scholarly journals Neurolinguistics

2006 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-65
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Experimental Psychology ◽  
Brain Research ◽  
Rapid Change ◽  
Morphological Processing ◽  
Nature Publishing Group ◽  
Boston College ◽  
Cognitive Brain Research ◽  
Publishing Group

06–194Altarriba, Jeanette & Jennifer L. Gianico (U Albany, State U New York, USA), Lexical ambiguity resolution across languages: A theoretical and empirical review. Experimental Psychology (Hogrefe & Huber Publishers) 50.3 (2003), 159–170.06–195Bialystok, Ellen (York U, Canada; [email protected]) & Dana Shapero, Ambiguous benefits: The effect of bilingualism on reversing ambiguous figures. Developmental Science (Blackwell) 8.6 (2005), 595.06–196Blot, J. Kevin (Clark U & Boston College, USA), Michael A. Zaraté & Paul B. Paulus, Code-switching across brainstorming sessions: Implications for the revised hierarchical model of bilingual language processing. Experimental Psychology (Hogrefe & Huber Publishers) 50.3 (2003), 171–183.06–197Costa, Albert (U Barcelona, Spain; [email protected]), Mikel Santesteban & Agnès Caño, On the facilitatory effects of cognate words in bilingual speech production. Brain and Language (Elsevier) 94.1 (2005), 94–103.06–198De Diego Balaguer, R. (Faculté de Médecine, Paris XII, France), N. Sebastián-Gallés, B. Díaz & A. Rodríguez-Fornells, Morphological processing in early bilinguals: An ERP study of regular and irregular verb processing. Cognitive Brain Research (Elsevier) 25.1 (2005), 312–327.06–199Elston-Güttler, Kerrie E. (Max Planck Institute of Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany; [email protected]) & Angela D. Friederici, Native and L2 processing of homonyms in sentential context. Journal of Memory and Language (Elsevier) 52.2 (2005), 256–283.06–200Luka, Barbara J. (Bard College, USA; [email protected]) & Lawrence W. Barsalou, Structural facilitation: Mere exposure effects for grammatical acceptability as evidence for syntactic priming in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language (Elsevier) 52.3 (2005), 436–459.06–201McLaughlin, Judith (U Washington, USA; [email protected]), Lee Osterhout & Albert Kim, Neural correlates of second- language word learning: Minimal instruction produces rapid change. Nature Neuroscience (Nature Publishing Group) 7 (2004), 703–704.06–202Mechelli, Andrea (Wellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience, U London, UK; [email protected]), Jenny T. Crinion, Uta Noppeney, John O'Doherty, John Ashburner, Richard S. Frackowiak & Cathy J. Price, Neurolinguistics: Structural plasticity in the bilingual brain. Nature (Nature Publishing Group) 431.757 (2004), 256–283.06–203Meijer, Paul J. A. (Clark U & Boston College, USA) & Jean E. Fox Tree, Building syntactic structures in speaking: A bilingual exploration. Experimental Psychology (Hogrefe & Huber Publishers) 50.3 (2003), 184–195.06–204Moreno, Eva M. (U Califonia, USA; [email protected]) & Marta Kutas, Processing semantic anomalies in two languages: An electrophysiological exploration in both languages of Spanish–English bilinguals. Cognitive Brain Research (Elsevier) 22.2 (2005), 205–220.06–205Pallier, C. (Service Hospitalier Fredrik Joliot, Orsay, France; [email protected]), S. Dehaene, J.-B. Poline, D. Lebihan, A.-M. Argenti, E. Dupoux & J. Mehler, Brain imaging of language plasticity in adopted adults: Can a second language replace the first?Cerebral Cortex (Oxford University Press) 13.2 (2003), 155–161.06–206Reiterer, Susanne (U Vienna, Austria; [email protected]), Claudia Hemmelmann, Peter Rappelsberger & Michael L. Berger, Characteristic functional networks in high- versus low-proficiency second-language speakers detected also during native language processing: An explorative EEG coherence study in 6 frequency bands. Cognitive Brain Research (Elsevier) 25.2 (2005), 566–578.06–207Tham, Wendy W. P. (Nanyang Technological U, Singapore), Susan J. Rickard Liow, Jagath C. Rajapakse, Tan Choong Leong, Samuel E. S. Ng, Winston E. H. Lim & Lynn G. Homoreno, Phonological processing in Chinese–English bilingual biscriptals: An fMRI study. Neuroimage (Elsevier) 28.3 (2005), 579–587.

Second language processing of English past tense morphology: The role of working memory

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Filiz Rızaoğlu ◽  
Ayşe Gürel
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Negative Relationship ◽  
Masked Priming ◽  
Morphological Processing ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
L2 Learners

AbstractThis study examines, via a masked priming task, the processing of English regular and irregular past tense morphology in proficient second language (L2) learners and native speakers in relation to working memory capacity (WMC), as measured by the Automated Reading Span (ARSPAN) and Operation Span (AOSPAN) tasks. The findings revealed quantitative group differences in the form of slower reaction times (RTs) in the L2-English group. While no correlation was found between the morphological processing patterns and WMC in either group, there was a negative relationship between English and Turkish ARSPAN scores and the speed of word recognition in the L2 group. Overall, comparable decompositional processing patterns found in both groups suggest that, like native speakers, high-proficiency L2 learners are sensitive to the morphological structure of the target language.

Learning and Using Morphology and Morphosyntax in a Second Language

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie Beth Feldman ◽  
Judith F. Kroll
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Early Time ◽  
Morphological Processing ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Linguistic Categories ◽  
Parallel Activation ◽  
High Degree

We summarize findings from across a range of methods, including behavioral measures of overall processing speed and accuracy, electrophysiological indices that tap into the early time course of language processing, and neural measures using structural and functional imaging. We argue that traditional claims about rigid constraints on the ability of late bilinguals to exploit the meaning and form of the morphology and morphosyntax in a second language should be revised so as to move away from all or none command of structures motivated from strict dichotomies among linguistic categories of morphology. We describe how the dynamics of morphological processing in neither monolingual or bilingual speakers is easily characterized in terms of the potential to decompose words into their constituent morphemes and that morphosyntactic processing is not easily characterized in terms of categories of structures that are learnable and those that are unlearnable by bilingual and nonnative speakers. Instead, we emphasize the high degree of variability across individuals and plasticity within individuals in their ability to successfully learn and use even subtle aspects of a second language. Further, both of the bilingual’s two languages become active when even one language is engaged, and parallel activation has consequences that shape both languages, thus their influence is not in the unidirectional manner that was traditionally assumed. We briefly discuss the nature of possible constraints and directions for future research.

Differential lateralization in first-versus second-language processing: An fMRI study

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thad Polk ◽  
Charles Behensky ◽  
Heather Pond ◽  
Stefan Frisch ◽  
Marilyn Shatz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Fmri Study

scholarly journals Letter transpositions and morphemic boundaries in the second language processing of derived words: An exploratory study of individual differences

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-446
Author(s):  
Hasibe Kahraman ◽  
Bilal Kırkıcı
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Reading Proficiency ◽  
Individual Variability ◽  
Morphological Processing ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Priming Effects ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Morphological Priming

AbstractResearch into nonnative (L2) morphological processing has produced largely conflicting findings. To contribute to the discussions surrounding the contradictory findings in the literature, we examined L2 morphological priming effects along with a transposed-letter (TL) methodology. Critically, we also explored the potential effects of individual differences in the reading networks of L2 speakers using a test battery of reading proficiency. A masked primed lexical decision experiment was carried out in which the same target (e.g., ALLOW) was preceded by a morphological prime (allowable), a TL-within prime (allwoable), an substituted letter (SL)-within prime (allveable), a TL-across prime (alloawble), an SL-across prime (alloimble), or an unrelated prime (believable). The average data yielded morphological priming but no significant TL priming. However, the results of an exploratory analysis of the potential effects of individual differences suggested that individual variability mediated the group-level priming patterns in L2 speakers. TL-within and TL-across priming effects were obtained only when the performance of participants on nonword reading was considered, while the magnitude of the morphological priming effects diminished as the knowledge of vocabulary expanded. The results highlight the importance of considering individual differences while testing L2 populations.

scholarly journals What is special about L3 processing?

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
KEES DE BOT ◽  
CAROL JAENSCH
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Third Language ◽  
The Core ◽  
Dynamic Perspective ◽  
Core Issue ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Over Time

While research on third language (L3) and multilingualism has recently shown remarkable growth, the fundamental question of what makes trilingualism special compared to bilingualism, and indeed monolingualism, continues to be evaded. In this contribution we consider whether there is such a thing as a true monolingual, and if there is a difference between dialects, styles, registers and languages. While linguistic and psycholinguistic studies suggest differences in the processing of a third, compared to the first or second language, neurolinguistic research has shown that generally the same areas of the brain are activated during language use in proficient multilinguals. It is concluded that while from traditional linguistic and psycholinguistic perspectives there are grounds to differentiate monolingual, bilingual and multilingual processing, a more dynamic perspective on language processing in which development over time is the core issue, leads to a questioning of the notion of languages as separate entities in the brain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document