Chinese–English Bilinguals Reading English Hear Chinese

Wu, Yan Jing; Thierry, Guillaume

doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1602-10.2010

Cited by 250 publications

(242 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

207

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Pairs were either semantically related, orthographically related, or unrelated, hence expected responses were "yes" for semantically related pairs, and "no" for orthographically related and unrelated pairs. We expected that responses should be faster for semantically related word pairs than unrelated ones, because negative responses typically involve more complex decision than "yes" responses (e.g., Gomez, Ratcliff, & Perea, 2007;Wu & Thierry, 2010). The central issue was whether on semantically unrelated pairs, response latencies are modulated by orthographic relatedness.…”

Section: Orthographic Effects In Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence Frmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthographic effects in spoken word recognition: Evidence from Chinese

Damian

2016

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms Orthography in spoken word recognition 2 Abstract Extensive evidence from alphabetic languages demonstrates a role of orthography in the processing of spoken words. Because alphabetic systems explicitly code speech sounds, such effects are perhaps not surprising. However, it is less clear whether orthographic codes are involuntarily accessed from spoken words in languages with non-alphabetic systems, in which the sound-spelling correspondence is largely arbitrary. We investigated the role of orthography via a semantic relatedness judgment task: native Mandarin speakers judged whether or not spoken word pairs were related in meaning. Word pairs were either semantically related, orthographically related, or unrelated. Results showed that relatedness judgments were made faster for word pairs that were semantically related than for unrelated word pairs. Critically, orthographic overlap on semantically unrelated word pairs induced a significant increase in response latencies. These findings indicate that orthographic information is involuntarily accessed in spoken-word recognition, even in a nonalphabetic language such as Chinese.

show abstract

Section: Orthographic Effects In Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence Frmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthographic effects in spoken word recognition: Evidence from Chinese

Damian

2016

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2). Increased relatedness or facilitation has been observed in isolation Jiang, 2002Jiang, , 2004; see also Morford, Wilkinson, Villwock, Piñar, & Kroll, 2011;Thierry & Wu, 2007;Wu & Thierry, 2010;Zhang, van Heuven, & Conklin, 2011) and in sentence context (Elston-Güttler & Williams, 2008), and when the shared-translation words were related in meaning (e.g., home-house, Degani et al, 2011;ElstonGüttler & Williams, 2008;Jiang, 2002Jiang, , 2004Morford et al, 2011;Thierry & Wu, 2007) and unrelated in meaning (e.g., tool-dish; Degani et al, 2011;Morford et al, 2011;Thierry & Wu, 2007;Wu & Thierry, 2010;Zhang et al, 2011). Inhibition has nonetheless been observed for unrelated shared-translation words in sentence context (ElstonGüttler et al, 2005).…”

Section: Joint Translationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-language influences: translation status affects intraword sense relatedness

Degani

Tokowicz

2013

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many words have more than one meaning, and these meanings vary in their degree of relatedness. In the present experiment, we examined whether this degree of relatedness is influenced by whether or not the two meanings share a translation in a bilingual's other language. Native English speakers with Spanish as a second language (i.e., EnglishSpanish bilinguals) and native Spanish speakers with English as a second language (i.e., Spanish-English bilinguals) were presented with pairs of phrases instantiating different senses of ambiguous English words (e.g., dinner date-expiration date) and were asked to decide whether the two senses were related in meaning. Critically, for some pairs of phrases, a single Spanish translation encompassed both meanings of the ambiguous word (joint-translation condition; e.g., mercado in Spanish refers to both a flea market and the housing market), but for others, each sense corresponded to a different Spanish translation (split-translation condition; e.g., cita in Spanish refers to a dinner date, but fecha refers to an expiration date). The proportions of "yes" (related) responses revealed that, relative to monolingual English speakers, Spanish-English bilinguals consider joint-translation senses to be less related than split-translation senses. These findings exemplify semantic cross-language influences from a first to a second language and reveal the semantic structure of the bilingual lexicon.Keywords Bilingualism . Semantic ambiguity . Word sense ambiguity Words are notoriously ambiguous in meaning. A single word can refer to several slightly different referents, or even to completely different referents, in different contexts. The word beam for instance, refers to a wooden beam in the context of carpentry, but to a laser beam in the context of physics. The different senses of words may be more or less related in meaning, and may share many or no semantic features. For instance, both senses of the polysemous word beam encompass a referent with a straight line. In other cases, a word can encompass two unrelated meanings, for which it is more difficult to identify a shared set of semantic features (e.g., the homonym bark, referring to the sound a dog makes or to the outer layer of a tree). Such homonyms are typically thought to have been accidently created in the language, such that two separate lexical entries happen to share form (e.g., Klein & Murphy, 2001, 2002.Words therefore vary in the degree of relatedness of their different nuances of meaning, which we will refer to as intraword sense relatedness. In the present experiment, we examined whether this degree of relatedness is influenced by whether or not the two meanings share a translation in a bilingual's other language. In particular, we examined whether the two senses of an ambiguous word are more (or less) related when a single word in a bilingual's other language also captures these two senses. For example, the Spanish word operación refers to both the military and the mathematical senses of the English word op...

show abstract

“…One of the key discoveries was the finding that the two languages of a bilingual speaker are always active, even if the speaker is using only one language in a particular situation (BijeljacBabic, Biardeau, & Grainger, 1997;Colome, 2001;Spivey & Marian, 1999;Wu & Thierry, 2010). Therefore, bilingual experience requires that the speaker constantly monitors and controls language choice.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Data trimming procedure can eliminate bilingual cognitive advantage

Zhou

Krott

2015

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bilingualism and its cognitive impacts have drawn increasing interest. Recently, inconsistencies in the findings have raised discussions on what might have caused such discrepancies and how evidence should be evaluated. This review tries to shed new light onto the reasons for the inconsistencies by taking a novel perspective. Motivated by the finding that bilingualism affects response time distribution profiles, particularly findings that suggest bilinguals have fewer long responses, we investigated the relation between maximum response times allowed/included in the analysis of an experiment and the finding of a bilingual advantage. We reviewed 68 experiments from 33 articles that compared monolingual and bilingual speakers' performance in three commonly used non-verbal interference tasks (Simon, Spatial Stroop and Flanker). We found that studies that included longer responses in their analysis were more likely to report a bilingualism effect. We conclude that seemingly insignificant details such as the data trimming procedure can have a potential impact on whether an effect is observed. We also discuss the implication of our findings and suggest the usefulness of more fine-grid analytical procedures.

show abstract

Chinese–English Bilinguals Reading English Hear Chinese

Cited by 250 publications

References 41 publications

Orthographic effects in spoken word recognition: Evidence from Chinese

Orthographic effects in spoken word recognition: Evidence from Chinese

Cross-language influences: translation status affects intraword sense relatedness

Data trimming procedure can eliminate bilingual cognitive advantage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About