Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T22:56:24.452Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CROSSLANGUAGE LEXICAL ACTIVATION

A Test of the Revised Hierarchical and Morphological Decomposition Models in Arabic-English Bilinguals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2010

Mousa Qasem  and
Rebecca Foote
Mousa Qasem
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Rebecca Foote*
Affiliation:
University of Illinois
*
*Address correspondence to: Rebecca Foote, Department of Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese, 4080 Foreign Languages Building, MC-176, 707 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801; e-mail: rfoote@illinois.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study tested the predictions of the revised hierarchical (RHM) and morphological decomposition (MDM) models with Arabic-English bilinguals. The RHM (Kroll & Stewart, 1994) predicts that the amount of activation of first language translation equivalents is negatively correlated with second language (L2) proficiency. The MDM (Frost, Forster, & Deutsch, 1997) claims that in nonconcatenative languages, including Arabic, activation spreads by morphological identity rather than orthographic similarity. To test these two models, native speakers of Arabic at two levels of English L2 proficiency completed a translation recognition task. In the critical conditions, the Arabic word was not the correct translation of the English word (shoulder-katif) but was orthographically related (shoulder-kahf “cave”), morphologically related but semantically opaque (shoulder-takaatuf “unity”), or semantically related (shoulder-raqaba “neck”). Results show more morphological- than orthographic-form interference for all participants, in line with the MDM. Contrary to the RHM, however, both proficiency groups experienced interference in the semantic condition as well as in the form conditions.

Type
Research Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 111 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Altarriba, J., & Mathis, K. M. (1997). Conceptual and lexical development in second language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 550–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Athanasopoulos, P. (2006). Effects of grammatical representation of number on cognition in bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9, 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, L. (2004). A glossary of morphology. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2000). Non-concatenative morphemes in language processing: Evidence from modern standard Arabic. In Cutler, A., McQueen, J. M., & Zondervan, R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the workshop on spoken word access processes (pp. 23–26). Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2001). Morphological units in the Arabic mental lexicon. Cognition, 81, 65–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2004a). Abstract morphemes and lexical representation: The CV-skeleton in Arabic. Cognition, 92, 271–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2004b). Allomorphic variation in Arabic: Implications for lexical processing and representation. Brain and Language, 90, 106–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2005). Discontinuous morphology in time: Incremental masked priming in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 207–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2009). Aralex: A lexical database for modern standard Arabic. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. (2003). The intercultural style hypothesis: L1 and L2 interaction in requesting behaviour. In Cook, V. (Ed.), Effects of the second language on the first (pp. 62–80). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, H.-C., & Ho, C. (1986). Development of Stroop asymmetrical cross-language priming effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 397–401.Google Scholar
Chen, H.-C., & Leung, Y.-S. (1989). Patterns of lexical processing in a nonnative language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 316–325.Google Scholar
Colombo, L. (1986). Activation and inhibition with orthographically similar words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12, 226–234.Google Scholar
Cook, V. (2003). Introduction: The changing L1 in the L2 user’s mind. In Cook, V. (Ed.), Effects of the second language on the first (pp. 1–18). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, V., Larossi, E., Stellakis, N., & Tokumaru, Y. (2003). Effects of the L2 on the syntactic processing of the L1. In Cook, V. (Ed.), Effects of the second language on the first (pp. 193–213). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Groot, A. M. B. (1992). Determinants of word translation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 1001–1018.Google Scholar
De Groot, A. M. B., & Poot, R. (1997). Word translation at three levels of proficiency in a second language: The ubiquitous involvement of conceptual memory. Language Learning, 47, 215–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsch, A., Frost, R., & Forster, K. I. (1998). Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1238–1255.Google Scholar
Dussias, P. E. (2003). Syntactic ambiguity resolution in L2 learners: Some effects of bilinguality on L1 and L2 processing strategies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 529–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferré, P., Sánchez-Casas, R., & Guasch, M. (2006). Can a horse be a donkey? Semantic and form interference effects in translation recognition in early and late proficient and nonproficient Spanish-Catalan bilinguals. Language Learning, 56, 571–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1987). The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics, 15, 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I., & Azuma, T. (2000). Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems: Does submit prime permit? Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 539–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 680–698.Google Scholar
Forster, K. I., Davis, C., Schoknecht, C., & Carter, R. (1987). Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 211–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 35, 116–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frost, R., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. I. (2000). Decomposing complex words in a nonlinear morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 751–765.Google Scholar
Frost, R., Deutsch, A., Gilboa, O., Tannenbaum, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2000). Morphological priming: Dissociation of phonological, semantic, and morphological factors. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1277–1288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frost, R., Forster, K. I., & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew? A masked priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 829–856.Google ScholarPubMed
Frost, R., Kugler, T., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. I. (2005). Orthographic structure versus morphological structure: Principles of lexical organization in a given language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Leaning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1293–1326.Google Scholar
Grainger, J. (1990). Word frequency and neighborhood frequency effects in lexical decision and naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 228–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S. (2003). Probing the effects of the L2 on the L1: A case study. In Cook, V. (Ed.), Effects of the second language on the first (pp. 81–102). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kecskes, I., & Papp, T. (2003). How to demonstrate the conceptual effect of L2 on L1? Methods and techniques. In Cook, V. (Ed.), Effects of the second language on the first (pp. 247–265). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J. F., Michael, E., Tokowicz, N., & Dufour, R. (2002). The development of lexical fluency in a second language. Second Language Research, 18, 137–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J. F., & Tokowicz, N. (2005). Models of bilingual representation and processing: Looking back and to the future. In Kroll, J. F. & De Groot, A. M. B. (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 531–553). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
La Heij, W., Hooglander, A., Kerling, R., & Van der Velden, E. (1996). Nonverbal context effects in forward and backward word translation: Evidence for concept mediation. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 648–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2001). Access to lexical representations: Cross-linguistic issues. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16, 699–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2007). Morphological processes in language comprehension. In Gaskell, M. G. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 175–193). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Menenti, L., & Indefrey, P. (2006). L2-L1 word associations in bilinguals: Direct evidence. Nijmegen CNS, 1, 17–24.Google Scholar
Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 507–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sánchez-Casas, R., Igoa, J. M., & García-Albea, J. E. (2003). On the representation of inflections and derivations: Data from Spanish. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 621–668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sholl, A., Sankaranarayanan, A., & Kroll, J. F. (1995). Transfer between picture naming and translation: A test of asymmetries in bilingual memory. Psychological Science, 6, 45–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunderman, G., & Kroll, J. F. (2006). First language activation during second language lexical processing: An investigation of lexical form, meaning, and grammatical class. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 387–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talamas, A., Kroll, J. F., & Dufour, R. (1999). From form to meaning: Stages in the acquisition of second-language vocabulary. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, I. (1991). Phonological processing in two languages. In Bialystok, E. (Ed.), Language processing in bilingual children (pp. 25–48). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zampini, M. L., & Green, K. P. (2001). The voicing contrast in English and Spanish: The relationship between perception and production. In Nicol, J. L. (Ed.), One mind, two languages (pp. 23–48). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar