Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections Between Bilingual Memory Representations

Kroll, Judith F.; Stewart, Erika

doi:10.1006/jmla.1994.1008

Cited by 1,990 publications

(2,452 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

192

Mentioning

2,016

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some evidence suggests that cognates are translated in a different manner than noncognates (de Groot, Dannenburg, & van Hell, 1994; but see Kroll & Stewart, 1994). Specifically, some researchers argue that cognates may be translated using direct word-to-word associations between the speaker's two languages, bypassing lexico-semantics.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic and syntactic forces in noun phrase production.

Vigliocco¹,

Lauer²,

Damian³

et al. 2002

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments investigated semantic and syntactic effects in the production of phrases in Dutch. Bilingual participants were presented with English nouns and were asked to produce an adjective ϩ noun phrase in Dutch including the translation of the noun. In 2 experiments, the authors blocked items by either semantic category or grammatical gender. Participants performed the task slower when the target nouns were of the same semantic category than when they were from different categories and faster when the target nouns had the same gender than when they had different genders. In a final experiment, both manipulations were crossed. The authors replicated the results of the first 2 experiments, and no interaction was found. These findings suggest a feedforward flow of activation between lexico-semantic and lexico-syntactic information.Speaking involves the retrieval of lexical representations that correspond to our intentions and the development of a syntactically well-formed frame for the to-be-uttered sentence. The development of such a frame is, in part, guided by syntactic information specific to each word: for example, a word's grammatical category, the subcategorization requirements of verbs, and a noun's gender (for languages such as Dutch). The focus of this article is on the relationship between retrieving a lexical representation that specifies the meaning the speaker wants to convey and retrieving the associated lexico-syntactic information.Across languages, lexico-syntactic properties of words are often linked to lexico-semantic properties. For example, for grammatical class, the semantic distinction between objects, actions, and properties corresponds to a syntactic distinction between nouns, verbs, and adjectives. The semantic dimension of biological gender corresponds to the syntactic distinction between masculine and feminine nouns, and the semantic distinction between entities that can be counted and substances is captured by the syntactic distinction between count and mass nouns. The existence of such correspondencies between the semantic and the syntactic dimensions has been taken by some authors as indicating a conceptual foundation for the syntactic distinctions (e.g., Bates & MacWhinney, 1982;Langacker, 1987). However, these correspondencies between semantic and syntactic properties are limited, to an important extent. With respect to grammatical class, actions (e.g., "to bomb") can also be denoted by nouns (e.g., bombardment). In a number of languages, gender of nouns is not only a property of nouns referring to entities but also of nouns referring to objects and abstract entities for which there is no clear semantic correlate. And, cases exist, in English for example, in which the distinction between count and mass nouns does not reflect the semantic distinction between entities that can be counted and substances (e.g., abstract nouns such as opinion and knowledge). The different degree of correspondence between lexico-semantic and lexico-syntactic properties across languages and types ...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic and syntactic forces in noun phrase production.

Vigliocco¹,

Lauer²,

Damian³

et al. 2002

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Irrespective of whether the interference effect does reflect a RIF-like phenomenon, there is a sizeable neurophysiological and modeling literature that independently attributes a key role to the hippocampus in incremental learning (for reviews, see Gluck, Meeter, & Meyers, 2003;Meeter, Myers & Gluck, 2005). In addition, at least one neuroimaging study has reported differential hippocampal activity associated with the interference effect in blocked cyclic naming, albeit based on data averaged over all cycles Kroll & Stewart, 1994) or arises in conceptual featureto-lexical connections (e.g., Damian & Als., 2005;Oppenheim et al, 2010) and has a lexical locus, the PRc is a plausible candidate region for demonstrating signal changes in conjunction with left mid-lateral temporal cortex.…”

Section: Neuroanatomical Correlates Of Mechanisms Proposed To Accountmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The context in which objects are presented influences the speed at which they are named (Kroll & Stewart, 1994). Compared to arbitrary (or unrelated) contexts, semantic context effects on naming latencies can vary from facilitation to interference according to the nature of the relationship and whether target items are repeated (for a review, see Mahon et al, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within homogeneous contexts, the sets of objects are exemplars of the same category (e.g., all animals), whereas in heterogeneous contexts they are unrelated (e.g., animal, vehicle, furniture, fruit). Repeated access to the same semantic category in the homogeneous context results in slower object naming latencies compared to the heterogeneous context (e.g., Damian, Vigliocco & Levelt, 2001;Kroll & Stewart, 1994;see Belke & Stielow, 2013 for a review). This interference effect usually manifests from the second presentation cycle onward, as evidenced by a significant interaction between context and cycle (Belke & Stielow, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A perfusion fMRI investigation of thematic and categorical context effects in the spoken production of object names

Zubicaray

Johnson

Howard

et al. 2014

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The context in which objects are presented influences the speed at which they are named. We employed the blocked cyclic naming paradigm and perfusion fMRI to investigate the mechanisms responsible for interference effects reported for thematically-and categorically-related compared to unrelated contexts. Naming objects in categorically homogeneous contexts induced a significant interference effect that accumulated from the second cycle onwards. This interference effect was associated with significant perfusion signal decreases in left middle and posterior lateral temporal cortex and the hippocampus. By contrast, thematically homogeneous contexts facilitated naming latencies significantly in the first cycle and did not differ from heterogeneous contexts thereafter, nor were they associated with any perfusion signal changes compared to heterogeneous contexts. These results are interpreted as being consistent with an account in which the interference effect both originates and has its locus at the lexical level, with an incremental learning mechanism adapting the activation levels of target lexical representations following access. We discuss the implications of these findings for accounts that assume thematic relations can be active lexical competitors or assume mandatory involvement of top-down control mechanisms in interference effects during naming.

show abstract

“…Specifically, form similarity assumes a greater importance when proficiency is low and semantic representations are relatively impoverished (Talamas, Kroll, & Dufour, 1999). Secondly, in the past few decades, much of the work on language processing in bilinguals has focused on semantic memory and on the lexical organization of a bilingual's two languages (Chen & Ng, 1989;de Groot & Nas, 1991;Kroll & Stewart, 1994;see Altarriba & Basnight-Brown, in press, and Francis, 1999 for reviews). Even though this is and continues to be an important question, provocative findings in other domains of bilingual research (i.e., morphological, syntactic) are emerging.…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Monolingual and bilingual recognition of regular and irregular English verbs: Sensitivity to form similarity varies with first language experience

Basnight-Brown

Chen

Shu

et al. 2007

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used a cross-modal priming procedure to explore the processing of irregular and regular English verb forms in both monolinguals and bilinguals (Serbian-English, Chinese-English). Materials included irregular nested stem (drawn-DRAW), irregular change stem (ran-RUN), and regular past tense-present tense verb pairs that were either low (guided-GUIDE) or high (pushed-PUSH) in resonance, a measure of semantic richness. Overall, semantic richness of irregular verbs (nested and irregular change) and of regular verbs (high and low resonance) was matched. Native speakers of English revealed comparable facilitation across regularity and greater facilitation for nested than change stem irregulars. Like native speakers, Serbian, but not Chinese bilinguals matched for proficiency, showed facilitation due to form overlap between irregular past and present tense forms with a nested stem. Unlike native speakers, neither group showed reliable facilitation to stem change irregulars. Results demonstrate the influence of first language on inflectional processing in a second language.Keywords semantic density; language transfer; morphological facilitation; cross modal priming; regular past tense formations; irregular past tense formations; mastery of inflection in a second language There is a long-standing debate in the word recognition literature as to whether native speakers of a language process irregular (e.g., ran-run) and regular (e.g., walked-walk) verb forms by common (single) or different (dual-route) mechanisms. Those who advocate a single processing system argue that processing of all words benefits from the extent to which words that are similar in form tend to be similar in meaning (

show abstract

Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections Between Bilingual Memory Representations

Cited by 1,990 publications

References 0 publications

Semantic and syntactic forces in noun phrase production.

Semantic and syntactic forces in noun phrase production.

A perfusion fMRI investigation of thematic and categorical context effects in the spoken production of object names

Monolingual and bilingual recognition of regular and irregular English verbs: Sensitivity to form similarity varies with first language experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About