2020
DOI: 10.5007/2175-8026.2020v73n1p409
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Retrieving L2 word stress from orthography: Evidence from word naming and cross-modal priming

Abstract: In this paper we investigated how L1 word stress affects L2 word naming for cognates and non-cognates in two lexical stress languages, Brazilian Portuguese (BP, L1) and American English (AE, L2). In Experiment 1,  BP-AE bilinguals named a mixed list of disyllabic moderate frequency words in L1 (Portuguese) and L2 (English). In Experiment 2, Portuguese-English bilinguals named English (L2) disyllabic target words presented simultaneously with auditory Portuguese (L1) disyllabic primes. It is concluded that word… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 49 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Jiang (2018) further argues that the current version of Multilink assumes language-specific phonological representations, whereas “there are good reasons for postulating a partially integrated (rather than a language-dependent) system of phonological representations.” For instance, L2 segments may be parasitic on L1 segments and interact with their L1 counterparts (also see Post da Silveira, 2016). Because we specified the phonological representations in Multilink by using those for L1 speakers in CELEX, each language is currently indeed characterized in terms of its native phonological distinctions, without any accommodation for bilinguals.…”
Section: Multilink: Theoretical Issues and Desired Extensionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jiang (2018) further argues that the current version of Multilink assumes language-specific phonological representations, whereas “there are good reasons for postulating a partially integrated (rather than a language-dependent) system of phonological representations.” For instance, L2 segments may be parasitic on L1 segments and interact with their L1 counterparts (also see Post da Silveira, 2016). Because we specified the phonological representations in Multilink by using those for L1 speakers in CELEX, each language is currently indeed characterized in terms of its native phonological distinctions, without any accommodation for bilinguals.…”
Section: Multilink: Theoretical Issues and Desired Extensionsmentioning
confidence: 99%