The dynamic nature of assimilation and accommodation procedures in the brains of Chinese–English and English–Chinese bilinguals

Abstract

The framework of assimilation and accommodation has been proposed to explain the brain mechanisms supporting second language reading acquisition (Perfetti et al. [2007]: Bilingual Lang Cogn 10:131). Assimilation refers to using the procedures of the native language network in the acquisition of a new writing system, whereas accommodation refers to using second language procedures for reading the newly acquired writing system. We investigated assimilation and accommodation patterns in the brains of bilingual individuals by recruiting a group of Chinese-English bilinguals and a group of English-Chinese bilinguals to perform lexical decision tasks in both English and Chinese. The key question was whether the assimilation/accommodation procedures supporting second language reading in the brains of Chinese-English and English-Chinese bilinguals were dynamic, i.e., modulated by proficiency in the second language and perceptual features of the second language's script. Perceptual features of the scripts were manipulated through orthographic degradation by inserting spaces between the radicals of a Chinese character or between the syllables of an English word. This manipulation disrupts the visual configuration of the orthography but does not change its more fundamental design principles. We found that for English-Chinese bilinguals, higher proficiency was associated with greater accommodation, suggesting that the accommodation procedure in a bilingual individual's brain is modulated by second language proficiency. Most interestingly, we found that the assimilation/accommodation effects vanished or diminished when orthographically degraded scripts were processed by both Chinese-English and English-Chinese bilinguals, suggesting that the assimilation/accommodation procedures in a bilingual individual's brain are modulated by perceptual features of orthography. This work therefore offers a new, dynamic perspective for our understanding of the assimilation/accommodation framework for second language acquisition.

Lexical learning in a new language leads to neural pattern similarity with word reading in native language

“…Consistent with previous studies (S. Y. Kim et al, 2017;Mei et al, 2015b;Sun et al, 2015;Xue et al, 2004), this study found that different languages were generally processed in common regions, such as the anterior cingulate cortex, bilateral prefrontal cortex, occipitoparietal cortex, and occipitotemporal cortex.…”

“…Most neuroimaging studies have revealed similar activations in the prefrontal cortex, temporoparietal cortex, and occipitotemporal regions when reading in native and second languages (Buchweitz, Shinkareva, Mason, Mitchell, & Just, 2012;Liu, Hu, Guo, & Peng, 2010;Nakada, Fujii, & Kwee, 2001;Wartenburger et al, 2003), especially at the word level (Briellmann et al, 2004;Cao, Tao, Liu, Perfetti, & Booth, 2013;Kim et al, 2016;Mei et al, 2015b;Nelson, Liu, Fiez, & Perfetti, 2009;Van de Putte, De Baene, Brass, & Duyck, 2017;Videsott et al, 2010;Xue, Dong, Jin, Zhang, & Wang, 2004). Liu, Dunlap, Fiez, & Perfetti, 2007;Sun et al, 2015;Tham et al, 2005). Liu & Cao, 2016;Y.…”

“…Liu & Cao, 2016;Y. Liu, Dunlap, Fiez, & Perfetti, 2007;Sun et al, 2015;Tham et al, 2005). For instance, Tham et al (2005) found that the neural activations for Chinese and English words differed in a number of brain regions when Chinese-English bilinguals performed a homophone matching task.…”

Individual differences in representational similarity of first and second languages in the bilingual brain

“…Current theories of bilingual language processing hold that bilingual speakers coactivate their two languages during speech, and that they maintain similar, overlapping representations for both [1][2][3][4] . Additionally, past neuroimaging research has provided much evidence that a second language (L2) is processed similarly to the speaker's first language [5][6][7][8][9] . Even when L1-L2 differences exist, such as more extensive activity in L2 10,11 , there remains extensive overlap 6 .…”

Language distance in orthographic transparency affects cross‐language pattern similarity between native and non‐native languages

“…This phenomenon is more pronounced at the single‐word level than at the sentence level (Briellmann et al, 2004; Li et al, 2019; Mei, Xue, Lu, Chen, et al, 2015; Nelson, Liu, Fiez, & Perfetti, 2009; Xue, Dong, Jin, Zhang, & Wang, 2004). Furthermore, the degree of similarity in activation patterns between native and non‐native languages has been found to be affected by language proficiency (Bowden, Steinhauer, Sanz, & Ullman, 2013; Cao et al, 2013; Gao et al, 2017; Kim et al, 2017; Li et al, 2019; Rossi, Gugler, Friederici, & Hahne, 2006; Sun et al, 2015), age of acquisition (Berken et al, 2015; Chee, Tan, & Thiel, 1999; Das, Padakannaya, Pugh, & Singh, 2011; Gathercole & Moawad, 2010; Jasinska & Petitto, 2013), and language exposure in non‐native languages (Perani et al, 2003; Tu et al, 2015).…”