Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-kp629 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T04:38:15.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Refining key concepts of the Ontogenesis Model of the L2 lexical representation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 February 2022

Denisa Bordag ,
Kira Gor  and
Andreas Opitz
Denisa Bordag*
Affiliation:
Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel
Kira Gor
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park, USA
Andreas Opitz
Affiliation:
Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
*
Address for correspondence: Denisa Bordag, Universität Leipzig, Beethovenstr. 15, 04107 Leipzig, Germany. Email: denisav@uni-leipzig.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

modellinglexical representationL2 acquisitionlexical developmentfuzziness

Information

Type
Authors response
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , March 2022 , pp. 236 - 241
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aujla, H (in press) Language experience predicts semantic priming of lexical decision. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology.Google Scholar
Baxter, P, Leoné, F and Dijkstra, T (2021a) Helping busy Suzy fight fuzzy in foreign language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.Google Scholar
Baxter, P, Droop, M, van den Hurk, M, Bekkering, H, Dijkstra, T and Leoné, F (2021b) Contrasting Similar Words Facilitates Second Language Vocabulary Learning in Children by Sharpening Lexical Representations. Frontiers in Psychology 12:688160.10.3389/fpsyg.2021.688160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordag, D, Gor, K and Opitz, A (2021) Ontogenesis Model of the L2 lexical representation. Bilingualism: Language & Cognition, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728921000250. Published online by Cambridge University Press on June 17, 2021.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M, Lagrou, E and Stevens, M (2017) Visual word recognition in a second language: A test of the lexical entrenchment hypothesis with lexical decision times. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 20(3), 530–548.10.1017/S1366728916000353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calabria, M (2021) On the semantic optimum and contexts. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, SV, Pandža, NB, Lancaster, AK and Gor, K (2016) Fuzzy nonnative phonolexical representations lead to fuzzy form-to-meaning mappings. Frontiers in Psychology 7, 1345.10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01345CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corder, SP (1967) The Significance of Learners’ Errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 5, 161–17010.1515/iral.1967.5.1-4.161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darcy, I (2021) From fuzzy to fine-grained representations in the developing lexicon: Commentary on Bordag, Gor, and Opitz. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diependaele, K, Lemhöfer, K and Brysbaert, M (2013) The word frequency effect in first-and second-language word recognition: A lexical entrenchment account. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 66(5), 843–863.10.1080/17470218.2012.720994CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dijkstra, T and van Heuven, WJB (2002) The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 5(3), 175–197.10.1017/S1366728902003012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T, Wahl, A, Buytenhuijs, F, van Halem, N, Al-Jibouri, Z, De Korte, M and Rekké, S (2019) Multilink: a computational model for bilingual word recognition and word translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 22(4), 657–679.10.1017/S1366728918000287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ecke, P and Hall, CJ (2021) Bilingual Aspects of the Ontogenesis Model: Parasitic Connections at all Levels of Representation? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N (2021) Fuzzy Representations. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escudero, P, Benders, T and Lipski, SC (2009) Native, non-native and L2 perceptual cue weighting for Dutch vowels: The case of Dutch, German, and Spanish listeners. Journal of Phonetics 37(4), 452–465.10.1016/j.wocn.2009.07.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escudero, P and Hayes-Harb, R (2021) The Ontogenesis Model may provide a useful guiding framework, but lacks explanatory power for the nature and development of L2 lexical representation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firth, JR (1957) Modes of meaning. In Palmer, FR (ed.), Papers in Linguistics (pp. 190–215). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gass, S (1997) Input, Interaction, and the Second Language Learner. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gass, S (2021) Use it or lose it? Spell it? Sign it?: Reaching the optimum. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S136672892100064XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gor, K, Cook, S, Bordag, D, Chrabaszcz, A and Opitz, A (in press) Fuzzy lexical representations in late second language learners. Frontiers in Psychology. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.732030/abstractGoogle Scholar
Gyllstad, H (2021) The Ontogenesis Model: How do multiword units fit in, and are most lexical representations in the L1 really at their optima? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, CJ and Ecke, P (2003) Parasitism as a default mechanism in L3 vocabulary acquisition. In Cenoz, J, Hufeisen, B and Jessner, U (eds.), The multilingual lexicon (pp. 71–85). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-0-306-48367-7_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, ZS (1954) Distributional structure. Word 10(2–3), 146–162.10.1080/00437956.1954.11659520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jamieson, RK, Johns, BT, Taler, V and Jones, MN (2021) The importance of formal modelling for the development of cognitive theory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, BT, Sheppard, C, Jones, MN and Taler, V (2016) The role of semantic diversity in lexical organization across aging and bilingualism. Frontiers in Psychology 7, 703.10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, MN and Mewhort, DJK (2007) Representing word meaning and order information in a composite holographic lexicon. Psychological Review 114, 1–37.10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirschenbaum, A (2021) Unsupervised Approaches for Morphological Analysis. Unpublished dissertation.Google Scholar
Kroll, JF and Stewart, E (1994) Category interference in translation and picture naming: evidence for asymmetric connections between bilinguals memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language 33, 149–174.10.1006/jmla.1994.1008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, JF, Vargas Fuentes, N and Torres, J (2021) Representing words in a second language: Can the L2 dance on its own? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K (2021) What is fuzziness, and what does it explain? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, P, Zhao, X and MacWhinney, B (2007) Dynamic self-organization and early lexical development in children. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal 31, 581–612.10.1080/15326900701399905CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, P and Zhao, X (2021) Computational Mechanisms of Development? Connectionism and Bilingual Lexical Representation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lund, K and Burgess, C (1996) Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers 28, 203–208.10.3758/BF03204766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClelland, JL and Rumelhart, DE (1981) An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review 88, 375–407.10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meara, P (2021) Modelling L2 vocabulary acquisition: The devil is in the detail. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.Google Scholar
Mikolov, T, Sutskever, I, Chen, K, Corrado, GS and Dean, J (2013) Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 3111–3119.Google Scholar
Mishra, RK (2021) The limits to ‘fuzziness’ in the L2 learner. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montag, JL, Jones, MN and Smith, LB (2015) The Words Children Hear: Picture Books and the Statistics for Language Learning. Psychological science 26, 1489–1496.10.1177/0956797615594361CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicol, J (2021) How fuzzy are L2 phonological representations? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ota, M, Hartsuiker, RJ and Haywood, SL (2009) The KEY to the ROCK: Near-homophony in nonnative visual word recognition. Cognition 111, 263–269.10.1016/j.cognition.2008.12.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ota, M, Hartsuiker, RJ and Haywood, SL (2010) Is a FAN always FUN? Phonological and orthographic effects in bilingual visual word recognition. Language and Speech 53, 383–403.10.1177/0023830910371462CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pecher, D, de Rooij, J and Zeelenberg, R (2009) Does a pear growl? Interference from semantic properties of orthographic neighbors. Memory & Cognition 37(5), 541–546.10.3758/MC.37.5.541CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pennington, J, Socher, R and Manning, CD (2014) GloVe: Global vectors for word representation. Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 1532–1543.10.3115/v1/D14-1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poibeau, T, Villavicencio, A, Korhonen, A and Alishahi, A (2013) Computational modeling as a methodology for studying human language learning. In Villavicencio, A, Poibeau, T, Korhonen, A and Alishahi, A (eds.) Cognitive aspects of computational language acquisition (pp. 1–25). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
van Hell, J (2021) Ontogenesis model of L2 lexical representation: Cross-language links to account for bilingual lexical processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Leussen, JW and Escudero, P (2015) Learning to perceive and recognize a second language: the L2LP model revised. Frontiers in Psychology 6, 1000.10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01000CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolter, B (2001) Comparing the L1 and L2 mental lexicon: A depth of individual word knowledge model. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23(1), 41–69.10.1017/S0272263101001024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolter, B (2021) Refining optimum levels of acquisition and L1 semantic influences in the Ontogenesis Model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.10.1017/S1366728921000584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yee, E and Sedivy, JC (2006) Eye movements to pictures reveal transient semantic activation during spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 32(1), 1–14.10.1037/0278-7393.32.1.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, X and Li, P (2010) Bilingual lexical interactions in an unsupervised neural network model. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 13(5), 505–524.10.1080/13670050.2010.488284CrossRefGoogle Scholar