Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T11:17:13.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Language and categorization in monolinguals and bilinguals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2019

Sarah Fairchild  and
Anna Papafragou
Sarah Fairchild*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of Delaware
Anna Papafragou
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of Delaware
*
Address for correspondence: Sarah Fairchild, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

People assume that objects labelled alike belong to the same category. Here we asked whether the role of labels in categorization depends on individuals' language experience, linguistic abilities, and/or cognitive abilities. We compared monolinguals' and bilinguals' use of phonologically licit words (zeg), illicit words (gsz), and non-linguistic frames (in addition to a baseline condition with no additional cues) in forming novel categories. For both groups, licit words affected categorization more than frames, especially in the absence of perceptual evidence for category boundaries; illicit words also shifted categorization preferences compared to frames. Furthermore, linguistic abilities predicted reliance on both licit and illicit words, and bilingualism predicted reliance on illicit words in categorization. Thus, in both monolinguals and bilinguals, novel (and even unconventional) linguistic labels act as unique category markers but their use in categorization depends on individual language processing skills (and, in some cases, exposure to a second language).

Keywords

categorizationverbal labelsbilingualsexecutive function
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , May 2020 , pp. 618 - 630
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

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.)

References

Athanasopoulos, P, Dering, B, Wiggett, A, Kuipers, JR and Thierry, G (2010). Perceptual shift in bilingualism: Brain potentials reveal plasticity in pre-attentive colour perception. Cognition, 116(3), 437–443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Athanasopoulos, P, Bylund, E, Montero-Melis, G, Damjanovic, L, Schartner, A, Kibbe, A, Riches, N and Thierry, G (2015). Two languages, two minds: Flexible cognitive processing driven by language of operation. Psychological Science, 26(4), 518–526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Balaban, MT and Waxman, SR (1997). Do words facilitate object categorization in 9-month-old infants? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64, 3–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartolotti, J and Marian, V (2012). Language learning and control in monolinguals and bilinguals. Cognitive Science, 36(6), 1129–1147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartolotti, J, Marian, V, Schroeder, SR and Shook, A (2011). Bilingualism and inhibitory control influence statistical learning of novel word forms. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(324), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bassetti, B (2007). Bilingualism and thought: Grammatical gender and concepts of objects in Italian–German bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingualism, 11(3), 251–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E (1999). Cognitive complexity and attentional control in the bilingual mind. Child Development, 70(3), 636–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E, Barac, R, Blaye, A and Poulin-Dubois, D (2010). Word mapping and executive functioning in young monolingual and bilingual children. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11(4), 485–508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Booth, AE and Waxman, SR (2002). Object names and object functions serve as cues to categories for infants. Developmental Psychology, 38(6), 948–957.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosch, L and Sebastián-Gallés, N (2001). Evidence of early language discrimination abilities in infants from bilingual environments. Infancy, 2, 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boutonnet, B and Lupyan, G (2015). Words jump-start vision: A label advantage in object recognition. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35(25), 9329–9335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bull, R and Scerif, G (2001). Executive functioning as a predictor of children's mathematics ability: Inhibition, switching, and working memory. Developmental Neuropsychology, 19(3), 273–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buchsbaum, BR, Greer, S, Chang, WL and Berman, KF (2005). Meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies of the Wisconsin card-sorting task and component processes. Human Brain Mapping, 25(1), 35–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Byers-Heinlein, K and Werker, JF (2009). Monolingual, bilingual, trilingual: infants' language experience influences the development of a word-learning heuristic. Developmental Science, 12(5), 815–823.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlesimo, GA, Fadda, L, Lorusso, S and Caltagirone, C (1994). Verbal and spatial memory spans in Alzheimer's and multi-infarct dementia. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 89(2), 132–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlson, SM, Moses, LJ and Claxton, LJ (2004). Individual differences in executive functioning and theory of mind: An investigation of inhibitory control and planning ability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87(4), 299–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cenoz, J (2003). The additive effect of bilingualism on third language acquisition: a review. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7(1), 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J and Valencia, JF (1994). Additive trilingualism: evidence from the Basque country. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15(02), 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chey, J, Lee, J, Kim, YS, Kwon, SM and Shin, YM (2002). Spatial working memory span, delayed response and executive function in schizophrenia. Psychiatry Research, 110(3), 259–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M and Carpenter, PA (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 450–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D, Jergovic, D, Imami, Z and Theodos, V (1997). Monolingual and bilingual children's use of the mutual exclusivity constraint. Journal of Child Language, 24(01), 3–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davidson, NS and Gelman, SA (1990). Inductions from novel categories: The role of language and conceptual structure. Cognitive Development, 5(2), 151–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D and Tell, D (2005). Monolingual and bilingual children's use of mutual exclusivity in the naming of whole objects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92(1), 25–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Abreu, PMJE, Gathercole, SE and Martin, R (2011). Disentangling the relationship between working memory and language: The roles of short-term storage and cognitive control. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(5), 569–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dehaene, S (1995). Electrophysiological evidence for category-specific word processing in the normal human brain. NeuroReport, 6(16), 2153–2157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deng, W and Sloutsky, VM (2012). Carrot-eaters and moving heads: Salient features provide greater support for inductive inference than category labels. Psychological Science, 23(2), 178–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, A (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diesendruck, G and Peretz, S (2013). Domain differences in the weights of perceptual and conceptual information in children's categorization. Developmental Psychology, 49(12), 2383–2395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eriksen, BA and Eriksen, CW (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairchild, S, Mathis, A and Papafragou, A (2018). Linguistic cues are privileged over non-linguistic cues in young children's categorization. Cognitive Development, 48, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, M (2014). Spanish as a Heritage Language. In Lacorte, M (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Hispanic Applied Linguistics, 134–149. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ferguson, B, Havy, M and Waxman, SR (2015). The precision of 12-month-old infants' link between language and categorization predicts vocabulary size at 12 and 18 months. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1319), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferry, AL, Hespos, SJ and Waxman, SR (2010). Categorization in 3- and 4-month-old infants: an advantage of words over tones. Child Development, 81(2), 472–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferry, AL, Hespos, SJ and Waxman, SR (2013). Nonhuman primate vocalizations support categorization in very young human infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(38), 15231–15235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fischer, MH (2001). Probing spatial working memory with the Corsi blocks task. Brain and Cognition, 45(2), 143–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frank, I and Poulin-Dubois, D (2002). Young monolingual and bilingual children's responses to violation of the Mutual Exclusivity Principle. International Journal of Bilingualism, 6(2), 125–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, NP, Miyake, A, Young, SE, DeFries, JC, Corley, RP and Hewitt, JK (2008). Individual differences in executive functions are almost entirely genetic in origin. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(2), 201–225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fulkerson, AL and Waxman, SR (2007). Words (but not tones) facilitate object categorization: Evidence from 6-and 12-month-olds. Cognition, 105(1), 218–228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, SA and Coley, JD (1990). The importance of knowing a dodo is a bird: Categories and inferences in 2-year-old children. Developmental Psychology, 26(5), 796–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, SA and Davidson, NS (2013). Conceptual influences on category-based induction. Cognitive Psychology, 66(3), 327–353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, SA and Markman, EM (1986). Categories and induction in young children. Cognition, 23(3), 183–209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, SA and Markman, EM (1987). Young children's inductions from natural kinds: The role of categories and appearances. Child Development, 58(6), 1532–1541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, SA and O'Reilly, AW (1988). Children's inductive inferences within superordinate categories: The role of language and category structure. Child Development, 59(4), 876–887.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, SA (2013). Artifacts and essentialism. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 4(3), 449–463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gershkoff-Stowe, L and Smith, LB (2004). Shape and the first hundred nouns. Child Development, 75(4), 1098–1114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gervits, F, Johanson, M and Papafragou, A (2016). Intentionality and the role of labels in categorization. Proceedings from the 38 thAnnual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 1146–1151.Google Scholar
Gleitman, L and Papafragou, A (2016). New perspectives on language and thought. In Holyoak, K and Morrison, R (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gold, JM, Carpenter, C, Randolph, C, Goldberg, TE and Weinberger, DR (1997). Auditory working memory and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance in schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54(2), 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F (1989). Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language, 36(1), 3–15.Google Scholar
Harrington, M (2006). The lexical decision task as a measure of L2 lexical proficiency. EUROSLA Yearbook, 6(1), 147–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston-Price, C, Caloghiris, Z and Raviglione, E (2010). Language experience shapes the development of the mutual exclusivity bias. Infancy, 15(2), 125–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, M and Papafragou, A (2016). The influence of labels and facts on children's and adults’ categorization. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 144, 130–151.Google ScholarPubMed
Jones, SS, Smith, LB and Landau, B (1991). Object properties and knowledge in early lexical learning. Child Development, 62(3), 499–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kane, MJ and Engle, RW (2002). The role of prefrontal cortex in working-memory capacity, executive attention, and general fluid intelligence: An individual-differences perspective. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 637–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaushanskaya, M and Marian, V (2007). Age-of-acquisition effects in the development of a bilingual advantage for word learning. Proceedings of the Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Kaushanskaya, M and Marian, V (2009). The bilingual advantage in novel word learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(4), 705–710.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keshavarz, MH and Astaneh, H (2004). The impact of bilinguality on the learning of English vocabulary as a foreign language (L3). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 7(4), 295–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kessels, RP, Van Zandvoort, MJ, Postma, A, Kappelle, LJ and De Haan, EH (2000). The Corsi block-tapping task: standardization and normative data. Applied Neuropsychology, 7(4), 252–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
King, J and Just, MA (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(5), 580–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kongs, SK, Thompson, LL, Iverson, GL and Heaton, RK (2000). Wisconsin card sorting test-64 card version (WCST-64). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Kroll, JF, Bobb, SC and Hoshino, N (2014). Two languages in mind: Bilingualism as a tool to investigate language, cognition, and the brain. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(3), 159–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurinski, E and Sera, MD (2011). Does learning Spanish grammatical gender change English-speaking adults’ categorization of inanimate objects? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14(2), 203–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurinski, E, Jambor, E and Sera, MD (2016). Spanish grammatical gender: Its effects on categorization in native Hungarian speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20(1), 76–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, B and Shipley, E (2001). Labelling patterns and object naming. Developmental Science, 4(1), 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupyan, G (2008). From chair to “chair:” A representational shift account of object labeling effects on memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(2), 348–369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lupyan, G and Swingley, D (2012). Self-directed speech affects visual search performance. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(6), 1068–1085.Google ScholarPubMed
Lupyan, G and Thompson-Schill, SL (2012). The evocative power of words: activation of concepts by verbal and nonverbal means. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(1), 170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lupyan, G, Rakison, DH and McClelland, JL (2007). Language is not just for talking redundant labels facilitate learning of novel categories. Psychological Science, 18(12), 1077–1083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, EM (1991). The whole-object, taxonomic, and mutual exclusivity assumptions as initial constraints on word meanings. In Gelman, SA & Byrnes, JP (Eds.), Perspectives on language and thought: Interrelations in development (pp. 72–106). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, V and Kaushanskaya, M (2004). Self-construal and emotion in bicultural bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(2), 190–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathôt, S, Schreij, D and Theeuwes, J (2012). OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 314–324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miyake, A and Friedman, NP (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(1), 8–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mueller, ST and Piper, BJ (2014). The Psychology Experiment Building Language (PEBL) and PEBL Test Battery. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 222, 250–259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nazzi, T and Gopnik, A (2001). Linguistic and cognitive abilities in infancy: when does language become a tool for categorization? Cognition, 80(3), B11–B20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oakes, LM and Rakison, DH (2003). Issues in the early development of concepts and categories: An introduction. In Oakes, LM and Rakison, DH (Eds.), Early category and concept development: Making sense of the blooming, buzzing confusion (pp. 3–23). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Özgen, E and Davies, IRL (2002). Acquisition of categorical color perception: A perceptual learning approach to the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 477–493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paap, KR and Greenberg, ZI (2013). There is no coherent evidence for a bilingual advantage in executive processing. Cognitive Psychology, 66(2), 232–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papagno, C and Vallar, G (1995). Verbal short -term memory and vocabulary learning in polyglots. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A, 98–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A (1999). New approaches to concepts in bilingual memory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 209–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, SE, Fox, PT, Snyder, AZ and Raichle, ME (1990). Activation of extrastriate and frontal cortical areas by visual words and word-like stimuli. Science, 249(4972), 1041–1045.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plunkett, K, Hu, JF and Cohen, LB (2008). Labels can override perceptual categories in early infancy. Cognition, 106(2), 665–681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rastle, K, Harrington, J and Coltheart, M (2002). 358,534 nonwords: The ARC Nonword Database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 1339–1362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, M and Gelman, SA (2009). Five-year-olds' beliefs about the discreteness of category boundaries for animals and artifacts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(5), 920–924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, MG (2004). Age-related differences in performance on the Wisconsin card sorting test: a meta-analytic review. Psychology and Aging, 19(3), 482–494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romine, CB, Lee, D, Wolfe, ME, Homack, S, George, C and Riccio, CA (2004). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test with children: a meta-analytic study of sensitivity and specificity. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19(8), 1027–1041.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanz, C (2000). Bilingual education enhances third language acquisition: evidence from Catalonia. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21(01), 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sebastián-Gallés, N and Bosch, L (2002). Building phonotactic knowledge in bilinguals: role of early exposure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(4), 974.Google ScholarPubMed
Sloutsky, VM and Fisher, AV (2012). Linguistic labels: conceptual markers or object features? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111(1), 65–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sloutsky, VM, Kloos, H and Fisher, AV (2007). When looks are everything: Appearance similarity versus kind information in early induction. Psychological Science, 18(2), 179–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sloutsky, VM, Lo, YF and Fisher, AV (2001). How much does a shared name make things similar? Linguistic labels, similarity, and the development of inductive inference. Child Development, 72(6), 1695–1709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Soares, C and Grosjean, F (1984). Bilinguals in a monolingual and a bilingual speech mode: The effect on lexical access. Memory & Cognition, 12(4), 380–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoffers, D, Berendse, HW, Deijen, JB and Wolters, EC (2003). Deficits on Corsi's block-tapping task in early stage Parkinson's disease. Parkinsonism & Related Disorders, 10(2), 107–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stuss, DT, Levine, B, Alexander, MP, Hong, J, Palumbo, C, Hamer, L, Murphy, KJ and Izukawa, D (2000). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance in patients with focal frontal and posterior brain damage: Effects of lesion location and test structure on separable cognitive processes. Neuropsychologia, 38(4), 388–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tanner, D and Van Hell, JG (2014). ERPs reveal individual differences in morphosyntactic processing. Neuropsychologia, 56, 289–301.Google ScholarPubMed
Tanner, D, Inoue, K and Osterhout, L (2014). Brain-based individual differences in online L2 grammatical comprehension. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(02), 277–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valian, V (2015). Bilingualism and cognition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(1), 3–24.Google Scholar
Van Hell, JG and Mahn, AC (1997). Keyword mnemonics versus rote rehearsal: learning concrete and abstract foreign words by experienced and inexperienced learners. Language Learning, 47(3), 507–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waxman, SR and Markow, DB (1995). Words as invitations to form categories: Evidence from 12-to 13-month-old infants. Cognitive Psychology, 29(3), 257–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waxman, SR (1999). Specifying the scope of 13-month-olds' expectations for novel words. Cognition, 70(3), B35-B50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welder, AN and Graham, SA (2006). Infants' categorization of novel objects with more or less obvious features. Cognitive Psychology, 52(1), 57–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolff, P and Holmes, KJ (2011). Linguistic relativity. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(3), 253–265.Google ScholarPubMed
Wöstmann, NM, Aichert, DS, Costa, A, Rubia, K, Möller, HJ and Ettinger, U (2013). Reliability and plasticity of response inhibition and interference control. Brain and Cognition, 81(1), 82–94.Google ScholarPubMed
Yamauchi, T and Markman, AB (2000). Inference using categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(3), 776.Google ScholarPubMed
Zelazo, PD (2006). The Dimensional Change Card Sort (DCCS): A method of assessing executive function in children. Nature Protocols, 1(1), 297–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed