When bilinguals choose a single word to speak: Electrophysiological evidence for inhibition of the native language

Abstract

Behavioral and event-related potential (ERP) measures are reported for a study in which relatively proficient Chinese-English bilinguals named identical pictures in each of their two languages. Production occurred only in Chinese (the first language, L1) or only in English (the second language, L2) in a given block with the order counterbalanced across participants. The repetition of pictures across blocks was expected to produce facilitation in the form of faster responses and more positive ERPs. However, we hypothesized that if both languages are activated when naming one language alone, there might be evidence of inhibition of the stronger L1 to enable naming in the weaker L2. Behavioral data revealed the dominance of Chinese relative to English, with overall faster and more accurate naming performance in L1 than L2. However, reaction times for naming in L1 after naming in L2 showed no repetition advantage and the ERP data showed greater negativity when pictures were named in L1 following L2. This greater negativity for repeated items suggests the presence of inhibition rather than facilitation alone. Critically, the asymmetric negativity associated with the L1 when it followed the L2 endured beyond the immediate switch of language, implying long-lasting inhibition of the L1. In contrast, when L2 naming followed L1, both behavioral and ERP evidence produced a facilitatory pattern, consistent with repetition priming. Taken together, the results support a model of bilingual lexical production in which candidates in both languages compete for selection, with inhibition of the more dominant L1 when planning speech in the less dominant L2. We discuss the implications for modeling the scope and time course of inhibitory processes.

The second language interferes with picture naming in the first language: evidence for L2 activation during L1 production

“…However, it is still debated whether lexical selection, too, is non-specific with respect to language. Some studies suggest that lexical entries / representations from both languages compete for selection, and that to resolve this competition, the non-target language is actively inhibited (Abutalebi & Green, 2007;Costa, Colomé, Gómez, & Sebastián-Gallés, 2003;Green, 1998;Hermans et al, 1998;Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2016;Kroll, Bobb, Misra, & Guo, 2008;Misra, Guo, Bobb, & Kroll, 2012;Spalek, Hoshino, Wu, Damian, & Thierry, 2014), while others advocate language-specific lexical selection in which no competition for selection arises between two languages (Colomé, 2001;Costa, Miozzo, & Caramazza, 1999). More recently, it has been proposed that lexical selection in bilingual language production may be thought of as a dynamic process, in which language-selectivity can be achieved temporarily depending on a number of variables both specific to the speakers involved (e.g.…”

Electrophysiological evidence that inhibition supports lexical selection in picture naming

“…For example, bilingual speakers have been shown to use inhibition to suppress a non-target language (e.g., De Bruin et al, 2014;Guo et al, 2011;Misra et al, 2012;Jackson et al, 2001;Roelofs et al, 2011;Verhoef et al, 2009). There is also evidence suggesting that inhibition deficits contribute to the impaired speech production of children with specific language impairment (SLI; e.g., Henry et al, 2012;Im-Bolter et al, 2006;Seiger-Gardner and Schwartz, 2008;Spaulding, 2010).…”

Selective and nonselective inhibition of competitors in picture naming

“…Liu, Misra, & Kroll, 2011;Jackson, Swainson, Cunnington, & Jackson, 2001;Misra, Guo, Bobb, & Kroll, 2012;Roelofs, Piai, & Garrido Rodriguez, 2011). Moreover, there is evidence that inhibition deficits contribute to the impaired word production of children with developmental language disorders, such as specific language impairment (e.g., Henry, Messer, & Nash, 2012;Im-Bolter, Johnson, & Pascual-Leone, 2006;SeigerGardner & Schwartz, 2008;Spaulding, 2010).…”

“…Much of the work on the role of inhibition in word production has concerned bilingual speakers. A common assumption is that bilingual speakers use inhibition to suppress words in the nontarget language, either obligatorily (Abutalebi & Green, 2007;Costa, Hernández, & Sebastián-Gallés, 2008;Green, 1998;Guo et al, 2011;Jackson et al, 2001;Misra et al, 2012) or optionally (Roelofs et al, 2011;Verhoef, Roelofs, & Chwilla, 2009). Because of the routine engagement of inhibition in language control, bilingual speakers might outperform monolingual speakers in linguistic as well as nonlinguistic tasks involving inhibitory control.…”