Non-identical cognates yield facilitation in translation – does the way foreign vocabulary is learned affect its processing?

Abstract

Cognates (words sharing form and meaning across languages, e.g. Polish–English FILM–FILM (identical cognates) or TUNNEL–TUNEL (non-identical cognates)) are processed faster than single-language words (cognate facilitation effect), which is modulated by a number of factors. Here, we extended the study reported by Lijewska and Chmiel (2015) and tested the influence of learning experience on non-identical cognate processing in a translation task in 2 experiments with Polish-German–English trilinguals and with German–English bilinguals. The trilinguals learned English and German via Polish, whereas the bilinguals learnt English via German. They translated Polish–English non-identical cognates (MUSZTARDA–SENF–MUSTARD), German–English non-identical cognates (TRAWA–GRAS–GRASS) and controls from English into Polish and into German (trilinguals) or only into German (bilinguals). We found no evidence for the influence of learning experience on cognate processing but the novel finding was a reliable facilitation effect obtained when only non-identical cognates were tested in a translation task with trilinguals (in the accuracy data) as well as with bilinguals (in translation latencies). Additionally, the reported study pointed to the important role of language proficiency in processing.

The influence of semantic bias on triple non-identical cognates during reading: Evidence from trilinguals’ eye movements

“…slower recognition) of non-identical cognates in Experiment 2, once identical cognates were eliminated from the task. The inhibitory effects of non-identical cognates failed to be recently obtained in an overt translation task with trilingual Polish–German–English trilinguals and German–English bilinguals (Lijewska and Błaszkowska, 2021). This seems to suggest that non-identical cognates are not only sensitive to the stimulus list composition in terms of the presence or absence of identical cognates as stimuli, but they are also affected by the type of task at hand (for similar evidence, see Duyck et al, 2007).…”

“…These factors include the level of cognates' cross-language similarity in form (Comesaña et al, 2021;Dijkstra et al, 2010;Pureza et al, 2016;Van Assche et al, 2011), the type of task at hand (Dijkstra et al, 2010;Lauro and Schwartz, 2017;Van Assche et al, 2011), stimulus list composition (Comesaña et al, 2012(Comesaña et al, , 2015, participants' levels of foreign language proficiency (Bultena et al, 2014;Nakayama et al, 2015;Rosselli et al, 2012), or the level of semantic bias in the surrounding sentence context (Lauro and Schwartz, 2017;Libben and Titone, 2009;Pivneva et al, 2014;Schwartz and Kroll, 2006). The influence of some of these factors has already been observed with trilingual speakers (Dijkstra and Van Hell, 2003;Lemhöfer et al, 2004;Lijewska and Błaszkowska, 2021;Lijewska and Chmiel, 2015;Van Hell, 2012, 2014;Szubko-Sitarek, 2015;Zhu and Mok, 2020).…”

“…A successful replication of prior bilingual evidence with trilingual participants would provide evidence for the claim that trilinguals (or multilinguals) are simply ‘extended bilinguals’ with more than one second language (L2) (for a broader discussion, see De Angelis, 2007). Moreover, such evidence would justify simple extensions of bilingual models to trilinguals or multilinguals (Dijkstra, 2003; Lijewska and Błaszkowska, 2021). However, if bilingual effects are not replicated with trilinguals/multilinguals or replications reveal new processing patterns, that would suggest that new models are needed or that bilingual models have to be adapted to accommodate the peculiarity of trilingual/multilingual processing.…”

“…When a bilingual speaker is presented with a cognate, similar form representations in two languages are thought to be co-activated and to jointly activate the semantic representation thereby leading to faster processing of cognates relative to non-cognates. Even though the RHM, the BIA+ and Multilink aim to model lexical processing in bilingual speakers, similar processing has been assumed in the case of trilinguals (Dijkstra, 2003; Lijewska and Błaszkowska, 2021).…”

Stylistic Conversion and Linguistic Beauty Reproduction in English Translation-Based on Neurosemantic Analysis

“…To determine the semantics of the English content and to meet certain criteria is to collect and organize data. To analyze the semantics of the English content, the factors in it will be dissected on the kind; for the English content to be partially selected, using the formulated analysis method, using manual coding method to analyze the content chosen; data after unified management to analyze the data, to confirm the consistency of the coders in the coding process exists in the validation of the content, and ultimately, the content of the data expression will be completed [8][9][10][11][12]. In the process of development and popularization of information technology, the user the process of using only the content, which is analyzed layer by layer, and finally, the content and meaning of which is clearly processed.…”