Bilingualism and Lexical Representation

Abstract

Forty-eight Hindi-English bilinguals completed two blocks of trials where each trial involved presentation of a letter string requiring a lexical decision. In the first block subjects were exposed to 22 words and 11 non-words in either English or Hindi. In the second block the original words were repeated in either the same language or in the alternative language. In this block the old (repeated) words were mixed with 22 new words, and 22 non-words. Twelve subjects were included in each of the four groups given by the factorial combination of blocks and languages. Reaction time in the lexical decision task was facilitated when words were repeated in the same language (109 and 125 ms in the English-English and Hindi-Hindi groups respectively), but little or no facilitation was observed in the inter-lingual conditions (-22 and 23 ms in the Hindi-English and English-Hindi conditions respectively). The results support the view that lexical representation in bilinguals is language-specific.

Semantic facilitation and translation priming effects in Chinese-English bilinguals

“…The semantic priming effect is consistent with the findings reported previously by Kirsner et al (1984, Experiments 4 and 5) and Schwanenflugel and Rey (1986). The translation priming effect differed from previous results (see, e.g., Kirsner et al, 1980;Kirsner et al, 1984, Experiments 1 and 3;Scarborough et al, 1984), presumably because of the difference in time lag between the presentations of the prime comparisons were conducted using the protected r-test procedure (Fisher's least significant difference).…”

“…The idea was that if translation equivalents are represented in languagespecific forms, then the repetition and translation conditions should result in different patterns of results. The general results showed that the processing of a concept could be affected by how the concept was presented or activated: Words repeated in the same language (i.e., the repetition condition), but not those repeated in the different language (i.e., the translation condition), resulted in shorter lexical decision times than did unrepeated new words (see, e.g., Kirsner, Brown, Abrol, Chadha, & Sharma, 1980;Scarborough, Gerard, & Cortese, 1984, for similar fmdings). In other words, lexical recognition could be generally facilitated by a represented identical item, but not by a functionally equivalent translation item.…”

“…Experiment 2 was designed in order to test the wordinterconnection and the concept-mediation models. The word-association model, on the other hand, was not involved in the present study, because it has been consistently rejected on the basis of findings in previous research (e.g., Kirsneret al, 1984;Schwanenflugel & Rey, 1986 Several studies on lexical decision priming have failed to find a translation facilitation effect with relatively long priming intervals of 10 min or more (e.g., Kirsner et al, 1980;Kirsner et al, 1984, Experiments 1 and 3;Scarborough et al, 1984). On the other hand, a reliable between-language semantic facilitation effect has been reported in studies with relatively short priming intervals of 300 msee orless (e.g., Kirsner et al, 1984; Schwanenflugel 's.…”

Language specificity in lexical organization: Evidence from deaf signers' lexical organization of American Sign Language and English

“…For example, in studies that have looked at whether a word in one language activates its translation in another language, influences of one language on the processing of the other have not been obtained, provided that the experiment has not been set up to encourage such translation (Kirsner, Brown, Abrol, Chadha, & Sharma, 1980;Kirsner, Smith, Lockhart, King, & Jain, 1984;Scarborough, Gerard, & Cortese, 1984;Watkins & Peynircioglu, 1983; see also Beauvillain & Grainger, 1987). The lexical decision task of Experiment 2 is not one that requires translation from one language into another; that is, it does not test whether the printed words SIT and CHAIR are translated into their corresponding ASL signs.…”

Word and picture identification: Is representational parsimony possible?

“…Whereas repetition priming is reduced or even eliminated by a change in mode (Durso & Johnson, 1979), modality (Kirsner, Milech, & Standen, 1983;Kirsner & Smith, 1974;Morton, 1979) or language (Kirsner, Brown, Abrol, Chaddha, & Sharma, 1980) of the study andtestpresentations, semantic priming appears to beinsensitive to changes in each of these variables (Kirsner, Smith, Lockhart, King, & Jain, 1984;Meyer & Ruddy, 1974;Swinney, Onifer, Prather, & Hirshkowitz, 1979;Vanderwart, 1984).…”