Meta-analysis of the neural representation of first language and second language

2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 799-819 ◽  
Author(s):  
RAJANI SEBASTIAN ◽  
ANGELA R. LAIRD ◽  
SWATHI KIRAN
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Functional Neuroimaging ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
First Language ◽  
Likelihood Estimation ◽  
Neural Representation ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACTThis study reports an activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of published functional neuroimaging studies of bilingualism. Four parallel meta-analyses were conducted by taking into account the proficiency of participants reported in the studies. The results of the meta-analyses suggest differences in the probabilities of activation patterns between high proficiency and moderate/low proficiency bilinguals. The Talairach coordinates of activation in first language processing were very similar to that of second language processing in the high proficient bilinguals. However, in the low proficient group, the activation clusters were generally smaller and distributed over wider areas in both the hemispheres than the clusters identified in the ALE maps from the high proficient group. These findings draw attention to the importance of language proficiency in bilingual neural representation.

scholarly journals A meta-analysis of task-based differences in bilingual L1 and L2 language networks

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindy B Comstock ◽  
Bruce Oliver
Keyword(s):  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Functional Organization ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
Proficiency Level ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Design Factors

The functional organization of first (L1) and second (L2) language processing in bilinguals remains a topic of great interest to the neurolinguistics community. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies report meaningful differences in the location and extent of hemodynamic changes between tasks performed in the L1 and L2, yet there is no consensus on whether these networks can be considered truly distinct. In part, this may be due to the multiplicity of task designs implemented in such studies, which complicates the interpretation of their findings. This paper compares the results of previous bilingual meta-analyses to a new ALE meta-analysis that categorizes neuroimaging studies by task design. Factors such as the age of L2 acquisition (AoA) and the L2 language proficiency level of participants are also considered. The findings support previous accounts of the effect of participant characteristics on linguistic processing, while at the same time revealing dissociable differences in fMRI activation for L1 and L2 networks within and across tasks that appear independent of these external factors.

Construct operationalization, L1 effects, and context in second language processing

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 694-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALAN JUFFS
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
First Language ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Second Language Processing

Cunnings (2016) provides welcome insights into differences between native speaker (NS) sentence processing, adult non-native speaker processing (NNS), and working memory capacity (WMC) limitations. This commentary briefly raises three issues: construct operationalization; the role of first language (L1); and context.

Second language processing: when are first and second languages processed similarly?

2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Sabourin ◽  
Laurie A. Stowe
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
First Language ◽  
Grammatical Gender ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Neural Processing ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Second Languages ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
L1 And L2

In this article we investigate the effects of first language (L1) on second language (L2) neural processing for two grammatical constructions (verbal domain dependency and grammatical gender), focusing on the event-related potential P600 effect, which has been found in both L1 and L2 processing. Native Dutch speakers showed a P600 effect for both constructions tested. However, in L2 Dutch (with German or a Romance language as L1) a P600 effect only occurred if L1 and L2 were similar. German speakers show a P600 effect to both constructions. Romance speakers only show a P600 effect within the verbal domain. We interpret these findings as showing that with similar rule-governed processing routines in L1 and L2 (verbal domain processing for both German and Romance speakers), similar neural processing is possible in L1 and L2. However, lexically-driven constructions that are not the same in L1 and L2 (grammatical gender for Romance speakers) do not result in similar neural processing in L1 and L2 as measured by the P600 effect.

Transfer and typological proximity in the context of second language processing

2002 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 250-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gisela Håkansson ◽  
Manfred Pienemann ◽  
Susan Sayehli
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
First Language ◽  
First Year ◽  
Intermediate Structure ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
L1 Influence

In this article, the issue of cross-linguistic influence in second language acquisition is examined from a processing perspective. Applying Processability Theory as the theoretical framework we claim that second language (L2) learners can only produce forms they are able to process. We thus argue that the first language (L1) influence on the L2 is developmentally moderated. Data were collected from German L2 learners with Swedish as their L1. Twenty informants participated in the study, 10 in their first year of German (13 years of age) and 10 in their second year of German (14 years of age). Both languages involved are typologically very close but not mutually intelligible. The results show that Swedish learners of German do not transfer the verb-second structure from their L1 to the L2 even though this structure is identical in both languages.Instead they start out with canonical word order and subsequently produce an intermediate structure (adv NPsubjV X), which is ungrammatical in the L1 and the L2. These observations support the idea of a developmentally moderated transfer. The results clearly contradict the predictions from the ‘full transfer/full access’ hypothesis (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1994; 1996).

scholarly journals Specific Referential Contexts Shape Efficiency in Second Language Processing: Three Eye-Tracking Experiments With 6- and 10-Year-Old Children in Spanish Immersion Schools

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
pp. 128-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Casey Lew-Williams
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Elementary Schools ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
First Language ◽  
Grammatical Gender ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Biological Gender

ABSTRACTEfficiency in real-time language processing generally poses a greater challenge to adults learning a second language (L2) than to children learning a first language (L1). A notoriously difficult aspect of language for L2 learners to master is grammatical gender, and previous research has shown that L2 learners do not exploit cues to grammatical gender in ways that resemble L1 speakers. But it is not clear whether this problem is restricted to grammatical gender or whether it reflects a broader difficulty with processing local relations between words. Moreover, we do not know if immersive L2 environments, relative to typical L2 classrooms, confer advantages in learning regularities between words. In three eye-tracking experiments, 6- and 10-year-old children who were enrolled in Spanish immersion elementary schools listened to sentences with articles that conveyed information about the grammatical gender (Experiment 1), biological gender (Experiment 2), and number of referents in the visual field (Experiment 3). L1 children used articles to guide their attention to target referents in all three experiments. L2 children did not take advantage of articles as cues to grammatical gender, but succeeded in doing so for biological gender and number. Interpretations of these findings focus on how learning experiences interact with the nature of specific referential contexts to shape learners’ efficiency in language processing.

Within-language attention control in second language processing

2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 195-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARLENE TAUBE-SCHIFFNORMAN ◽  
NORMAN SEGALOWITZ
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Attention Control ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Second Language Proficiency ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Word Classification ◽  
And Performance ◽  
L1 English

This study investigated attention control in tasks involving the processing of relational terms (more highly grammaticized linguistic stimuli: spatial prepositions) and non-relational terms (less highly grammaticized lexical stimuli: nouns) in a first (L1) and second language (L2). Participants were adult bilinguals with greater proficiency in their L1 (English) than in their L2 (French) as determined by self-report and performance on a speeded word classification task. Attention control was operationalized in terms of shift costs obtained in an alternating runs experimental design (Rogers and Monsell, 1995). As hypothesized from consideration of the attention-directing functions of language, participants displayed significantly greater shift costs (lower attention control) for relational terms when performing in the L2 as compared to the L1, but no difference in shift costs for non-relational terms between the two languages. The results are discussed from a cognitive linguistic perspective and in relation to second language proficiency development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document