First Language Use in Second Language Production

Poulisse, Nanda; Bongaerts, Theo

doi:10.1093/applin/15.1.36

Cited by 375 publications

(406 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

355

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finkbeiner et al (in press) have argued, though, that a weaker version of the language switch hypothesis, where the intentions of the speaker serve to activate the target language more strongly than the nontarget language, is a viable option. This weaker version is also seen in recent proposals by La Heij (2005) and Poulisse and Bongaerts (1994), who have similarly argued that the target language is specified at the conceptual level and that this specification serves to activate lexical nodes in the target language more strongly than their equivalents in the nontarget language. Finkbeiner et al (in press) have gone one step further by suggesting that the hard problem, which different models of bilingual lexical access have been designed to solve (e.g., Costa et al, 1999;Green, 1998;La Heij, 2005), may not be very hard after all.…”

Section: Implications For Models Of Bilingual Speech Productionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression.

Finkbeiner¹,

Almeida²,

Janssen³

et al. 2006

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

130

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The "hard problem" in bilingual lexical access arises when translation-equivalent lexical representations are activated to roughly equal levels and, thus, compete equally for lexical selection. The language suppression hypothesis (D. W. Green, 1998) solves this hard problem through the suppression of lexical representations in the nontarget language. Following from this proposal is the prediction that lexical selection should take longer on a language switch trial because the to-be-selected representation was just suppressed on the previous trial. Inconsistent with this prediction, participants took no longer to name pictures in their dominant language on language switch trials than they did on nonswitch trials. These findings indicate that nontarget lexical representations are not suppressed. The authors suggest that these results undermine the viability of the language suppression hypothesis as a possible solution to the hard problem in bilingual lexical access.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Models Of Bilingual Speech Productionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression.

Finkbeiner¹,

Almeida²,

Janssen³

et al. 2006

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

130

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, Yang and Yang (2013) suggest that Zhang et al's (2013) visual language cueing effects might be restricted to subjects with very low proficiency, based on observations in the literature that grammatical and lexical intrusions of the native language occur more frequently in relatively lower proficiency bilinguals than higher proficiency bilinguals (Poulisse & Bongaerts, 1994). Kroll and McClain (2013) similarly suggest that such effects might well be modulated by factors such as age of second language acquisition and whether the bilingual is immersed in their second language or not (also see above).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Cues for Language Selection in Bilinguals

Hartsuiker

2015

Attention and Vision in Language Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bilinguals need to select the right language for the particular context they are in, but how do they do this? One possibility is that they exploit visual cues from the context such as people's faces, so that recognition of the face increases the availability of the language associated with that face. This chapter first examines the degree to which bilinguals activate multiple languages and how this is constrained by linguistic cues and then discusses three new lines of research that investigate visual language cueing. Specifically, these new research lines suggest effects on language processing of (a) the language associated with familiar people's faces (e.g., German for Angela Merkel); (b) language that people associate with the race of unknown faces (e.g., Chinese for an Asian face, English for a white face); (c) language associated with cultural icons (e.g., Russian for a picture of the Kremlin).Hartsuiker -visual cues for language in bilingualism 3

show abstract

“…The available evidence provides support for a number of different loci of cross-language activation during the planning of a single word utterance. Figure 1 is a representative model of bilingual word production adapted from previous work by Hermans (2000) and Poulisse and Bongaerts (1994). The general assumption in models of lexical production (e.g., De Bot & Schreuder, 1993;Levelt, 1989) is that at least three component processes must be engaged prior to articulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language selection in bilingual speech: Evidence for inhibitory processes

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although bilinguals rarely make random errors of language when they speak, research on spoken production provides compelling evidence to suggest that both languages are active when only one language is spoken (e.g., Poulisse, 1999). Moreover, the parallel activation of the two languages appears to characterize the planning of speech for highly proficient bilinguals as well as second language learners. In this paper we first review the evidence for cross-language activity during single word production and then consider the two major alternative models of how the intended language is eventually selected. According to language-specific selection models, both languages may be active but bilinguals develop the ability to selectively attend to candidates in the intended language. The alternative model, that candidates from both languages compete for selection, requires that crosslanguage activity be modulated to allow selection to occur. On the latter view, the selection mechanism may require that candidates in the non-target language be inhibited. We consider the evidence for such an inhibitory mechanism in a series of recent behavioral and neuroimaging studies.

show abstract

First Language Use in Second Language Production

Cited by 375 publications

References 0 publications

Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression.

Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression.

Visual Cues for Language Selection in Bilinguals

Language selection in bilingual speech: Evidence for inhibitory processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About