2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2013.09.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A novelty effect in phonetic drift of the native language

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
111
4

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 101 publications
(124 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
9
111
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The scope of the changes to the native language is broad, with related evidence that has been reported for other grammatical structures (Dussias & Cramer Scaltz, 2008) and for the phonology of the native language (e.g., Chang, 2013). Research on priming also shows that sentence processing is changed by a recent occurrence of a similar syntactic structure, even when the prime and target sentences cross from one of the bilingual’s languages to the other (Bernolet, Hartsuiker, & Pickering, 2007; Kantola & Van Gompel, 2011).…”
Section: The Bilingual’s Language System Is Adaptivementioning
confidence: 81%
“…The scope of the changes to the native language is broad, with related evidence that has been reported for other grammatical structures (Dussias & Cramer Scaltz, 2008) and for the phonology of the native language (e.g., Chang, 2013). Research on priming also shows that sentence processing is changed by a recent occurrence of a similar syntactic structure, even when the prime and target sentences cross from one of the bilingual’s languages to the other (Bernolet, Hartsuiker, & Pickering, 2007; Kantola & Van Gompel, 2011).…”
Section: The Bilingual’s Language System Is Adaptivementioning
confidence: 81%
“…Interestingly, one study has found not only weaker activation in the classical leftlateralized language areas (e.g., left middle temporal gyrus, left inferior occipital gyrus), but also stronger activation in some non-typical language areas (e.g., posterior cingulate cortex, right superior temporal gyrus) for Spanish-Catalan early bilinguals as compared to Spanish monolinguals during Spanish (L1) picture naming (Palomar-García et al, 2015), suggesting early bilinguals utilize a more distributed and less efficient network for L1 processing than monolinguals. Recent ERP studies have also suggested native language changes during L2 acquisition (Chang, 2013), even during early stages of L2 learning (Bice & Kroll, 2015). Taken together, a handful of studies have shown brain changes in several regions during L1 processing after L2 is acquired.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Convergence enhances already existing similarities between those languages (Ameel et al, 2009; Alferink and Gullberg, 2013). This increased similarity manifests itself at different language levels including phonology and phonetics (Bullock, 2004; Chang, 2013) and morphology and syntax (Kantola and van Gompel, 2011; Sanchez, 2012; Bernolet et al, 2013). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%