Do Cross-Language Script Differences Enable Bilinguals to Function Selectively When Speaking in One Language Alone?

Abstract

The present study examined the role of script in bilingual speech planning by comparing the performance of same and different-script bilinguals. Spanish-English bilinguals (Experiment 1) and Japanese-English bilinguals (Experiment 2) performed a picture-word interference task in which they were asked to name a picture of an object in English, their second language, while ignoring a visual distractor word in Spanish or Japanese, their first language. Results replicated the general pattern seen in previous bilingual picture-word interference studies for the same-script, Spanish-English bilinguals but not for the different-script, Japanese-English bilinguals. Both groups showed translation facilitation, whereas only Spanish-English bilinguals demonstrated semantic interference, phonological facilitation, and phono-translation facilitation. These results suggest that when the script of the language not in use is present in the task, bilinguals appear to exploit the perceptual difference as a language cue to direct lexical access to the intended language earlier in the process of speech planning.

A prime-masked ERP investigation on phonology in visual word processing among bilingual speakers of alphasyllabic and alphabetic orthographies

“…Based on the behavioral and electrophysiological findings from the current study, we argue that in the absence of orthographic overlap between the primes and targets, phonological (or combined phonological + semantic) similarity may not influence the visual word processing, at least, in orthographically distinct bilingual dyads, such in the current study. These findings could augment the arguments that early orthographic cues might guide visual word processing in a resource-economic, language-selective manner 6 , 7 , 32 . Finally, the ERP difference in the early time window (100–200 ms) with translated Malayalam targets and the overall increased error rates with Malayalam targets in this study could possibly be due to the difference in participants’ exposure between written forms of Malayalam and English.…”

“…As predicted, they observed the N2 and P3 components suggestive of early processing of the orthographic cues. Finally, a very recent study 7 that compared the cross-script (Japanese-English) and same-script (Spanish–English) bilinguals on a picture-word interference paradigm provided further evidence for the perceptual differences between orthographies as a language cue which can facilitate faster processing of words in the target language.…”

“…Several studies emphasize the role of phonology in bilingual word processing 1 . However, some highlight the importance of the script in bilingual visual word processing, especially in orthographically distinct bilingual dyads 6 , 7 . In the current study, we experimentally manipulated the phonology of the prime-target dyads in a bilingual masked priming paradigm (clubbed with event-related potentials) where the two languages do not share any visual or orthographic similarity.…”

Do accent and input modality modulate processing of language switches in bilingual language comprehension?

“…Alternatively, if such demand is related to the form differences as such (regardless of the modality), we would expect a larger switching cost in the visual task (different forms) than in the one-accent auditory task (more similar forms). However, given that we did not see such effect in Experiment 2 when comparing the one- and two-accent tasks, this latter direction seemed less likely.If language-specific visual cues can reduce language coactivation (e.g., through allowing earlier language selection, Hoshino et al, 2021, and reducing interference from the nontarget language, Orfanidou & Sumner, 2005), we expected switching costs to be smaller (potentially mostly reducing the L1 cost) in the visual task than in the one-accent task. This hypothesis is similar to Experiment 2’s hypothesis (2b) regarding the comparison between the two-accents and one-accent task.…”

“…This result suggests that orthographic information can regulate lexical access between languages (see also the results of the bilingual Reicher–Wheeler task included in Casaponsa et al, 2015). Furthermore, Hoshino et al (2021) asked Spanish–English and Japanese–English bilinguals to name pictures in L2-English while ignoring visually presented L1 distractors. While Spanish–English bilinguals showed several effects associated with the L1 distractor (e.g., semantic interference and phonological facilitation), these effects were not found for Japanese–English bilinguals.…”