Class Notes (835,894)
Canada (509,478)
Psychology (4,206)
PSY274H5 (129)
Lecture 8

Lecture 8 - Bilingualism and the Psychology of Language

6 Pages
164 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSY274H5
Professor
Craig Chambers
Semester
Fall

Description
Bilingualism and the Psychology of Language Introduction - Bilingualism is the “norm” worldwide - Yet monolinguals are the reference case in most work in the psychology of language - Why? Conducting Psychological Research on Bilingualism - Issues: o What does bilingual mean? o Should bilingualism be treated as categorical or continuous? o Does it matter which languages are being considered? o Does it matter when different languages were learned? o What if person knows a 2 language but doesn’t use it? - Terminology for this class: L1 = first/native language; L2 = second nonnative language What Do We Know When We Know a Language? - Representation of linguistic knowledge in mind - Speech sounds (phonological system) o Inventory + rules of combination - Word inventory - Morphological and syntactic system (rules for combining morphemes and words in sequences) - Pragmatic knowledge (conventions of language use) Major Theme in Psychological Approaches: - The mental representation of words and concepts - Recall: word = pairing of perceptual pattern and concept - Q1: What do these “pairings” look like in the mind? Four Perspectives* on the Storage of Word meaning in Bilinguals - The first two perspectives each describe a way of framing two sides of a debate, and do not advance a specific hypothesis Shared/Interdependence Hypothesis - Each concept is associated with two perceptual patterns (one for each language, L1 and L2) - There are two versions of each concept, each with its own associated perceptual pattern - There are two complete memory stores (one for each language) Compound vs. Coordinate Bilingualism - Assumes BOTH the interdependence AND independence hypothesis are correct, but relate to DIFFERENT individuals - A) Compound bilingualism: (example: two languages learned simultaneously in same context): memory format resembles the “interdependence” view - B) Coordinate Bilingualism: (examples: two languages learned sequentially and/or in different contexts): memory format resembles the “independence” view; potential for slightly different meanings for things that would be considered translation equivalents Connectionist Approaches - Reflect a position whereby “meaning” = a bundle of semantic units that together constitute a concept - Makes distinction between concrete and abstract words o Concrete words: more likely to have overlapping memory representation for meaning o Abstract words: less likely “Revised Hierarchical Model” - Assumes the linguistic part of a word and its meaning are stored at different levels of representation - Links between linguistic and conceptual representations can vary in strength - Differences in strength of lexical links at word level: o Capture differences in translation difficulty - Differences in strength of links between words and concepts: o Capture stronger conceptual knowledge in L1 More on the Mental Representation of Words and Concepts: - Q2: What happens when bilinguals encounter a word in the course of reading or listening? - I) Language selective view: o Only the relevant lexicon for the situation is accessed - Ii) Language nonselective view: o In the earliest moments of processing, BOTH lexicons are accessed. However, the “intrusion” from the irrelevant lexicon is short-lived Background: - Spoken word recognition = a competitive process - Candidate words that are compatible with the unfolding speech input are “Activated” - As the word continues to unfold in time, words will “drop out” of the competition (become deactivated) if there is a mismatch between word and speech input - NOTE: words other than the explicitly recognized on rarely enter into conscious consideration Spivey and Marian (1999) - Tested Russian-English speakers (Russian = L1) - Expt. Conducted in English - Eye movements monitored as people followed instructions like: o “Put the marker below the cross” - The word for STAMP in Russian…. o Initial sounds overlap with English word “marker” - This object = the between language competitor object (also called the “interlingual competitor” - Tabletop contained not only a marker, but also a stamp, and two other objects whose names didn’t overlap with “mark…” - Results: o Found people (unconsciously) looked at the between language competitor on about 30% of traits! o Although they correctly selected the intended target o When the situation is reversed (language of experiment = L1; “competing” language = L2), weaker effect are found - Conclusions: o The “irrelevant” lexicon is not completely “switched off” o The intrusion from the irrelevant language is strong when it is the listener’s dominant language Additional Points: - This “activation” of the meaning of the word in the currently irrelevant lexicon is UNCONSCIOUS, not available to awareness - The same is true of the measures (eye movements) - In reading, the effect can be shown with interlingual homographs (words spelled in the same way in two languages, example: French pain/ English pain) o Typical effect: readers unconsciously slow down upon reading these words compared to words whose spelling is distinct in the active language - A converse effect is sometimes shown for cognates (words with similar spelling AND MEANING across two languages, example: French table/ English table): Readers have been shown to actually speed up! Additional question: what role is played by specific details of the sound system of different languages? Background: - Different languages sometimes have a slightly different phonetic implementation of similar sounds o Example: /p/ /t/ k/ sounds like English vs. Spanish (in a word like “car” and “casa” - Difference: amount of time between release of airstream in mouth and the point at which the vocal folds begin vibrating (Spanish /t/ sounds closer to English /d/) - VOICE ONSET TIME (VOT) Ju and Luce (2004) - Same general procedure as Spivey and Marian, with Spanish-English bilinguals o Expt conducted in Spanish o Example target word: playa (beach) o Display also contained similar sounding object: pilers (Terminology: between- language competitor) o Manipulated whether display contained between-language competitor or a control object with no sound overlap - Result: o Degree of competition from “pilers” =
More Less

Related notes for PSY274H5

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit