The effects of phonotactic constraints on lexical processing in bilingual and monolingual subjects

Altenberg, Evelyn P.; Cairns, Helen Smith

doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(83)90134-2

Cited by 87 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It may be that such influences can only be traced using stimuli that share many features across languages, such as our cognates. This explanation may account for the absence, or relatively small size, of such effects in studies manipulating only phonological and/or orthographic features of stimuli (e.g., Altenberg & Cairns, 1983;Jared & Kroll, 2001).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An increasing number of studies indicate that, in these situations, the activation of words in bilingual memory operates in a language-nonselective way (e.g., Altenberg & Cairns, 1983;BijeljacBabic, Biardeau, & Grainger, 1997;Brysbaert, Van Dyck, & Van de Poel, 1999;De Groot, Delmaar, & Lupker, 2000;De Groot & Nas, 1991;Dijkstra, Grainger, & Van Heuven, 1999;Dijkstra, Van Jaarsveld, & Ten Brinke, 1998;Gollan, Forster, & Frost, 1997;Grainger & Frenck-Mestre, 1998;Jared & Kroll, 2001;Jiang, 1999;Nas, 1983;Van Hell & De Groot, 1998;Van Heuven, Dijkstra, & Grainger, 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a lexical decision experiment, Altenberg and Cairns (1983) had English-German bilinguals process words and nonwords that followed the orthographic and phonological rules in either L1 or L2, in both languages, or in neither of the two languages. The lexical decision times for the nonwords were affected by their legality in L1 as much as by their legality in L2.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts

Hell

Dijkstra

2002

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

518

415

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In three experiments, we studied the influence of foreign language knowledge on native language performance in an exclusively native language context. Trilinguals with Dutch as their native and dominant language (L1), English as their second language (L2), and French as their third language (L3) performed a word association task (Experiment 1) or a lexical decision task (Experiments 2 and 3) in L1. The L1 stimulus words were cognates with their translations in English, cognates with their translations in French, or were noncognates. In Experiments 1 and 2 with trilinguals who were highly proficient in English and relatively low in proficiency in French, we observed shorter word association and lexical decision times to the L1 words that were cognates with English than to the noncognates. In these relatively low-proficiency French speakers, response times (RTs) for the L1 words that were cognates with French did not differ from those for the noncognates. In Experiment 3, we tested Dutch-EnglishFrench trilinguals with a higher level of fluency in French (i.e., equally fluent in English and in French). We now observed faster responses on the L1 words that were cognates with French than on the noncognates. Lexical decision times to the cognates with English were also shorter than those to the noncognates. The results indicate that words presented in the dominant language, to naive participants, activate information in the nontarget, and weaker, language in parallel, implying that the multilinguals' processing system is profoundly nonselective with respect to language. A minimal level of nontarget language fluency seems to be required, however, before any weaker language effects become noticeable in L1 processing.

show abstract

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts

Hell

Dijkstra

2002

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

518

415

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, ironically, one of the most immediately obvious aspects of bilingual speech has been least intensively researched- Watson (1991) called phonology ''the Cinderella of bilingual studies' ' (p. 25). Studies typically looked at the perception (Altenberg & Cairns, 1983;Grainger, 1993;Grainger & Dijkstra, 1992;Jared & Kroll, 2001) or the articulation of words in the first and second language (Flege, 1991;Flege & Eefting, 1987), but the access of word-form information in memory for production has not received much attention. The present paper addresses this issue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shared phonological encoding processes and representations of languages in bilingual speakers

Roelofs

2003

Language and Cognitive Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four form-preparation experiments investigated whether aspects of phonological encoding processes and representations are shared between languages in bilingual speakers. The participants were Dutch-English bilinguals. Experiment 1 showed that the basic rightward incrementality revealed in studies for the first language is also observed for second-language words. In Experiments 2 and 3, speakers were given words to produce that did or did not share onset segments, and that came or did not come from different languages. It was found that when onsets were shared among the response words, those onsets were prepared, even when the words came from different languages. Experiment 4 showed that preparation requires prior knowledge of the segments and that knowledge about their phonological features yields no effect. These results suggest that both firstand second-language words are phonologically planned through the same serial order mechanism and that the representations of segments common to the languages are shared.

show abstract

“…The first locus of influence seems to occur at the level of orthography. Altenberg and Cairns (1983) tested German-English bilinguals and English monolinguals on English lexical decision. The stimulus set included items that were orthographically legal in both languages and those that were legal only in English.…”

Section: Cognitive Mobilization In Bilingual Readingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differentiating Between Automatic and Strategic Control Processes: Toward a Model of Cognitive Mobilization in Bilingual Reading

Cheung

Lin

2005

PSYCHOLOGIA -An International Journal of Psychological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent years have witnessed an increased interest in studying the effect of first language (L1) reading experience on second language (L2) literacy. Such crosslanguage influence in reading is understood as a particular case of the more general phenomenon of cognitive mobilization, which refers to the application of L1-related mechanisms to L2 processing . In this paper, we propose a model of cognitive mobilization for the bilingual reader. The model postulates an L1 and an L2 word recognition system the automaticity of which depends on language proficiency, and a language-neutral central system which entails effortful, strategic control processes. Under the assumptions of limited attentional resources and increasing L2 word recognition automaticity due to enhanced L2 proficiency, the model makes different predictions about cognitive mobilization in reading for bilingual readers at various levels of L2 proficiency. L1-to-L2 mobilization and topdown application of general reading strategies to L2 word decoding are similarly modelled. The paper contributes to the area by providing a framework for the formulation of working hypotheses about cognitive mobilization in reading.Key words: mobilization, reading, bilingual, automatic COGNITIVE MOBILIZATION IN BILINGUAL READINGWhat are the effects of first language (L1) reading experience on second language (L2) literacy development? The first locus of influence seems to occur at the level of orthography. Altenberg and Cairns (1983) tested German-English bilinguals and English monolinguals on English lexical decision. The stimulus set included items that were orthographically legal in both languages and those that were legal only in English. Results showed that the monolinguals were equally fast in making decisions on both types of items, whereas the bilinguals performed better on words that were legal only in English. The authors concluded that the bilinguals' experience in German (L1) interfered with their English (L2) lexical decision when the target items could also be German words (i.e., orthographically legal in German). On the other hand, interference did not occur when the targets did not look like German words at all (i.e., orthographically illegal in German).Cognitive mobilization in reading also takes place in terms of activation of L1 phonological information when reading L2 items. Nas (1983) tested Dutch-English bilinguals on English lexical decision with real English words, English nonwords, and

show abstract

The effects of phonotactic constraints on lexical processing in bilingual and monolingual subjects

Cited by 87 publications

References 23 publications

Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts

Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts

Shared phonological encoding processes and representations of languages in bilingual speakers

Differentiating Between Automatic and Strategic Control Processes: Toward a Model of Cognitive Mobilization in Bilingual Reading

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About