Linguistically directed attention to the temporal aspect of action events in monolingual English speakers and Chinese–English bilingual speakers with varying English proficiency

2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 413-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
JENN-YEU CHEN ◽  
JUI-JU SU ◽  
CHAO-YANG LEE ◽  
PADRAIG G. O'SEAGHDHA
Keyword(s):  
English Proficiency ◽  
Linguistic Relativity ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Directed Attention ◽  
Chinese Speakers ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Temporal Aspect ◽  
Chinese And English

Chinese and English speakers seem to hold different conceptions of time which may be related to the different codings of time in the two languages. Employing a sentence–picture matching task, we have investigated this linguistic relativity in Chinese–English bilinguals varying in English proficiency and found that those with high proficiency performed differently from those with low proficiency. Additional monolingual English data, reported here, showed further that high-proficiency bilinguals performed similarly to the English monolinguals, suggesting that Chinese speakers’ sensitivity to the time of an action event might be modifiable according to the extent of their experience with a tensed language.

The production of referring expressions in oral narratives of Chinese–English bilingual speakers and monolingual peers

2012 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liang Chen ◽  
Jianghua Lei
Keyword(s):  
Narrative Analysis ◽  
Picture Book ◽  
Noun Phrases ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Referring Expressions ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Discourse Functions ◽  
Chinese And English

This study evaluates the extent to which the production of referring expressions such as noun phrases and pronouns to fulfill various discourse functions in narratives of Chinese–English bilingual children matches that of their monolingual peers in each of the two languages. Spoken narratives in English and Chinese were elicited from 30 9-year-old participants from each of the three groups: Chinese–English bilinguals and their monolingual peers in each of the two languages using the wordless picture book Frog, Where Are You? (Mayer, 1969). Narrative analysis focused on the referring expressions that are used to introduce, re-introduce, and maintain reference to story characters in the narratives. Results show that (1) monolingual Chinese and English speakers differed significantly in the preferred referring expressions for the discourse functions; (2) the Chinese–English bilinguals differed from their monolingual peers in the distribution of referring expressions for referent introduction in English and re-introduction in Chinese; and (3) bilinguals resembled their monolingual peers in their differentiated use of referring expressions for referent maintenance in each of the two languages. These results suggest that the patterns of production of referring expressions in discourse by bilingual speakers may be unique, and fall in between those by their monolingual peers in each of the languages.

Evidence Against Linguistic Relativity in Chinese and English: A Case Study of Spatial and Temporal Metaphors

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 335-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chi-Shing Tse ◽  
Jeanette Altarriba
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Relativity ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Current Experiment ◽  
Chinese Speakers ◽  
Spatial Metaphors ◽  
Reverse Pattern ◽  
Chinese And English

AbstractTo talk about time, English speakers often use horizontal spatial metaphors whereas Chinese speakers use both vertical and horizontal spatial metaphors. Boroditsky (2001) showed that while Chinese-English bilinguals were faster to verify a temporal target like June comes earlier than August after they had seen a vertical spatial prime rather than a horizontal spatial prime, English monolinguals showed the reverse pattern, thus supporting the linguistic relativity hypothesis. This finding was not conceptually replicated in January and Kako's (2007) six experiments for English monolinguals. In the current experiment, we failed to conceptually replicate her English monolinguals' findings: both Chinese-English bilinguals and English monolinguals were faster to verify the sentences after seeing a vertical spatial prime than a horizontal spatial prime. While we replicated Boroditsky's findings, in part, for our Chinese-English bilinguals, the similarity in the pattern of findings for both Chinese-English bilinguals and English monolinguals argues against the linguistic relativity hypothesis.

Single Word Insertions as Code-Switching or Established Borrowing?

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 14
Author(s):  
Marzieh Hadei
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Method ◽  
Mental Lexicon ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Code Switching ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Single Word ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Mixed Method Design ◽  
Class 1

<p class="1"><span lang="X-NONE">The present study aims to show whether or not English single word insertions in Persian can be considered as code-switching or established borrowing. A mixed method design is chosen for the study. Data for the present study were collected from 12 Persian-English bilingual speakers in different tape-recorded spontaneous conversations. The findings of the study revealed that English single word insertions cannot be considered as established borrowing for several reasons:  a) They are not integrated phonologically into the Persian frame b) They behave similarly to phrasal insertions with different Persian markers c) They are not fixed in the mental lexicon of the bilingual Persian-English speakers and are used without any awareness and d) English verbs cannot integrate into the Persian frame- neither morphologically nor syntactically. <span>Overall, the present study agrees with Myers-Scotton’s (2002) </span>that borrowing arises originally as code-switching, and borrowed forms and code-switched forms tend to fall across a continuum.</span></p>

Intercultural pragmatics at work: (Self-)perceptions of intercultural behavior of Chinese and English speakers and interpreters in healthcare interactions

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Hlavac ◽  
Zhichang Xu ◽  
David Xiong Yong
Keyword(s):  
The Self ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Chinese Speakers ◽  
Intercultural Pragmatics ◽  
Linguistic Behavior ◽  
Healthcare Situation ◽  
Chinese And English

AbstractInterpreters are expected to have an advanced command of not only the vocabulary and grammar of their working languages, but also the pragmatic norms that speakers of their working languages employ in communicative interactions. The aim of this paper is to explore the perceptions and practices of interpreters in relation to intercultural pragmatics at work in healthcare interactions. The paper employs two theoretical frameworks: the first is based on interpretations of behavior according to speakers' discourse-pragmatic features as representative of “high” or “low” context cultures (cf. Hall 1976); the second applies Celce-Murcia's (2007) more refined notion of “communicative competence.” The data sample of this paper focuses on cultural-pragmatic features of two linguistic and cultural groups – 25 Chinese speakers and 24 English speakers – and contrasts their selected responses to five features of Chinese-English interpreted healthcare interactions. Responses from 33 Chinese-English interpreters are matched against those from speakers of the two groups to examine the degree of congruence that interpreters have with the self-reported (para-)linguistic behavior of the two groups of speakers, for whom they interpret. This study shows that the self-reported (para-)linguistic behavior of both groups is determined by their adoption of a particular approach (doctor- vs. patient-centered approach) and other micro-level features (perceived time constraints, different notions of “small talk”) that limit elaborate pragmatic enactments. Over-arching cultural-pragmatic models based on “high” (or “low”) context communication, or “vertical” (vs. “horizontal”) hierarchical perceptions of role and status appear to have limited application to the data. Instead, local features specific to the healthcare situation co-determine both English and Chinese speakers' responses to questions about their use of pragmatics. Findings indicate that interpreters attend to each group's enactment of pragmatic features and, as expert language users, are able to recognize features and components of interactions and their functions to a greater degree than the Chinese and English speakers.

Insight into the structure of compound words among speakers of Chinese and English

2011 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 753-779 ◽  
Author(s):  
JIE ZHANG ◽  
RICHARD C. ANDERSON ◽  
QIUYING WANG ◽  
JEROME PACKARD ◽  
XINCHUN WU ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sixth Graders ◽  
Compound Word ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Compound Words ◽  
Chinese Speakers ◽  
Word Structure ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Noun Compounds ◽  
Chinese And English ◽  
Insight Into

ABSTRACTKnowledge of compound word structures in Chinese and English was investigated, comparing 435 Chinese and 258 Americans, including second, fourth, and sixth graders, and college undergraduates. As anticipated, the results revealed that Chinese speakers performed better on a word structure analogy task than their English-speaking counterparts. Also, as anticipated, speakers of both languages performed better on noun + noun and verb + particle compounds, which are more productive in their respective languages than noun + verb and verb + noun compounds, which are less productive. Both Chinese and English speakers performed significantly better on novel compounds than on familiar compounds, most likely because familiar compounds are lexicalized and do not invite decomposition into constituents.

The effects of language immersion on the bilingual lexicon

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 614-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peggy P.K. Mok ◽  
Alan C.L. Yu
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
English Proficiency ◽  
Language Immersion ◽  
Priming Effects ◽  
Bilingual Lexicon ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Translation Priming ◽  
Cross Language

Abstract Previous studies have consistently found an asymmetry where priming in the L1-L2 direction is stronger than that in the L2-L1 direction. However, some studies showed that an L2 immersion environment could attenuate bilingual speakers’ access to the L1 and result in a ‘bilingual disadvantage’. This study investigated how language immersion modulates the priming effects of late adult bilingual speakers. We compared late Chinese-English bilingual speakers with high L2 (English) proficiency in an L1 environment and those in an L2 immersion environment. Both semantic and translation priming in same-language and cross-language conditions were investigated. The results showed no ‘bilingual disadvantage’ of the immersed participants. The priming asymmetry was weakened for the immersed participants who were more comparable in their reaction time to different language conditions. Both semantic and translation priming were found in L1-L2 and L2-L1 directions, suggesting that both types of priming are similar in nature in the bilingual lexicon.

Do Chinese- and English-speaking preschoolers think differently about language?

2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 617-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yao Guan ◽  
M. Jeffrey Farrar
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Receptive Vocabulary ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Metalinguistic Awareness ◽  
Chinese Speakers ◽  
Language Groups ◽  
Rhyme Awareness ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Chinese And English

Metalinguistic awareness is the ability to identify, reflect upon, and manipulate linguistic units. It plays a critical role in reading development. The present study investigated Chinese- and English-speaking preschoolers’ metalinguistic awareness development and the role of cognitive and linguistic abilities in its development. Forty-two Chinese-speaking and 36 English-speaking monolingual children completed a series of metalinguistic awareness, false belief, inhibitory control, and receptive vocabulary tasks. The results revealed distinct pathways for the two language groups. English speakers had a more advanced level of rhyme awareness. Chinese speakers developed homonym understanding faster during the preschool years. Inhibitory control was more important for Chinese speakers to develop synonym and homonym understanding, whereas receptive vocabulary was crucial for English speakers to develop rhyme awareness. These differences may be attributable to the characteristics of the Chinese and English languages, as well as the patterns of cognitive development in the two populations.

Testing the Cognitive Load Hypothesis: Repair Rates and Usage in a Bilingual Community

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Dumont
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Language Change ◽  
English Proficiency ◽  
Code Switching ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Naturally Occurring ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Using Data

AbstractIt has been assumed that bilingual speakers have a heavier cognitive load than monolinguals, which may be responsible for language change such as simplification, overgeneralization, transfer and code-switching. While the cognitive load hypothesis is interesting, the hypothesis has not been empirically tested using naturally occurring speech. Using data from a Spanish/English bilingual community, this study operationalizes and tests the cognitive load hypothesis by studying disfluencies in two groups of Spanish speakers with varying degrees of English proficiency. Specifically, truncated utterances and the mechanisms of linguistic repair involved in fixing these disfluencies are examined. The results show measurable differences between the two groups. The group of speakers with higher bilingual proficiency, who are predicted to have a heavier cognitive load, shows a significantly higher rate of repair; additionally the syntactic patterns and types of repair are significantly different between the more bilingual and the less bilingual speakers, suggesting that they use repair in divergent ways. There is not sufficient evidence, however, to conclude that the more bilingual speakers have a higher cognitive load.

scholarly journals Subcortical Involvement in Formulaic Language: Studies on Bilingual Individuals With Parkinson's Disease

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (12) ◽  
pp. 4029-4045
Author(s):  
Binna Lee ◽  
Diana Van Lancker Sidtis
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Native English Speakers ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Conversational Speech ◽  
Formulaic Language ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Language Studies

Purpose An impoverished production of routinized expressions, namely, formulaic language, has been reported for monolingual speakers with Parkinson's disease (PD). Little is known regarding how formulaic expressions might be manifested in individuals with neurological damage who speak more than one language. This study investigated the processing of formulaic language across first language (L1) and second language (L2) in bilingual individuals with PD. Method Eleven Korean–English bilingual speakers with PD, who acquired Korean as L1 and English as L2, were recruited for this study. Two matched control groups composed of 11 healthy Korean–English bilingual individuals and 11 healthy native English speakers were included for comparison. Their performance on three structured tasks (comprehension, completion, and judgment–correction) and conversational speech was measured and compared across groups for analyses. Results The bilingual speakers with PD had significantly impaired comprehension of formulaic language in L1 and had lower proportions of formulaic expressions in their L1 conversational speech compared with the bilingual controls. Regarding L2, both bilingual groups with and without PD were comparable in their English performance across all tasks. Both groups performed significantly poorer in L2 structured tasks than the native English speakers. Spontaneous production of formulaic language in English (L2 for bilingual individuals) was similar across all three groups. Conclusions The results of this study contribute to the growing body of literature on impoverishment of formulaic language production following subcortical dysfunction. Additionally, findings here demonstrate a selective impairment of formulaic language performance in L1 but not L2 for bilinguals with PD, further supporting the role of the basal ganglia in native language.

Phonological Skills in Predominantly English-Speaking, Predominantly Spanish-Speaking, and Spanish-English Bilingual Children

2005 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian A. Goldstein ◽  
Leah Fabiano ◽  
Patricia Swasey Washington
Keyword(s):  
English Speakers ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Phonological Skills ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose: There is a paucity of information detailing the phonological skills of Spanish-English bilingual children and comparing that information to information concerning the phonological skills of predominantly English-speaking (PE) and predominantly Spanish-speaking (PS) children. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between amount of output (i.e., percentage of time each language was spoken) in each language and phonological skills in Spanish-English bilingual children and PE and PS children. Method: Fifteen typically developing children, ranging in age from 5;0 (years;months) to 5;5 (mean=5;2), participated in the study. The participants consisted of 5 PE speakers, 5 PS speakers, and 5 bilingual (Spanish-English) speakers. A single-word assessment was used to gather information on phonological skills (consonant accuracy, type and frequency of substitutions, frequency of occurrence of phonological patterns [e.g., cluster reduction], accuracy of syllable types [e.g., CV, CVC, CCV, etc.]), and type and rate of cross-linguistic effects. Results: The results indicated that there was no significant correlation between amount of output in each language and phonological skills either in the Spanish skills of PS children and Spanish-English bilingual speakers or in the English skills of PE children and Spanish-English bilingual speakers. In addition, there was no significant difference in segmental accuracy, syllabic accuracy, or percentage of occurrence of phonological patterns between either the Spanish skills of PS children and Spanish-English bilingual speakers or the English skills of PE children and Spanish-English bilingual speakers. Finally, the children showed a limited number of cross-linguistic effects. Clinical Implications: Results from this study indicate no link between parent estimates of language output and phonological skill and demonstrate that Spanish-English bilingual children will have commensurate, although not identical, phonological skills as compared to age-matched PS and PE children.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document