The increasing number of experimental studies on second language (L2) processing, frequently with English as the L2, calls for a practical and valid measure of English vocabulary knowledge and proficiency. In a large-scale study with Dutch and Korean speakers of L2 English, we tested whether LexTALE, a 5-min vocabulary test, is a valid predictor of English vocabulary knowledge and, possibly, even of general English proficiency. Furthermore, the validity of LexTALE was compared with that of self-ratings of proficiency, a measure frequently used by L2 researchers. The results showed the following in both speaker groups: (1) LexTALE was a good predictor of English vocabulary knowledge; 2) it also correlated substantially with a measure of general English proficiency; and 3) LexTALE was generally superior to self-ratings in its predictions. LexTALE, but not self-ratings, also correlated highly with previous experimental data on two word recognition paradigms. The test can be carried out on or downloaded from www.lextale.com.

We investigate the origin of differences in the word frequency effect between native speakers and second-language speakers. In a large-scale analysis of English word identification times we find that group-level differences are fully accounted for by the individual language proficiency scores. Furthermore, exactly the same quantitative relation between word frequency and proficiency is found for monolinguals and three different bilingual populations (Dutch-English, French-English, and German-English). We conclude that the larger frequency effects for second-language processing than for native-language processing can be explained by within-language characteristics and thus need not be the consequence of "being bilingual" (i.e., a qualitative difference). More specifically, we argue that language proficiency increases lexical entrenchment, which leads to a reduced frequency effect, irrespective of bilingualism, language dominance, and language similarity.

In a foreign country where an unfamiliar language is spoken, words such as hotel, taxi, and café can often still be recognized because they possess the same or a similar spelling and meaning across languages. Such words are called cognates. However, there may also be misleading words in the foreign language that are identical in spelling but different in meaning to words from one's native language. These items are called false friends or (noncognate) interlingual homographs. An example is the word spot, which means "mockery" in Dutch. Apart from spelling (orthography) and meaning (semantics), a third code thought to play a major role in word processing is sound (phonology), which can also be shared between words of different languages. For example, the English word cow is pronounced very much like the Dutch word kou ("cold"). Items with similar pronunciations across languages are called interlingual homophones.Interlingual homographs and cognates have been the most important sources of stimulus materials in studies attempting to unravel the process of bilingual word recognition. Through such words, a wealth of studies in the last decade have revealed that during the initial stages of word identification by bilinguals, word candidates from several languages are often coactivated (see Dijkstra & Van Heuven, 2002, for an overview). In accordance with these results, several word recognition models propose that bilingual word recognition involves an initial languagenonselective access process into an integrated lexicon. According to the BIAϩ (bilingual interactive activation) model (Dijkstra & Van Heuven, 2002), the visual presentation of a word to a bilingual leads to parallel activation of orthographic input representations in the native language (L1) and the second language (L2). These representations then activate associated semantic and phonological representations, leading to a complex interaction (or resonance process) between codes from which the lexical candidate corresponding to the input word emerges and is recognized.Furthermore, the BIAϩ model makes predictions about a number of important issues that are still unresolved and debated in the literature. First, with respect to representational issues, it is still unclear exactly how cognates and interlingual homographs are represented in the bilingual lexicon. The BIAϩ model proposes that interlingual homographs have separate representations for each language, whereas it remains possible that cognates have shared representations (Dijkstra & Van Heuven, 2002). This proposal is based on hints in the data from earlier studies (e.g., Dijkstra, Grainger, & Van Heuven, 1999; Dijkstra, Van Jaarsveld, & Ten Brinke, 1998) Recognizing cognates and interlingual homographs:Effects of code similarity in language-specific and generalized lexical decision KRISTIN LEMHÖFER and TON DIJKSTRA University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The NetherlandsIn four experiments, we investigated how cross-linguistic overlap in semantics, orthography, and phonology affects bilingual word recogn...

Many studies have reported that word recognition in a second language (L2) is affected by the native language (L1). However, little is known about the role of the specific language combination of the bilinguals. To investigate this issue, the authors administered a word identification task (progressive demasking) on 1,025 monosyllabic English (L2) words to native speakers of French, German, and Dutch. A regression approach was adopted, including a large number of within- and between-language variables as predictors. A substantial overlap of reaction time patterns was found across the groups of bilinguals, showing that word recognition results obtained for one group of bilinguals generalize to bilinguals with different mother tongues. Moreover, among the set of significant predictors, only one between-language variable was present (cognate status); all others reflected characteristics of the target language. Thus, although influences across languages exist, word recognition in L2 by proficient bilinguals is primarily determined by within-language factors, whereas cross-language effects appear to be limited. An additional comparison of the bilingual data with a native control group showed that there are subtle but significant differences between L1 and L2 processing.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract■ Learning the syntax of a second language (L2) often represents a big challenge to L2 learners. Previous research on syntactic processing in L2 has mainly focused on how L2 speakers respond to "objective" syntactic violations, that is, phrases that are incorrect by native standards. In this study, we investigate how L2 learners, in particular those of less than near-native proficiency, process phrases that deviate from their own, "subjective," and often incorrect syntactic representations, that is, whether they use these subjective and idiosyncratic representations during sentence comprehension. We study this within the domain of grammatical gender in a population of German learners of Dutch, for which systematic errors of grammatical gender are well documented. These L2 learners as well as a control group of Dutch native speakers read Dutch sentences containing gender-marked determinernoun phrases in which gender agreement was either (objectively) correct or incorrect. Furthermore, the noun targets were selected such that, in a high proportion of nouns, objective and subjective correctness would differ for German learners. The ERP results show a syntactic violation effect (P600) for objective gender agreement violations for native, but not for nonnative speakers. However, when the items were re-sorted for the L2 speakers according to subjective correctness (as assessed offline), the P600 effect emerged as well. Thus, rather than being insensitive to violations of gender agreement, L2 speakers are similarly sensitive as native speakers but base their sensitivity on their subjectivesometimes incorrect-representations. ■

a b s t r a c tThe involvement of neural motor and sensory systems in the processing of language has so far mainly been studied in native (L1) speakers. In an fMRI experiment, we investigated whether non-native (L2) semantic representations are rich enough to allow for activation in motor and somatosensory brain areas. German learners of Dutch and a control group of Dutch native speakers made lexical decisions about visually presented Dutch motor and non-motor verbs. Region-of-interest (ROI) and whole-brain analyses indicated that L2 speakers, like L1 speakers, showed significantly increased activation for simple motor compared to non-motor verbs in motor and somatosensory regions. This effect was not restricted to Dutch-German cognate verbs, but was also present for non-cognate verbs. These results indicate that L2 semantic representations are rich enough for motor-related activations to develop in motor and somatosensory areas.