How words ripple through bilingual hands: Motor-language coupling during L1 and L2 writing

Kogan, Boris; García‐Marco, Enrique; Birba, Agustina; Cortes, Camila; Melloni, Margherita; Ibáñez, Agustín; García, Adolfo M.

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107563

Cited by 7 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to relevant theoretical models of bilingualism, however (e.g., Dijkstra & van Heuven, 2002;Kroll & Stewart, 1994), and as suggested by previous studies (see Kogan, Muñoz, et al, 2020;Kühne & Gianelli, 2019;Monaco et al, 2019, for a review), L2 proficiency should modulate embodiment effects. Similar to our study, Kogan, García-Marco, et al (2020) did not find an influence of L2 proficiency either, suggesting that the null result could be because of task-related variables, needing systematic investigation. We believe that more variability in the sample with respect to L2 proficiency could help assessing its potential modulating role and could show us whether this linguistic factor impacts motor and semantic resonance to a similar degree.…”

Section: Comparing Semantic and Motor Resonancesupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Compared to L2 and to nonmotor verbs, L1 motor verbs are recognized faster when stimulating the motor cortex at 125 msec after verb presentation. This difference between L1 and L2 in terms of semantic resonance adds knowledge to the heterogeneous framework of dissimilarity between L1 and L2 degree of motor resonance, which, until now, has been described in terms of diminished magnitude (e.g., Foroni, 2015;Vukovic & Shtyrov, 2014), different timing (Foroni, 2015), different pattern (Ahlberg, Bischoff, Kaup, Bryant, & Strozyk, 2018;Sheikh & Titone, 2016;but see also De Grauwe, Willems, Rueschemeyer, Lemhöfer, & Schriefers, 2014), and even as different polarity of interaction when writing verbs (Kogan, García-Marco, et al, 2020). Nonetheless, the fact that this motor resonance dissimilarity was not detected in this study, whereas semantic resonance differences were, suggests that the factors influencing bilingual semantic embodiment are not the same for semantic and motor resonance effects.…”

Section: Comparing Semantic and Motor Resonancementioning

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

First and Second Language at Hand: A Chronometric Transcranial-Magnetic Stimulation Study on Semantic and Motor Resonance

Monaco

Jost

Lancheros

et al. 2021

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to embodied theories, motor and language processing bidirectionally interact: Motor activation modulates behavior in lexico-semantic tasks (semantic resonance), whereas understanding motor-related words entails activation of the corresponding motor brain areas (motor resonance). Whereas many studies investigated such interaction in the first language (L1), only few did so in a second language (L2), focusing on motor resonance. Here, we directly compared L1 and a late L2, for the first time both in terms of semantic and motor resonance and both in terms of magnitude and timing, by taking advantage of single-pulse TMS. Twenty-five bilinguals judged in each language, whether hand motor-related (“grasp”) and non-motor-related verbs (“believe”), were physical or mental. Meanwhile, we applied TMS on the hand motor cortex at 125, 275, 350, and 500 msec post verb onset, and recorded behavioral responses and TMS-induced motor evoked potentials. TMS induced faster responses for L1 versus L2 motor and nonmotor verbs at 125 msec (three-way interaction β = −0.0442, 95% CI [0.0814, −0.0070]), showing a semantic resonance effect at an early stage of word processing in L1 but not in L2. Concerning motor resonance, TMS-induced motor evoked potentials at 275 msec revealed higher motor cortex excitability for L2 versus L1 processing (two-way interaction β = 0.095, 95% CI [0.017, 0.173]). These findings confirm action–language interaction at early stages of word recognition, provide further evidence that L1 and L2 are differently embodied, and call for an update of existing models of bilingualism and embodiment, concerning both language representations and processing.

show abstract

Section: Comparing Semantic and Motor Resonancesupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Comparing Semantic and Motor Resonancementioning

confidence: 80%

First and Second Language at Hand: A Chronometric Transcranial-Magnetic Stimulation Study on Semantic and Motor Resonance

Monaco

Jost

Lancheros

et al. 2021

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To disentangle the role of both factors in motor-language coupling, we asked participants to perform a bimanual motor task (keyboard typing) as they processed high and low motility items from four categories: bimanual, unimanual, and non-manual, as well as minimally motoric verbs. Importantly, this task has been shown to capture robust motor-language coupling effects with different stimuli both during action planning and execution [9][10][11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Motor-language coupling is the embodied, context-sensitive phenomenon whereby actionladen words influence bodily movements, and vice versa [1,2,6,[12][13][14][15]. These effects can manifest in an effector-specific fashion, such that, for instance, words evoking a specific limb can distinctly affect movements of that body part [9,10,12]. However, the direction of this influence varies substantially across studies, as seen in research combining manual verbs with manual actions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our design involved four verb categories (bimanual, unimanual, non-manual, and minimally motoric verbs), each comprising high and low motility items. As in previous reports of this paradigm [9][10][11], we examined the effect of such factors on both motor planning and execution. We predicted that, relative to low motility verbs, high motility verbs would involve longer planning and execution stages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The embodied typist: Bimanual actions are modulated by words’ implied motility and number of evoked limbs

Rolán,

Sánchez-Borges,

Kogan

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The planning and execution of manual actions can be influenced by concomitant processing of manual action verbs. However, this phenomenon manifests in varied ways throughout the literature, ranging from facilitation to interference effects. Suggestively, stimuli across studies vary randomly in two potentially relevant variables: verb motility and effector quantity (i.e., the amount of movement and the number of hands implied by the word, respectively). Here we examine the role of these factors during keyboard typing, a strategic bimanual task validated in previous works. Forty-one participants read and typed high and low motility items from four categories: bimanual, unimanual, and non-manual action verbs, as well as minimally motoric verbs. Motor planning and execution were captured by first-letter lag (the lapse between word presentation and first keystroke) and whole-word lag (the lapse between the first and last keystroke). We found that verb motility modulated action planning and execution, both stages being delayed by high (relative to low) motility verbs. Effector quantity also influenced both stages, which were facilitated by bimanual verbs relative to unimanual verbs and non-manual verbs (this effect being confined to high motility items during action execution). Accordingly, motor-language coupling effects seem sensitive to words’ implied motility and number of evoked limbs. These findings refine our understanding of how semantics influences bodily movement.

show abstract

Horizontal mapping of time-related words in first and second language

Malyshevskaya,

Fischer,

Shtyrov

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The existence of a consistent horizontal spatial-conceptual mapping for words denoting time is a well-established phenomenon. For example, words related to the past or future (e.g., yesterday/tomorrow) facilitate respective leftward/rightward attentional shifts and responses, suggesting the visual-spatial grounding of temporal semantics, at least in the native language (L1). To examine whether similar horizontal bias also accompanies access to time-related words in a second language (L2), we tested 53 Russian-English (Experiment 1) and 48 German-English (Experiment 2) bilinguals, who classified randomly presented L1 and L2 time-related words as past- or future-related using left or right response keys. The predicted spatial congruency effect was registered in all tested languages and, furthermore, was positively associated with higher L2 proficiency in Experiment 2. Our findings (1) support the notion of horizontal spatial-conceptual mapping in diverse L1s, (2) demonstrate the existence of a similar spatial bias when processing temporal words in L2, and (3) show that the strength of time-space association in L2 may depend on individual L2 proficiency.

show abstract

How words ripple through bilingual hands: Motor-language coupling during L1 and L2 writing

Cited by 7 publications

References 85 publications

First and Second Language at Hand: A Chronometric Transcranial-Magnetic Stimulation Study on Semantic and Motor Resonance

First and Second Language at Hand: A Chronometric Transcranial-Magnetic Stimulation Study on Semantic and Motor Resonance

The embodied typist: Bimanual actions are modulated by words’ implied motility and number of evoked limbs

Horizontal mapping of time-related words in first and second language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About