This study investigated the electrophysiological correlates of cross-language orthographic and phonological processing in unbalanced Chinese (L1)–English (L2) bilinguals using a translation recognition task. The critical L1-L2 word pairs were incorrect translation equivalents but orthographically or phonologically related through translation (orthographic or phonological translation neighbor). Compared with the unrelated control, the recognition of L2 words showed comparable reaction time and accuracies when coupled with L1 orthographic or phonological translation neighbors. However, both orthographic and phonological translation neighbors elicited more negative event-related potential (ERP) waveforms in the bulk of the N400 component (300-600 ms) than the unrelated control. These findings were interpreted in the framework of the Bilingual Interactive Activation Plus model (BIA+ model), according to which cross-language orthographic and phonological representations were non-selectively accessed during the recognition of the L2 words, and top-down inhibitory control mechanism impacted the cross-language lexical competition and confliction between the two languages.

Extensive evidence has demonstrated that bilinguals non-selectively activate lexicons of both languages when reading or hearing words in one language. Here, we further investigated the electrophysiological roles of cross-linguistic orthography and phonology in the processing of L2 spoken words in unbalanced Chinese (L1)–English (L2) bilinguals in a cross-modal situation. Relative to unrelated control, the recognition of auditory L2 words showed behavioral interference effects when paired with orthographic or phonological neighbors of the correct translations of L2 words. Moreover, the lexical effects were also exhibited in the electrophysiological data, as reflected by marginally less positive late positive component (500–800 ms) amplitudes in the frontal region. Importantly, the orthographic rather than phonological translation neighbor condition elicited less negative N400 (300–500 ms) amplitudes in the parietal–occipital regions, suggesting that this orthographic translation neighbor condition facilitated the co-activation of spoken L2 words. Taken together, these findings indicate that cross-linguistic orthographic and phonological activation have different temporal dynamics with both bottom-up parallel cross-linguistic activation and the top-down inhibitory control mechanism governing the two-language lexical organization in L2 spoken word recognition.