Cerebral organization in adult second language acquisition: Is the right hemisphere more involved?

Galloway, Linda; Scarcella, Robin

doi:10.1016/0093-934x(82)90071-2

Cited by 39 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, laterality is apparently unrelated to the differential overall accuracy in stimulus recall for native and non-native languages. In both the present and Galloway and Scarcella's (1982) studies, ear advantages were similar for the native and non-native languages, whereas overall level of accuracy was better for stimuli spoken in the former than in the latter languages.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 41%

“…In fact, when sets of verbal stimuli (words, digits, consonant-vowel syllables) were presented dichotically, no cross-language differences in REA appeared for Spanish-English (Gordon and Zatorre 198 1;Galloway and Scarcella 1982) and for Enghsh-Hebrew bilinguals (Gordon 1980). Different results on a dichotic listening task were reported for Navajo and Anglo Americans (Scott et al 1979), but they were subsequently contradicted by findings showing similar performances by members of the two groups (Hynd and Scott 1980).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cross‐language Differences in Dichotic Listening*

Nachshon

1986

Int J Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Greater right ear advantage in dichotic listening to English-spoken digits among English-speakers than among Japanese-and Hebrew-speakers (Hatta and Dimond 1981; Nachshon 1986) was attributed either to effects of lingustic properties of the respective native languages, or to the sequence of language acquisition. In order to evaluate the two alternative hypotheses, 112 English-Hebrew and 140 Hebrew-En&sh bilinguals recalled a series of three-digit dichotic sets. Differential ear advantages were expected on the basis of the two hypotheses. Data analysis showed, however, that while recall was better for digits spoken in the native than in the non-native languages, no significant differences in right ear advantage between the two groups were found. Procedural effects might account for this result.The notion that hemispheric asymmetry may vary across languages has recently gained a considerable amount of support (Hatta and Dimond 1981;Moss et al. 1985;Scott et al. 1979;TenHouten et al. 1976;Tsao and Wu 1981;Van Lanckner and Fromkin 1973). For example, in one of their studies Hatta and Dimond (1981) presented English-spoken digits, paired with various environmental sounds, to English-and Japanese-speakers. Both groups showed right ear/left hemisphere advantage (REA) in digit recall which was, however, significantly greater for the English-than for the Japanese-speakers.The authors accounted for this differential performance in terms of effects of certain linguistic properties of the subjects' native languages. Specifically, Hatta and Dimond (1 98 1) argued that since Japanese is moreThe author thanks Nili Arkin and Yosef Gabai for testing subjects.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 41%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Cross‐language Differences in Dichotic Listening*

Nachshon

1986

Int J Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are proposals that there will be either a left hemisphere dominance for both languages, or a smaller left lateralization for the language in bilingual or, yet, bilingual lateralization differences for the two languages. Some studies have found differences in the direction of a greater involvement of the right hemisphere 34,35 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolução temporal e potenciais corticais em diferentes níveis de proficiência da língua inglesa

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: to investigate and compare hearing abilities in normal hearing bilingual students, at different levels of English proficiency (basic, intermediate and advanced), using behavioral testing and electrophysiological testing. Methods: this study is descriptive, quantitative and transversal. The sample consisted of 60 subjects (language schools students at different English proficiency levels: 20 at advanced level (AG); 20 at intermediate level (IG); 20 at basic level (BG)) with normal hearing and no complaints about auditory processing abilities, aged 18-35 years. They were subjected to behavioral test: Random Gap Detection Test (RGDT) that assesses ability of temporal resolution; and electrophysiological test Long Latency Auditory Evoked Potential (LLAEP) with verbal stimuli (syllables /ba/ -frequent stimulus and /di/ -rare stimulus) evaluating memory, attention and auditory discrimination. Results: it was noticed a statistically significant difference between ears for: BG, to amplitude of N1 and P2, with higher values for left ear; IG to amplitude of P1, N1 and P2, with higher values for left ear; AG to latency of N1, with higher values for left ear, and amplitudes of components P2, N2 and P3, with higher values for left ear. Between groups, RGDT showed lower values of AG, and latency of N1 component, with higher values for BG. Conclusion: there were significant differences in temporal resolution ability, better for students in advanced level of English and also to the latency of evoked cortical N1 with higher values for students at a basic level. Keywords: Hearing; Bilingualism; Electrophysiology; Event-Related Potentials, P300; Adult RESUMO Objetivos: investigar e comparar as habilidades auditivas entre normo-ouvintes bilíngues estudantes de diferentes níveis de proficiência do inglês por meio de teste comportamental e eletrofisiológico. Métodos: este estudo tem caráter descritivo, quantitativo e transversal. A amostra foi composta por 39 sujeitos (alunos de escolas de idiomas: 13 no nível avançado (GA); 13 no nível intermediário (GI); 13 no nível básico (GB)), com idade entre 18 a 35 anos, limiares auditivos tonais dentro dos limites da normalidade e sem queixas de habilidades de processamento auditivo. Foram submetidos aos testes comportamentais: teste de detecção de gap (RGDT); e ao teste eletrofisiológico potencial evocado auditivo de longa latência (PEALL), com estímulos verbais (sílabas /ba/ -frequente -e /di/ -raro) Resultados: verificou-se diferença estatisticamente significante entre as orelhas para: o GB, para a amplitude de N1 e P2, com maiores valores para a orelha esquerda; o GI, para a amplitude de P1, N1 e P2, com maiores valores para a orelha esquerda, o GA, para a latência do componente N1, com maiores valores para a orelha esquerda, e, para as amplitudes dos componentes P2, N2 e P3, com maiores valores para a orelha esquerda. Entre os grupos, o teste RGDT mostrou menores valores para GA e para latência do componente N1, com maiores valores para o GB. Conclusões: pode-se concluir...

show abstract

“…For example, neither hypothesis can explain the results of studies which show late adult bilinguals'to be less lateralized than early bilinguals (Genesee et al 1978;Sussman et al 1982). Even more problematic is a study specifically designed by Galloway and Scarcella (1982) to test the modified stage hypothesis. They found that lateralization patterns exhibited by nonproficient Spanish-English bilinguals who had acquired their second language in a naturalistic setting did not differ from those of monolingual speakers of either language.…”

Section: Language Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some indicate greater left lateralization for first language processing than for second (Gaziel et al 1977;Maitre 1974;Obler et al 1975;Schneiderman and Wesche, forthcoming;Silverberg et al 1979;Sussman et al 1982). Other studies have found that lateralization patterns for first and second languages do not differ significantly (Barton et al 1965;Carroll 1978a;Walters and Zatorre 1978;Hamers and Lambert 1977;Galloway and Scarcella 1982;Gordon 1980), and a few researchers report greater left-lateralization for the second language than for the first (Rogers et al 1977;Carroll 1978b;Kotik 1975).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

The Modified Stage Hypothesis: Some Possible Implications

Schneiderman

1983

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The modified stage hypothesis (Galloway and Krashen 1980) is one of several explanations put forth in response to the contradictory results of a wave of recent studies exploring patterns of cerebral lateralization for the two languages of bilingual subjects. The modified stage hypothesis, roughly paraphrased, predicts that the degree of right hemisphere involvement in the early stages of L2 acquisition is proportional to the amount of natural acquisition versus learning (in Krashen's sense) that is taking place. Conversely, formal learning of the L2 is predicted to be more dependent upon left hemisphere functions. Thus learners (as opposed to acquirers) are likely to exhibit greater left lateralization in their L2 than individuals for whom that language is the L1. Acquirers, on the other hand, should be less lateralized in their L2 than native speakers of that language. Findings in support of the modified stage hypothesis compel us to examine how learning and acquisition might differentially engage the two hemispheres in the acquisition process. This examination leads to the discovery of an apparent contradiction between conclusions drawn from the experimental findings in support of the modified stage hypothesis and Krashen's Monitor theory which underlies it.

show abstract

Cerebral organization in adult second language acquisition: Is the right hemisphere more involved?

Cited by 39 publications

References 6 publications

Cross‐language Differences in Dichotic Listening*

Cross‐language Differences in Dichotic Listening*

Resolução temporal e potenciais corticais em diferentes níveis de proficiência da língua inglesa

The Modified Stage Hypothesis: Some Possible Implications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About