Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T08:11:12.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The role of cross-language orthography and phonology in translation recognition: an ERP study with Chinese–English bilinguals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2024

Er-Hu Zhang Open the ORCID record for Er-Hu Zhang [Opens in a new window]  and
Hong-Wen Cao Open the ORCID record for Hong-Wen Cao [Opens in a new window]
Er-Hu Zhang
Affiliation:
Research Center for Language, Cognition and Language Application, Chongqing University, Chongqing, P. R. China College of Foreign Languages, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, P.R. China
Hong-Wen Cao*
Affiliation:
Research Center for Language, Cognition and Language Application, Chongqing University, Chongqing, P. R. China Centre for Studies of Translation, Interpreting and Cognition, University of Macau, Taipa, Macau SAR, P. R. China
*
Corresponding author: Hong-Wen Cao, Email: caohwen@cqu.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigated the electrophysiological correlates of cross-language orthographic and phonological processing in unbalanced Chinese (L1)–English (L2) bilinguals using a translation recognition task. The critical L1-L2 word pairs were incorrect translation equivalents but orthographically or phonologically related through translation (orthographic or phonological translation neighbor). Compared with the unrelated control, the recognition of L2 words showed comparable reaction time and accuracies when coupled with L1 orthographic or phonological translation neighbors. However, both orthographic and phonological translation neighbors elicited more negative event-related potential (ERP) waveforms in the bulk of the N400 component (300-600 ms) than the unrelated control. These findings were interpreted in the framework of the Bilingual Interactive Activation Plus model (BIA+ model), according to which cross-language orthographic and phonological representations were non-selectively accessed during the recognition of the L2 words, and top-down inhibitory control mechanism impacted the cross-language lexical competition and confliction between the two languages.

Keywords

bilingualscross-languageorthography and phonologyN400
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , First View , pp. 1 - 12
Check for updates
Open Practices
Open materials
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This article has earned badges for transparent research practices: Open Materials. For details see the Data Availability Statement.

References

Ando, E., Matsuki, K., Sheridan, H., & Jared, D. (2015). The locus of Katakana–English masked phonological priming effects. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(1), 101–117. doi:10.1017/s1366728914000121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnea, A., & Breznitz, Z. (1998). Phonological and orthographic processing of Hebrew words: electrophysiological aspects. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 159(4), 492–504. doi:10.1080/00221329809596166CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:jss:jstsof:v:067:i01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bijeljac-Babic, R., Biardeau, A., & Grainger, J. (1997). Masked orthographic priming in bilingual word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 25(4), 447–457. doi:10.3758/bf03201121CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brouwer, H., Crocker, M. W., Venhuizen, N. J., & Hoeks, J. C. J. (2017). A Neurocomputational Model of the N400 and the P600 in Language Processing. Cognitive Science, 41(Suppl 6), 1318–1352. doi:10.1111/cogs.12461CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1993). The processing nature of the N400: evidence from masked priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 34–44. doi:10.1162/jocn.1993.5.1.34CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: a critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cai, Q., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). SUBTLEX-CH: Chinese word and character frequencies based on film subtitles. PLoS One, 5(6), e10729. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010729CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carrasco-Ortiz, H., Amengual, M., & Gries, S. T. (2021). Cross-language effects of phonological and orthographic similarity in cognate word recognition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 11(3), 389–417. doi:10.1075/lab.18095.carCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casaponsa, A., Carreiras, M., & Dunabeitia, J. A. (2015). How do bilinguals identify the language of the words they read? Brain Research, 1624, 153–166. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2015.07.035CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, B., Liu, W., Wang, L., Peng, D., & Perfetti, C. A. (2007). The timing of graphic, phonological and semantic activation of high and low frequency Chinese characters: an ERP study. Progress in Natural Science, 17(B07), 62–70. doi:10.1016/0378-1119(91)90386-PGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, I., Timmer, K., Ganushchak, L., & La Heij, W. (2015). On the production of interlingual homophones: delayed naming and increased N400. Language, cognition and neuroscience, 31(5), 628–638. doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1120877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degani, T., Prior, A., & Hajajra, W. (2018). Cross-language semantic influences in different script bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(4), 782–804. doi:10.1017/S1366728917000311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Groot, A. M. B. (1992). Determinants of Word Translation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(5), 1001–1018. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.18.5.1001Google Scholar
Delogu, F., Brouwer, H., & Crocker, M. W. (2019). Event-related potentials index lexical retrieval (N400) and integration (P600) during language comprehension. Brain and Cognition, 135, 103569. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2019.05.007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134, 9–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (1998). The BIA model and bilingual word recognition. In Grainger, J. & Jacobs, A. M. (Eds.). Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition (pp. 189–225). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5(3), 175–197. doi:10.1017/s1366728902003012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Wahl, A., Buytenhuijs, F., Van Halem, N., Al-Jibouri, Z., De Korte, M., & RekkÉ, S. (2018). Multilink: a computational model for bilingual word recognition and word translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22(04), 657–679. doi:10.1017/s1366728918000287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitropoulou, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). Phonology by itself: Masked phonological priming effects with and without orthographic overlap. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23(2), 185–203. doi:10.1080/20445911.2011.477811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ding, G., Peng, D., & Taft, M. (2004). The nature of the mental representation of radicals in chinese: a priming study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(2), 530–539. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.30.2.530Google ScholarPubMed
Eimer, M. (1993). Effects of attention and stimulus probability on ERPs in a Go/Nogo task. Biological Psychology, 35(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-0511(93)90009-WCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2009). Watching the Word Go by: On the Time-course of Component Processes in Visual Word Recognition. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3(1), 128–156. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00121.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1(2), 67–81. doi:10.1017/S1366728998000133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, T., Misra, M., Tam, J. W., & Kroll, J. F. (2012). On the time course of accessing meaning in a second language: an electrophysiological and behavioral investigation of translation recognition. Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 38(5), 1165–1186. doi:10.1037/a0028076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagoort, P., Hald, L., Bastiaansen, M., & Petersson, K. M. (2004). Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science, 304, 438–441. doi: 10.1126/science.1095455CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. Psychophysiology, 30(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1993.tb03204.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holcomb, P. J., Grainger, J., & O'Rourke, T. (2002). An electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 14(6), 938–950. doi:10.1162/089892902760191153CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoshino, N., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2010). An ERP investigation of masked cross-script translation priming. Brain Research, 1344, 159–172. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2010.05.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 434–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jankowiak, K., & Rataj, K. (2017). The N400 as a window into lexico-semantic processing in bilingualism. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 53, 119–156. doi:10.1515/psicl-2017-0006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jia, X., Wang, S., Zhang, B., & Zhang, J. X. (2013). Electrophysiological evidence for relation information activation in Chinese compound word comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 51(7), 1296–1301. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.03.024CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jouravlev, O., Lupker, S. J., & Jared, D. (2014). Cross-language phonological activation: evidence from masked onset priming and ERPs. Brain and Language, 134, 11–22. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2014.04.003CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kerkhofs, R., Dijkstra, T., Chwilla, D. J., & de Bruijn, E. R. (2006). Testing a model for bilingual semantic priming with interlingual homographs: RT and N400 effects. Brain Research, 1068(1), 170–183. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2005.10.087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kong, L., Zhang, J. X., Kang, C., Du, Y., Zhang, B., & Wang, S. (2010). P200 and phonological processing in Chinese word recognition. Neuroscience Letters, 473(1), 37–41. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2010.02.014CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. (2000). Electrophysiology Reveals Semantic Memory use in Language Comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 463–470. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01560-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual review of psychology, 62, 621–647. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lau, E. F., Phillips, C., & Poeppel, D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(12), 920–933. doi:10.1038/nrn2532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lau, E. F., Namyst, A., Fogel, A., & Delgado, T. (2016). A direct comparison of N400 effects of predictability and incongruity in adjective-noun combination. Collabora:Psychology, 2(1), 1–19. doi: 10.1525/collabra.40Google Scholar
Lemhofer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: a quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavior research methods, 44(2), 325–343. doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, Y., Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2003). ERP evidence for the time course of graphic, phonological, and semantic information in Chinese meaning and pronunciation decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(6), 1231. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.29.6.1231Google ScholarPubMed
Luck, S. (2005). An Introduction to the Event-related Potential Technique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ma, F., & Ai, H. (2018). Chinese Learners of English See Chinese Words When Reading English Words. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 47(3), 505–521. doi:10.1007/s10936-017-9533-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ma, F., Chen, P., Guo, T., & Kroll, J. F. (2017). When late second language learners access the meaning of L2 words: Using ERPs to investigate the role of the L1 translation equivalent. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 41, 50–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2016.09.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meade, G., Midgley, K. J., Dijkstra, T., & Holcomb, P. J. (2018). Cross-language Neighborhood Effects in Learners Indicative of an Integrated Lexicon. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 30(1), 70–85. doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01184CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., vanHeuven, W. J. B., & Grainger, J. (2008). An electrophysiological investigation of cross-language effects of orthographic neighborhood. Brain Research, 1246, 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2008.09.078CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2009). Masked repetition and translation priming in second language learners: A window on the time-course of form and meaning activation using ERPs. Psychophysiology, 46, 551–565. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00784.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2011). Effects of cognate status on word comprehension in second language learners: an ERP investigation. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 23(7), 1634–1647. doi:10.1162/jocn.2010.21463CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moldovan, C. D., Demestre, J., Ferré, P., & Sánchez-Casas, R. (2016). The role of meaning and form similarity in translation recognition in highly proficient balanced bilinguals: A behavioral and ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 37, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2015.07.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nieuwenhuis, S., Yeung, N., van den Wildenberg, W., & Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2003). Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: effects of response conflict and trial type frequency. Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 3(1), 17–26. doi:10.3758/cabn.3.1.17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nieuwland, M. S., Barr, D. J., Bartolozzi, F., Busch-Moreno, S., Darley, E., Donaldson, D. I., Ferguson, H. J., Fu, X., Heyselaar, E., Huettig, F., Matthew Husband, E., Ito, A., Kazanina, N., Kogan, V., Kohút, Z., Kulakova, E., Mézière, D., Politzer-Ahles, S., Rousselet, G., Rueschemeyer, S. A., … Von Grebmer Zu Wolfsthurn, S. (2020). Dissociable effects of prediction and integration during language comprehension: evidence from a large-scale study using brain potentials. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 375(1791), 20180522. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0522CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peeters, D., Dijkstra, T., & Grainger, J. (2013). The representation and processing of identical cognates by late bilinguals: RT and ERP effects. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(4), 315–332. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.12.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.orgGoogle Scholar
Sauval, K., Perre, L., Duncan, L. G., Marinus, E., & Casalis, S. (2017). Automatic phonological activation during visual word recognition in bilingual children: A cross-language masked priming study in grades 3 and 5. Journal of experimental child psychology, 154, 64–77. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2016.10.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stites, M. C., Federmeier, K. D., & Christianson, K. (2016). Do Morphemes Matter when Reading Compound Words with Transposed Letters? Evidence from Eye-Tracking and Event-Related Potentials. Language, cognition and neuroscience, 31(10), 1299–1319. doi:10.1080/23273798.2016.1212082CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sunderman, G. L., & Priya, K. (2012). Translation recognition in highly proficient Hindi–English bilinguals: The influence of different scripts but connectable phonologies. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(9), 1265–1285. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.596420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thierry, G., & Wu, Y. J. (2007). Brain potentials reveal unconscious translation during foreign-language comprehension. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(30), 12530–12535. doi:10.1073/pnas.0609927104CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van de Meerendonk, N., Indefrey, P., Chwilla, D. J., & Kolk, H. H. (2011). Monitoring in language perception: electrophysiological and hemodynamic responses to spelling violations. Neuroimage, 54(3), 2350–2363. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.022CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vergara-Martínez, M., & Swaab, T. Y. (2012). Orthographic neighborhood effects as a function of word frequency: an event-related potential study. Psychophysiology, 49(9), 1277–1289. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01410.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Von Holzen, K., & Mani, N. (2012). Language nonselective lexical access in bilingual toddlers. Journal of experimental child psychology, 113(4), 569–586. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2012.08.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wen, Y., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2018). Limitations of translation activation in masked priming: Behavioural evidence from Chinese–English bilinguals and computational modelling. Journal of Memory and Language, 101, 84–96. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2018.03.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wen, Y., Filik, R., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2018). Electrophysiological dynamics of Chinese phonology during visual word recognition in Chinese–English bilinguals. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 6869. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-25072-wCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winter, B. (2019). Statistics for linguists: An introduction using R. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, Y. J., & Thierry, G. (2010). Chinese–English bilinguals reading English hear Chinese. Journal of neuroscience, 30(22), 7646–7651. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1602-10.2010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, T., van Heuven, W. J. B., & Conklin, K. (2011). Fast automatic translation and morphological decomposition in Chinese–English bilinguals. Psychological Science, 22(10), 1237–1242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611421492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, J. X., Fang, Z., Du, Y., Kong, L., Zhang, Q., & Xing, Q. (2012). Centro-parietal N200: An event-related potential component specific to Chinese visual word recognition. Chinese Science Bulletin, 57(13), 1516–1532. doi:10.1007/s11434-011-4932-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, E.-H., Li, J., Zhang, X.-D., Li, D., & Cao, H.-W. (2022). Electrophysiological correlates of masked orthographic and phonological priming in Chinese–English bilinguals. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 16648. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-21072-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhou, H., Chen, B., Yang, M., & Dunlap, S. (2010). Language nonselective access to phonological representations: Evidence from Chinese–English bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(10), 2051–2066. doi:10.1080/17470211003718705CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed