Grounded cognition: Comparing Language × Space interactions in first language and second language

Abstract

The experiential traces account claims that language comprehension in one's first language (L1) is based on the reactivation of experiential traces that stem from experiencing the corresponding objects, states, or events. However, it remains unclear to what extent this is transferable to second language (L2) comprehension. In the present study, we compared German L1 speakers with German L2 speakers whose L1 uses similar or different spatial terms as German. In an adaptation of the Stroop paradigm, participants were instructed to respond to the font color of German spatial prepositions (e.g.,auf“on,”über“above,” andunter“under/below”) by either an upward or a downward hand movement, resulting in compatible or incompatible responses. We found significant compatibility effects for all speakers, but also clear differences between speakers of different L1s. The results thereby support the assumption that experiential traces built during L1 usage play an important role in L2 processing.

How do German bilingual schoolchildren process German prepositions? – A study on language-motor interactions

“…Some authors hypothesize that language proficiency plays a major role in the development of experiential traces [ 35 , 56 ]. Furthermore, in our study with adult participants [ 48 ], we found tentative evidence that experiential traces change over time with increasing proficiency. For instance, while for highly proficient participants a compatibility effect was found for auf as well as for über , in the mid-to-low proficient participants the compatibility effect was only found for auf but not for über .…”

“…Unexpectedly, the native speakers of German showed no compatibility effect for auf . For a detailed discussion of this finding see our previous study [ 48 ]. These differences presumably reflect the fact that Turkish and Korean (in contrast to German, Russian, and English) do not differentiate between +/- contact in the vertical dimension, and thus do not distinguish between the meaning of auf and über .…”

“…Similar to our previous study [ 48 ], we concentrated on three German words serving as stimuli, namely über ( above ), auf ( on ), and unter ( below ). Auf and über served as referents for the upper dimension, which differ with respect to the feature +/- contact, and unter served as a referent for the lower dimension.…”

“…To shed more light on this issue, we previously conducted a behavioural study to investigate how speakers of different native languages process the German prepositions auf , über , and unter [ 48 ]. We tested adult participants, who had acquired German as L1 and compared them to adults who acquired Russian or English as L1 and German as L2, as well as to adults who acquired Turkish or Korean as L1 and German as L2.…”

“…The adults tested in our previous study [ 48 ] mainly learned their L2 after the age of twelve. Therefore, the semantic categorizations of the L1, as well as the connected experiential traces were probably already very strongly consolidated.…”