Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T16:30:21.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cross-script L2-L1 noncognate translation priming in lexical decision depends on L2 proficiency: Evidence from Japanese–English bilinguals*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2015

MARIKO NAKAYAMA ,
KEISUKE IDA  and
STEPHEN J. LUPKER
MARIKO NAKAYAMA*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Arts, Letters and Sciences, Waseda University
KEISUKE IDA
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Arts, Letters and Sciences, Waseda University
STEPHEN J. LUPKER
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario
*
Address for correspondence: Mariko Nakayama, Faculty of Letters, Arts and Sciences, Waseda University, 1-24-1 Toyama Shinjuku-ku Tokyo, Japan[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous research with unbalanced, different-script bilinguals has typically produced null L2-L1 noncognate masked translation priming effects in lexical decision tasks (LDT). Two novel models of the bilingual mental lexicon have emerged to account for these null results: the episodic L2 hypothesis and the Sense model. In contrast, the BIA+ model predicts significant priming whenever bilinguals are sufficiently proficient in L2. Using Japanese–English bilinguals, the role of L2 proficiency in L2-L1 noncognate translation priming in an LDT was examined. In Experiments 1 and 2, significant priming effects were observed for highly proficient bilinguals. In contrast, in Experiment 3, less-proficient bilinguals produced a null priming effect. This pattern demonstrates that L2-L1 priming effects do arise in an LDT and those effects are modulated by L2 proficiency, consistent with the BIA+ model's expectations. The pattern can be also explained by the episodic L2 hypothesis, provided that certain modifications are made to its assumptions.

Keywords

Masked primingL2-L1 noncognate translation primingJapanese–English bilingualsLexical decision taskL2 proficiency
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 19 , Issue 5 , November 2016 , pp. 1001 - 1022
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported by a grant from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) to Mariko Nakayama.

References

Amano, N., & Kondo, T. (2003). NTT database series: Lexical characteristics of Japanese language (version 2). Tokyo: Sanseido. [CD-ROM]Google Scholar
Basnight-Brown, D. M., & Altarriba, J. (2007). Differences in semantic and translation priming across languages: The role of language direction and language dominance. Memory & Cognition, 35, 953–965.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kućera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 977–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, B., Zhou, H., Gao, Y., & Dunlap, S. (2014). Cross-language translation priming asymmetry with Chinese–English bilinguals: A test of the sense model. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 43, 225–240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, C., Sánchez-Casas, R., García-Albea, J. E., Guash, M., Molero, M., & Ferré, P. (2010). Masked translation priming: Varying language experience and word type with Spanish-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 137–155.Google Scholar
de Wit, B., & Kinoshita, S. (2014). The masked semantic priming effect is task dependent: Reconsidering the automatic spreading activation process. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1733–1744.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, A., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 175–197.Google Scholar
Dimitropoulou, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011a). Two words, one meaning: Evidence of automatic co-Activation of translation equivalents. Frontiers in Psychology, 288, 1–20.Google Scholar
Dimitropoulou, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011b). Masked translation priming effects with low-proficient bilinguals. Memory & Cognition, 39, 260–275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duñabeitia, J. A., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2010). Masked translation priming effects with highly proficient simultaneous bilinguals. Experimental Psychology, 57, 98–107.Google Scholar
Duyck, W., & Warlop, N. (2009). Translation priming between the native language and a second language. New evidence from Dutch-French Bilinguals. Experimental Psychology, 56, 173–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Educational Testing Service. (2003). Comparing TOEIC and TOEFL scores. http://www.etscanada.ca/teachers/compare.php (retrieved February 25, 2014).Google Scholar
Finkbeiner, M., Forster, K. I., Nicol, J., & Nakamura, K. (2004). The role of polysemy in masked semantic and translation priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 1–22.Google Scholar
Finkbeiner, M. (2005). Task-dependent L2–L1 translation priming: An investigation of the separate memory systems account. In Cohen, J., McAlister, K. T., Rolstad, K. & MacSwan, J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism (pp. 741–750). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Forster, K. I. (1985). Lexical acquisition and the modular lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I. (2013). How many words can we read at once? More intervener effects in masked priming, Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 563–573.Google Scholar
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gollan, T. H., Forster, K. I., & Frost, R. (1997). Translation priming with different scripts: Masked priming with cognates and noncognates in Hebrew-English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1122–1139.Google ScholarPubMed
Grainger, J., & Frenck-Mestre, C. (1998). Masked priming by translation equivalents in proficient bilinguals. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13, 601–623.Google Scholar
Grainger, J., Midgley, K.J., & Holcomb, P.J. (2010). Re-thinking the bilingual interactive-activation model from a developmental perspective (BIA-d). In Kail, M. & Hickman, M. (eds), Language acquisition across linguistic and cognitive systems, pp. 267–284. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoshino, N., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2010). An ERP investigation of masked cross-script translation priming. Brain Research, 1344, 159–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, N. (1999). Testing processing explanations for the asymmetry in masked cross-language priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 59–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N., & Forster, K. I. (2001). Cross-language priming asymmetries in lexical decision and episodic recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 32–51.Google Scholar
Kim, J., & Davis, C. (2003). Task effects in masked cross-script translation and phonological priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 484–499.Google Scholar
Kinoshita, S., & Lupker, S. J. (2003). Masked priming: The state of the art. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Lin, C-Y., & Ryan, L. (2007). Repetition priming without identification of the primes: Evidence for a component process view of priming. NeuroImage, 38, 589–603.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Masson, M. E. (2011). A tutorial on a practical Bayesian alternative to null-hypothesis significance testing. Behavioral Research Methods, 43, 679–690.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (2012). Cross-script phonological priming for Japanese–English bilinguals: Evidence for integrated phonological representations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 1563–1583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakayama, M., Sears, C.R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S.J. (2013). Masked translation priming with Japanese–English bilinguals: Interactions between cognate status, target frequency, and L2 proficiency. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 949–981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perea, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2008). Masked associative/semantic priming effects across languages with highly proficient bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 916–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajaram, S., & Neely, J. H. (1992). Dissociative masked repetition priming and word frequency effects in lexical decision and episodic recognition tasks. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 152–182.Google Scholar
Sabourin, L., Brien, C., & Burkholder, M. (2014). The effect of age of L2 acquisition on the organization of the bilingual lexicon: Evidence from masked priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17, 542–555.Google Scholar
Sabourin, L., Leclerc, J.-C., Burkholder, M., & Brien, C. (2014, May). Bilingual lexical organization: Is there a sensitive period? Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Linguistic Association, St. Catherine's, ONGoogle Scholar
Schoonbaert, S., Duyck, W., Brysbaert, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2009). Semantic and translation priming from a first language to a second and back: Making sense of the findings. Memory & Cognition, 37, 569–586.Google Scholar
Tamaoka, K., & Makioka, S. (2004). Frequency of occurrence for units of phonemes, morae, and syllables appearing in a lexical corpus of a Japanese newspaper. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 531–547.Google Scholar
Thomas, M. S., & van Heuven, W. J. (2005). Computational models of bilingual comprehension. In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A.M.B. (eds), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 202–225. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Voga, M., & Grainger, J. (2007). Cognate status and cross-script translation priming. Memory & Cognition, 35, 938–952.Google Scholar
Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2007). A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 779–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X. (2013). Language dominance in translation priming: Evidence from balanced and unbalanced Chinese–English bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 727–743.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, X., & Forster, K. I. (2010). Masked translation priming with semantic categorization: Testing the Sense Model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 327–340.Google Scholar
Wang, X., & Forster, K. I. (in press). Is translation priming asymmetry due to partial awareness of the prime? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.Google Scholar
Witzel, N. O., & Forster, K. I. (2012). How L2 words are stored: The episodic L2 Hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1608–1621.Google ScholarPubMed
Xia, V., & Andrews, S. (2015). Masked translation priming asymmetry in Chinese–English bilinguals: Making sense of the Sense Model. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 294–325.Google Scholar