Bilingual strategies from the perspective of a processing model

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 737-739 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROBERT J. HARTSUIKER
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
First Language ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Universal Language ◽  
Structural Coherence ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Domain I ◽  
Grammatical Structures

Muysken argues for four general “strategies” that characterize language contact phenomena across several levels of description. These strategies are (A) maximize structural coherence of the first language (L1); (B) maximize structural coherence of the second language (L2); (C) match between L1 and L2 patterns where possible; and (D) use universal language processing principles. These strategies are seen as choices that bilingual speakers make, individually and collectively, and that are influenced by multiple social, individual, and linguistic factors. This account has the clear advantage of unifying a seemingly very diverse set of language contact phenomena using a limited set of principles. One such phenomenon is cross-linguistic structural priming, the tendency of bilingual speakers to copy grammatical structures from a language recently used to another language (e.g., Hartsuiker, Pickering & Veltkamp, 2004), which Muysken considers an example of “bilingual interference”. In this domain, I will explore how these strategies can be realized in terms of a psycholinguistic processing model, and whether these strategies can be reduced to even more basic principles.

scholarly journals Language contact outcomes as the result of bilingual optimization strategies

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 709-730 ◽  
Author(s):  
PIETER MUYSKEN
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
First Language ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Universal Principles ◽  
Structural Coherence ◽  
Comprehensive Framework ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Point Of Departure ◽  
Important Progress

This paper sketches a comprehensive framework for modeling and interpreting language contact phenomena, with speakers’ bilingual strategies in specific scenarios of language contact as its point of departure. Bilingual strategies are conditioned by social factors, processing constraints of speakers’ bilingual competence, and perceived language distance. In a number of domains of language contact studies important progress has been made, including Creole studies, code-switching, language development, linguistic borrowing, and areal convergence. Less attention has been paid to the links between these fields, so that results in one domain can be compared with those in another. These links are approached here from the perspective of speaker optimization strategies. Four strategies are proposed: maximize structural coherence of the first language (L1); maximize structural coherence of the second language (L2); match between L1 and L2 patterns where possible; and rely on universal principles of language processing. These strategies can be invoked to explain outcomes of language contact. Different outcomes correspond to different interactions of these strategies in bilingual speakers and their communities.

Een Model Voor Taalcontact

2006 ◽  
Vol 76 ◽  
pp. 13-19
Author(s):  
Pieter Muysken
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Alternative Strategies ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Code Mixing ◽  
Universal Principles ◽  
Structural Coherence ◽  
Language Areas ◽  
Important Progress

In a number of domains of language contact studies important progress has been made, including Creole studies, code switching and code mixing, second language acquisition, linguistic borrowing, and language areas. Less attention has been paid to the conceptual links between these fields. These links will be the focus of the present paper, which approaches this issue from the perspective of speaker optimization strategies. Four alternative strategies are proposed: optimize the structural coherence of the LI, optimize possible matching between LI and L2 patterns, optimize universal principles of language processing, optimize the structural coherence of the L2. It will be argued that these strategies can be invoked to explain outcomes of language contact, and that different outcomes correspond to different rankings of these strategies by bilingual speakers and the community they belong to.

scholarly journals The Influence of Second Language Experience in the Pattern of Language Processing of the Bilingual Lexicon

MANUSYA ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-95
Author(s):  
P. Sudasna ◽  
S. Luksaneeyanawin ◽  
D. Burnham
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
English Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
Language Experience ◽  
High Group ◽  
Bilingual Lexicon ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Word Forms ◽  
Thai English

The present experimental research studies whether Thai-English bilinguals’ language experience in their non-native language influences the pattern of language processing of the bilingual lexicon. Two groups of 100 native Thai bilingual speakers with high or low English language experience were asked to perform Stroop Interference Tasks, with the processing of word forms being either Thai or English and the processing in colour naming also being either Thai or English. The results showed that when the processing of word forms was in Thai, there was more intra- than interlingual interference, and that the degree of interference was equivalent between the two English experience groups. When the processing of word forms was in English, the high and the low groups showed more intra- than interlingual interference; however, the high group showed more interference than the low group did. The results provide evidence that the maximal interference occurs in the processing of the first language and the interference in the processing of the second language is proportional to L2 language experience. The results suggest that there is a relationship between language experience and language processing of the bilingual lexicon.

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.

A sparkling apéritif or old wine in new bags?

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 748-750
Author(s):  
PIETER MUYSKEN
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Social Factors ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Language Change ◽  
First Language ◽  
List Type ◽  
Type Number ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Communicative Strategies

In the keynote article “Language contact outcomes as the result of bilingual optimization strategies” (Muysken, published online May 31, 2013; henceforth KA), I have tried to accomplish three things: (a)linking a number of fields of language contact research (code-switching, Creole studies, contact-induced language change, bilingual production), by(b)assuming four roles that the contributing languages may play ((i) first language dominant, (ii) second language dominant, (iii) neither language dominant – patterns common to the two languages, and (iv) neither language dominant – language-neutral communicative strategies), and(c)modeling these four roles in terms of bilingual optimization strategies, which may be implemented in an Optimality Theoretic (OT) framework. Bilingual strategies are conditioned by social factors, processing constraints of speakers’ bilingual competence, and perceived language distance. Different language contact outcomes correspond to different interactions of these strategies in bilingual speakers and their communities.

Null-subject encounter: Variable subject pronoun expression in the Spanish of Quechua-Spanish bilinguals in the Central Peruvian Andes

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 1005-1023
Author(s):  
Álvaro Cerrón-Palomino
Keyword(s):  
Language Contact ◽  
First Language ◽  
Specific Effect ◽  
Peruvian Andes ◽  
Null Subject ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Audio Recordings ◽  
Subject Pronoun ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Research Questions

Objectives and Research Questions: This study explores the effects of bilingualism on the production of subject personal pronouns (SPPs) in speakers of two null-subject languages, Quechua and Spanish. The paper also seeks to determine if these effects can be explained by general bilingual accounts, such as the Interface Hypothesis (IH), or by contact-specific accounts. Methodology: This is a sociolinguistic variationist study; therefore, the data were collected with sociolinguistic interviews. Data and Analysis: The data consist of transcriptions of audio recordings of eight Spanish monolingual and eight Quechua-Spanish bilingual speakers of Huancayo (Peru). The data were analyzed by using the statistical software SPSS 23.0 and Goldvarb X. Findings: The IH predicts that the overt SPP rate of the bilinguals should be higher than that of the monolinguals and that the pragmatic switch reference constraint should be difficult for the Quechua first language speakers to master. The results show, however, that their rates are similar, and that switch reference was the most robust predictor for the bilinguals. This study’s results suggest that indirect transfer from the mandatory Quechua switch reference subordinating particle – pti is taking place. Originality: This is one of the first variationist studies examining the IH predictions regarding SPP production in bilinguals speaking an indigenous American null-subject language alongside Spanish. In addition, this is the first study to show, through statistical analyses, the contact-specific effect the other language can exert on a particular constraint in the subject pronoun expression of the bilinguals. Significance: The results of the study suggest that even subtle transfer in situations of language contact can be accurately explained by contact-specific accounts.

scholarly journals Sentence Processing in Monolingual and Bilingual Speakers

Linguistics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paola E. Dussias ◽  
Anne L. Beatty-Martínez ◽  
Michael A. Johns ◽  
Manuel F. Pulido
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
First Language ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Great Promise ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Related Potentials

The main goal of monolingual models of sentence processing is to explain how the syntactic processor (or parser) assigns structure to an incoming string of words. The theoretical divide in the field has been about whether the architecture and mechanisms of the human sentence processor are modular—and computations are carried out serially—or whether it is interactive and computations are carried out in parallel. The debate about bilingual sentence processing has, instead, focused on whether bilingual speakers process their second language in a manner similar to monolingual speakers of the target language. Proposals rooted in generative approaches to language acquisition argue that adult second language (L2) learners lack access to the universal principles or the ability to reset parameters that guide language acquisition and language processing in their L2. Models grounded in neurocognitive approaches to memory hold that late bilinguals recruit different memory systems compared to native speakers of the target language. Other models have argued that differences in first and second language processing result largely from capacity differences, differences in susceptibility to interference, or lack of predictive ability. More recently, several studies have turned toward more experience-driven accounts, eschewing the earlier assumption that the first language is static and unchanging, and instead focusing on the interactive and interconnected nature of the bilingual linguistic system. These studies have revealed that not only does the first language (L1) affect L2 syntactic processing, but experience with the L2 can have ramifications for processing in the native language. A range of experimental techniques are employed to investigate how monolingual and bilingual speakers process language at the sentence level. Eye-tracking techniques allow measurement of responses, such as eye movements and pupil dilation, to study written and auditory language processing. Such measures permit insight into the cognitive processes that are engaged when individuals read written text or inspect visual scenes. Electrophysiological measures are particularly helpful for understanding the time course of neural activity associated with language and cognitive processes. Event-related potentials (ERPs) are obtained by recording and averaging across brain potentials associated with time-locked events (e.g., a word in a sentence). Electrophysiological measures are used to determine which stages of processing are affected by the experimental manipulation. Neuroimaging provides information about changes in brain structure and function. For example, the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technique can be used to visualize which brain regions are engaged in processing a particular type of sentence. Although neuroimaging is a relatively-new methodology, it holds great promise for increasing our understanding of the dynamic processes in the brain related to language. The writing of this bibliography was supported in part by National Science Foundation (NSF) grant BCS-1535124 and OISE 1545900 to Paola E. Dussias.

Does the shallow structures proposal account for qualitative differences in first and second language processing?

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-84
Author(s):  
Laura Sabourin
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
First Language ◽  
Qualitative Difference ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Lexical Knowledge ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
L1 And L2

In their Keynote Article, Clahsen and Felser (CF) provide a detailed summary and comparison of grammatical processing in adult first language (L1) speakers, child L1 speakers, and second language (L2) speakers. CF conclude that child and adult L1 processing makes use of a continuous parsing mechanism, and that any differences found in processing can be explained by factors such as limited working memory capacity and incomplete lexical knowledge. The authors then suggest that the existing differences between L1 (both adult and child) and L2 processing provide evidence that parsing mechanisms are qualitatively different between these groups. They posit that this qualitative difference between L1 and L2 is due to L2 speakers having shallower and less detailed syntactic representations than L1 speakers. This commentary focuses on discussing this shallow structures account and considers what this means for L2 processing.

scholarly journals Longitudinal Developments in Bilingual Second Language Acquisition and First Language Attrition of Speech: The Case of Arnold Schwarzenegger

Languages ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Lisa Kornder ◽  
Ineke Mennen
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Voice Onset Time ◽  
First Language ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Speech Development ◽  
Dynamic Interactions ◽  
First Language Attrition ◽  
Second Formant ◽  
L1 And L2

The purpose of this investigation was to trace first (L1) and second language (L2) segmental speech development in the Austrian German–English late bilingual Arnold Schwarzenegger over a period of 40 years, which makes it the first study to examine a bilingual’s speech development over several decades in both their languages. To this end, acoustic measurements of voice onset time (VOT) durations of word-initial plosives (Study 1) and formant frequencies of the first and second formant of Austrian German and English monophthongs (Study 2) were conducted using speech samples collected from broadcast interviews. The results of Study 1 showed a merging of Schwarzenegger’s German and English voiceless plosives in his late productions as manifested in a significant lengthening of VOT duration in his German plosives, and a shortening of VOT duration in his English plosives, closer to L1 production norms. Similar findings were evidenced in Study 2, revealing that some of Schwarzenegger’s L1 and L2 vowel categories had moved closer together in the course of L2 immersion. These findings suggest that both a bilingual’s first and second language accent is likely to develop and reorganize over time due to dynamic interactions between the first and second language system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document