Masked Translation Priming Effects With Highly Proficient Simultaneous Bilinguals

Abstract

One essential issue for models of bilingual memory organization is to what degree the representation from one of the languages is shared with the other language. In this study, we examine whether there is a symmetrical translation priming effect with highly proficient, simultaneous bilinguals. We conducted a masked priming lexical decision experiment with cognate and noncognate translation equivalents. Results showed a significant masked translation priming effect for both cognates and noncognates, with a greater priming effect for cognates. Furthermore, the magnitude of the translation priming was similar in the two directions. Thus, highly fluent bilinguals do develop symmetrical between-language links, as predicted by the Revised Hierarchical model and the BIA+ model. We examine the implications of these results for models of bilingual memory.

Non-cognate translation priming effects in the same–different task: evidence for the impact of “higher level” information

“…In the lexical decision task, there was a small but significant masked L1→L2 translation priming effect with non-cognate translation equivalent pairs, thus replicating earlier research with fluent L2 readers (e.g., de Groot & Nas, 1991;Duñabeitia et al, 2010;Duyck & Warlop, 2009;Gollan et al, 1997;Jiang, 1999;Jiang & Forster, 2001;Kim & Davis, 2003;Voga & Grainger, 2007;Williams, 1994). In addition, there was an identity priming effect in the participants' L2.…”

“…This manipulation was included mainly as a manipulation check, given the fact that although L1-L2 non-cognate priming has often been reported in the literature (e.g., de Groot & Nas, 1991;Duñabeitia, Perea, & Carreiras, 2010;Duyck & Warlop, 2009;Gollan, Forster, & Frost, 1997;Jiang, 1999;Jiang & Forster, 2001;Kim & Davis, 2003;Voga & Grainger, 2007;Williams, 1994), it has sometimes been difficult to detect with same-script bilinguals (e.g., Davis et al, 2010;Sánchez-Casas & García-Albea, 2005). The expectation, however, is that our stimuli should produce translation, as well as identity, priming in Experiment 1 due to the assumed lexical and semantic relationship between the word pairs (see Duñabeitia et al, 2010). In the masked prime same-different task in Experiment 2, we would, again, expect to observe identity priming because identity primes should prime at the orthographic level.…”

The neuroanatomy of bilingualism: how to turn a hazy view into the full picture

“…Similarly, even if the results obtained from studies exploring the influence of L2 proficiency and L2 AoA partially converge, there is convincing evidence that these two factors independently contribute to language processing in bilinguals' comprehension and production behaviour (Dimitropoulou, Duñabeitia, & Carreiras, 2011;Dowens, Vergara, Barber, & Carreiras, 2010;Duñabeitia, Dimitropoulou, Uribe-Etxebarria, Laka, & Carreiras, 2010;Duñabeitia, Perea, & Carreiras, 2010;Perea, Duñabeitia, & Carreiras, 2008). Thus, a thorough description of the knowledge and use of each of the languages is essential for a precise characterization of the samples being tested to make possible the replication and discussion of findings in the context of the specific linguistic background of the participants (see Tables 1 and 2 for an illustration of the variability between studies).…”

Making sense of the Sense Model

“…This finding has been reported for languages that share script (Dunãbeitia, Perea & Carreiras, 2010;Duyck, 2005;Grainger & Frenck-Mestre, 1998) and for those that differ in script (Finkbeiner, Forster, Nicol & Nakamura, 2004;Gollan, Forster & Frost, 1997;Jiang, 1999;Jiang & Forster, 2001). This asymmetry appears to reveal a difference in the effectiveness of L2 primes compared to L1 primes, which may in turn reveal important information about how bilinguals process words in different languages or how the bilingual lexicon is organized.…”

“…Research using cognates has repeatedly shown that overlap in both form and meaning leads to greater cross-linguistic activation than for noncognate translations, which share only meaning (see Dijkstra, 2007, for a review). This cognate facilitation effect has been found in multiple studies with languages that share script (e.g., Costa, Santesteban & Cano, 2005;Dunãbeitia, Perea & Carreiras, 2010;Lemhofer et al, 2008;Van Assche, Duyck, Hartsuiker & Diependaele, 2009;Van Assche, Drieghe, Duyck, Welvaert & Hartsuiker, 2011) and those that do not (e.g., Gollan, Forster, & Frost, 1997;Kim & Davis, 2002;Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Voga & Grainger, 2007).…”