Language control in bilingual production: Insights from error rate and error type in sentence production

Martin, Clara D.; Nozari, Nazbanou

doi:10.1017/s1366728920000590

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 80 publications

(140 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But, importantly, they mixed identical and high orthographic similarity items and found that very high similarity words (including identical items) were produced faster than high orthographic similarity items, but that phonological dissimilarity hindered performance. Although Schwartz and colleagues observed facilitation in this production task, others have found inhibition for cognates in production, depending on task difficulty 41 . Therefore, this contrast with our results might be due to differences in the task (production versus perception) or it might relate to task difficulty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of phonological and orthographic similarity on L2 word recognition across modalities in bilinguals

Frances

Navarra-Barindelli

Martin

2021

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language perception studies on bilinguals often show that words that share form and meaning across languages (cognates) are easier to process than words that share only meaning. This facilitatory phenomenon is known as the cognate effect. Most previous studies have shown this effect visually, whereas the auditory modality as well as the interplay between type of similarity and modality remain largely unexplored. In this study, highly proficient late Spanish–English bilinguals carried out a lexical decision task in their second language, both visually and auditorily. Words had high or low phonological and orthographic similarity, fully crossed. We also included orthographically identical words (perfect cognates). Our results suggest that similarity in the same modality (i.e., orthographic similarity in the visual modality and phonological similarity in the auditory modality) leads to improved signal detection, whereas similarity across modalities hinders it. We provide support for the idea that perfect cognates are a special category within cognates. Results suggest a need for a conceptual and practical separation between types of similarity in cognate studies. The theoretical implication is that the representations of items are active in both modalities of the non-target language during language processing, which needs to be incorporated to our current processing models.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of phonological and orthographic similarity on L2 word recognition across modalities in bilinguals

Frances

Navarra-Barindelli

Martin

2021

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But, importantly, they mixed identical and high orthographic similarity items and found that very high similarity words (including identical items) were produced faster than high orthographic similarity items, but that phonological dissimilarity hindered performance. Although Schwartz and colleagues observed facilitation in this production task, others have found inhibition for cognates in production, depending on task di culty 39 . Therefore, this contrast with our results might be due to differences in the task (production versus perception) or it might relate to task di culty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Inhibitory and Facilitatory Effects of Phonological and Orthographic Similarity on Bilingual Word Recognition

Frances

Navarra-Barindelli

Martin

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language perception studies on bilinguals often show that words that share form and meaning across languages (cognates) are easier to process than words that share only meaning. This facilitatory phenomenon is known as the cognate effect. Most previous studies have shown this effect visually, whereas the auditory modality as well as the interplay between type of similarity and modality remain largely unexplored. In this study, highly proficient late Spanish-English bilinguals carried out a lexical decision task in their second language, both visually and auditorily. Words had high or low phonological and orthographic similarity, fully crossed. We also included orthographically identical words (perfect cognates). Our results suggest that similarity in the same modality (i.e., orthographic similarity in the visual modality and phonological similarity in the auditory modality) leads to improved signal detection, whereas similarity across modalities hinders it. We provide support for the idea that perfect cognates are a special category within cognates. Results suggest a need for a conceptual and practical separation between types of similarity in cognate studies. The theoretical implication is that the representations of items are active in both modalities of the non-target language during language processing, which needs to be incorporated to our current processing models.

show abstract

“…Because the effect was different for very similar and more dissimilar cognates, the effect of cognate status in the total duration for the written group may no longer be visible in the main analysis. The effect of orthographic similarity on total duration in the typing of cognates suggests that when there is limited orthographic overlap between cognates, there is cognate interference at the sub-lexical level (see also Martin & Nozari, 2020). One important difference between our study and the one conducted by Muscalu and Smiley (2019) is the type of task that was used (i.e., picture naming vs. translation, respectively).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…As a consequence, one would expect more cross-lingual activation in the former type of task compared to the latter. However, even in a monolingual sentence context, cognate interference effects can be observed when the processing demands are increased (Martin & Nozari, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the current study, we will, amongst others, investigate whether there are L1 intrusions (i.e., errors) during the typewritten and spoken production of cognates vs. control words, given that Costa et al's (2017) learning theory would not predict such intrusions (as L1 is not activated during L2 production according to this theory). A language-nonselective account on the other hand, is compatible with such intrusions, although the activation of the non-target language may be task dependent (see Martin & Nozari, 2020). As such, the absence of L1 intrusions does not necessarily provide evidence against the non-selective account (we return to this issue in the discussion).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing the cognate effect in spoken and written second language word production

Muylle

Assche²,

Hartsuiker

2021

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognates – words that share form and meaning between languages – are processed faster than control words. However, is this facilitation effect merely lexical in nature or does it cascade to phonological/orthographic (i.e., sub-lexical) processes? This study compared cognate effects in spoken and typewritten production, which share lexical, but not sub-lexical processes. Dutch–English bilinguals produced English names for pictures representing Dutch–English cognates and control words in either the spoken or typewritten modality. Onset latencies were shorter and accuracy was higher for cognates vs. control words and this effect was similar in both modalities. Compared to controls, total latencies in the written modality were similar for cognates with much cross-linguistic overlap, but longer for ones with less overlap. Additionally, error analysis showed that cognates were more affected by L1 interference than controls. These results suggest two different cognate effects: one at the lexical and one at the sub-lexical level.

show abstract

Language control in bilingual production: Insights from error rate and error type in sentence production

Cited by 9 publications

References 80 publications

Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of phonological and orthographic similarity on L2 word recognition across modalities in bilinguals

Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of phonological and orthographic similarity on L2 word recognition across modalities in bilinguals

Inhibitory and Facilitatory Effects of Phonological and Orthographic Similarity on Bilingual Word Recognition

Comparing the cognate effect in spoken and written second language word production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About