A tale of two frequency effects: Toward a verification model of L2 word recognition

Abstract

This study examined the activation of first language (L1) translations in second language (L2) word recognition in a lexical decision task. Test materials included English words that differed in the frequency of their Chinese translations or in their surface lexical frequency while other lexical properties were controlled. Chinese speakers of English as a second language of different proficiencies and native speakers of English were tested. Native speakers produced a reliable lexical frequency effect but no translation frequency effect. English as a second language speakers of lower English proficiency showed both a translation frequency effect and a lexical frequency effect, but those of higher English proficiency showed a lexical frequency effect only. The results were discussed in a verification model of L2 word recognition. According to the model, L2 word recognition entails a checking procedure in which activated L2 words are checked against their L1 translations. The two frequency effects are seen to have two different loci. The lexical frequency effect is associated with the initial activation of L2 lemmas, and the translation frequency effect arises in the verification process. Existing evidence for verification in L2 word recognition and new issues this model raises are discussed.

Analytic Versus Holistic Recognition of Chinese Words Among L2 Learners

“…At the initial stage of vocabulary acquisition, this is desirable as L1 translations may serve both as an access point for the word's semantic and syntactic information and as an anchor linking the new word to the existing memory system, as Jiang (2000) pointed out. Recent behavioral and electrophysiological evidence suggests that L1 translations were automatically activated in L2 word recognition even among advanced L2 speakers, indicating the continued involvement of the L2–L1 links initially established (e.g., Jiang, Li, & Guo, 2020; Thierry & Wu, 2004, 2007; Wu & Thierry, 2010). The same phenomenon has been observed in bimodal bilinguals whose first language was a sign language (Meade et al., 2017; Morford et al., 2011; Villameriel et al., 2016).…”

First language translation involvement in second language word processing

“…The experiment follows the materials by Jiang et al (2019) . Our test materials consisted of 64 English words (the target stimuli), 48 non-words and 16 English filler words.…”

“… (1) Target words were all nouns or verbs, each had a unique disyllabic Chinese translation. According to Jiang et al (2019) , the high/low frequency of the English word was based on Brysbaert and New (2009) ; that of the Chinese word was based on Beijing Language Institute [BLI], 1986 . (2) The factors of Frequency and Translation Frequency were not correlated: (r = −0.181, p = 0.152).…”

“…It is in such a manner that the obligatory processing of L1 can be avoided. The recently employed tasks are semantic relatedness judgment (e.g., Thierry and Wu, 2004 , 2007 ) or lexical decision (e.g., Jiang et al, 2019 ). In both tasks, participants are asked to accomplish L2 tasks.…”

“…But as for the task of semantic relatedness judgment, it has been proposed that the manipulation of a shared character in L1 translation, essentially, creates a kind of L1 form-repetition. It was the repetition of a character that helped to promote L2 word processing, without the need to activate a whole L1 translation word ( Costa et al, 2017 ; Jiang et al, 2019 ). And in that case, the L1 translation word may get fully involved in the lexical decision task, but partially involved in the task of semantic relatedness judgment.…”