Lecture 14

why did the pictographs increasingly become more abstract?

to increase efficiency: if every symbol were super logographic, it would become more like decoding than reading. an abstract system that requires mapping onto meanings is faster to read than decoding each symbol one by one

true or false: Chinese symbol each represent a picture/element

false: some combine meaning and sounds

true or false: Japanese can mix many scripts in a single sentence

true: which is complex cognitively

why do we say Korean is an invented language?

because the letters of the Korean language reflect speech in syllable blocks: each symbol represents how people articulate and how they produce the sound in the articulatory system

how do we produce sounds?

by exhaling and using the articulator of our mouth and throat

define “abigida”

Inuktitut language created by westerners to provide them with a script

in abugida, the [consonant/vowel] determines the rotation of the symbol while the [consonant/vowel] determines the shape of the symbol

• vowel = rotation

• consonant = shape of the symbol

why was Esperanto created?

some people were tired o the lack of consistency found in English, so they developed a script and language that is perfect and rational (1 letter = 1 sound)

what would be the purpose to study bilingualism with an existing language and a made up lab language?

it would allow to control for external confounds

what makes exceptions difficult when learning a new language?

remembering them and knowing when to apply them

reading, Vaid 2022: what was the purpose of the study?

• we have a lot of research done on bilinguals who read alphabetic script (ex: English/French, Italian/Vietnamese) → WEIRD samples

• this led to an assumption that these findings are universally applicable while they probably aren’t

• we should focus on biscriptal research to become more inclusive

reading, Vaid 2022: what are the practical implications of studying biscriptuality? (3)

• being able to develop treatments for biscriptal bilinguals adapted to them (aphasia, stroke)

• what a letter is and tasks such as the lexical decision and priming may be affected by knowing many scripts

• there aren’t enough databases and corpora for non-alphabetic languages

reading, Vaid 2022: across which measures did biscriptality show an advantage? (5)

• lexical decision task: is this this a word or not

• semantic category judgment: is this stimulus (object, word) part of this semantic category

• morphological awareness: ability to recognize, understand and modify morphemes (smallest units of language)

• word proprieties

• eye-tracking measures of reading

reading, Vaid 2022: define “semantic category judgement”

task where the participant determines if this stimulus (object, word) part of this semantic category

reading, Vaid 2022: define “morphological awareness”

ability to recognize, understand and modify morphemes (smallest units of language)

reading, Vaid 2022: what were the methods?

• created reading comprehension tasks with 7338 participants across 19 countries and 70 languages

• compare language experience in English for L2 English readers

  • participants had to complete a language background questionnaire

reading, Vaid 2022: what were the factors obtained after the data reduction? (3)

• single word accuracy

• single word measures that detected the speed at processing a single word

• extended word measures: how people read sentence

reading, Vaid 2022: what did the experiment predict?

• if you read more in L2, you’ll be better at your L2

• but the experiment wanted to see to what extent is the relationship between L2 usage and reading performance impacted by L1 script difference

reading, Vaid 2022: the experiment started with 7339 participants, but only the data of 1073 were included. why? (6)

1. removed all missing data

2. removed monolinguals (since we wanted to see how L1 script affected L2)

3. removed trilingual and multilingual

4. removed English L1 speakers and speakers with no L1 before the age of 4

5. removed data collected from prolific: the experiment was put online and anyone could access it, but we don’t always know who were are testing and some answers can be dubious

6. removed L1 Korean or Japanese: not enough of participants in those languages

reading, Vaid 2022: what are the DVs (3) and the IV?

DVs: the 3 factors

• L2 English single word accuracy

• L2 English single word speed

• L2 English other measures

IV:

• writing script x % L2 reading usage

reading, Vaid 2022: explain the results found for the factor L2 English single word accuracy

• main effect, but no interaction with L1 script (all the lines are going in the same direction)

• positive relation: as L2 reading usage increases, the performance on L2 single word accurate increases

• note: participants with an alphabetic L1 tend to outperform alpha syllabic and logographic (but it makes sense since English is also an alphabetic word)

reading, Vaid 2022: explain the results found for the factor L2 English single word speed

• interaction of L1 script: logographic is different (because it’s the only line that goes up)

• positive relation for logographic: as L1 logographic read more L2 English, their reaction times would increase

• negative relation for alphabetic and alphasyllabic: as L1 alphasyllabic read more L2 English, their reaction times would decrease (expected)

reading, Vaid 2022: explain the results found for the factor L2 English other measures

• interaction of L1 script: logographic is different (because it’s the only line that goes down)

• new slides? recording? le y veut rien dire tbrnk

reading, Vaid 2022: what is the conclusion of the study?

bilingual adults’ L1 script experience impacts their L2 English reading speed and comprehension for logographic but not alphasyllabic L1 scripts (factors 2 and 3)

reading, Vaid 2022: true or false: according to the results of the study, you would need tailored literacy instruction when people L1’s script mismatches their L2 script

true

what are the steps for word recognition? (2)

1. match printed word with orthographic word-form stored in lexicon

2. lexical assess: further processing of knowledge stored with word-form (syntax, morphology, phonology, semantics)

what are the signatures of lexical access? (2)

• word frequency

• high frequency words (home) are processed faster and more accurately than low frequency words (kelp)

define “home” (not house)

high frequency words

define “kelp”

low frequency words

reading: what causes us to have accents in some languages?

it shows that we know many languages and those languages are active, co-exist and interact together

reading: define “cross-linguistic influence” (CLI)

how the knowledge and usage of one language affects the production, comprehension and acquisition of other languages

*previously called “transfer” or “interference”

reading: true or false: salient differences often make target-language structures easier to acquire

true: if you know English and are learning Chinese, it will be easier to acquire the structure

reading: true or false: cross-linguistic influence (CLI) decreases as proficiency in the less dominant language increases

false: it doesn’t, it’s only when you become more proficient in your weaker language that you start to recognize similarities and differences between two languages

reading: define “forward transfer”

knowledge transferring from L1 to L2

reading: defne “lateral transfer”

knowledge transferring from L2 to L3

reading: define “reverse transfer”

knowledge transferring from L2 to L1

reading: what’s the difference between forward, lateral and reverse transfer?

• forward: L1 → L2

• lateral: L2 → L3

• reverse: L2 → L1

reading: what are the factors that determine the likelihood of transfer? (2)

• age

• relatedness of the two languages

reading: what can be transferred across languages? (6)

• structure and language form

• phonological

• morphological

• syntactic transfer

• meaning

• pragmatics

reading: true or false: individual differences don’t cross-linguistic influence (CLI)

false: individual differences can impact the different types and extents of CLI

reading: what have studies in phonological transfer looked at? (3)

• syllables

• suprasegmental levels (tone, intonation)

• individual differences

reading: knowledge transfer is more frequent for [perception/production] than for [perception/production] because […]

production more than perception: you can produce an incorrect but similar sound by transferring you L1 knowledge to L2 (that’s what makes us have accents)

reading: true or false: we have one phonological system for every language

false: we have many for different languages

reading: true or false: different phonological systems (one system for one language) are independent from each other

false: they aren’t entirely autonomous (that’s Paradis’s “international dual systems model”)

reading: define Paradis’s “interactional dual systems model”

bilingual children have 2 phonological systems that can influence each other (so the systems aren’t entirely independent)

reading: according to Fabiano-Smith and Goldstein, how frequent is the cross-linguistic influence (CLI) in bilingual children?

low, but they can still differentiate sound and transfer knowledge from one language to the other

*confirms Paradis’s interactional dual system model that says that kids have 2 phonological systems that influence each other

reading: true or false: Fabiano-Smith and Goldenstein found that cross-linguistic influence (CLI) decreases as children get older

false: they weren’t able to find if the effects change or stay stable as kids grow up

reading: define “word choice transfer”

how knowledge in one language affects how your choice of words in another language

reading: define “inflectional morphology”

changing the word’s meaning by adding a prefix or suffix (ex: “ed” or “ing” at the end of a verb, adding s for plurals)

reading: define “overt morphology”

visible, orthographic, phonetic markings (ex: “read” in the present tense VS in the past tense)

reading: what’s the difference between inflectional and overt morphology?

• inflectional: changing a word’s meaning by adding a prefix or a suffix (ex: verbs with “ed” and “ing”, adding s for plurals)

• overt: visible, orthographic, phonetic markings (ex: “read” in the present VS the past tense)

reading: [inflectional/overt] morphology doesn’t transfer across languages

overt

*inflectional: prefixes and suffixes; overt: phonetics, visible changes

reading: true or false: it is impossible to reverse transfer morphological information, only forward transfer is possible

true and false:

• false: both are possible, but forward (L1 → L2) is more frequent than reverse (L2 → L1)

• true: reverse is only possible if you are highly proficient

reading: define “morphological awareness”

using morphemes and changing how words are built

reading: define “transfer facilitation model”

the skills you have in one language can transfer to another language → top-down assistance

reading: cross-linguistic influence (CLI) is more frequent for [sounds/words] than for [sounds/words]

more frequent for sounds than words

reading: when can inflectional morphemes transfer across languages more easily?

when both languages are similar lexically and morphologically

*inflectional morphology: changing a word’s meaning by adding a prefix or suffix

reading: true or false: morphological transfers between L1 and L2 and between L2 and L1 are both possible, but proficiency and other factors determine if the effects from L2 and L1 can be seen

true

reading: true or false: L3 can only be influence by L1

false: it can be influenced by L2

reading: true or false: L1 syntax and morphology are not transferable

false: they can be transferred

reading: L1 [grammar/syntax] affects L2 [grammar/syntax]

L1 syntax affects L2 grammar

reading: knowing [more/less] languages will make you more likely to reject ungrammatical sentences because […]

knowing less languages will make you more likely to reject ungrammatical sentences:

• when you know less languages, you will be more careful of the grammatical judgements you’ll make by basing on existing knowledge

reading: what causes increased left anterior negativity?

phrase-structure violation (ex: placing a verb where a noun should be)

reading: define “competition model”

differences when processing dissimilar elements in L1 and L2

reading: explain how syntactic transfer can be done from L1 to L2 and from L2 to L1

• interpret L2 sentences by using L1 knowledge, but you’ll stop doing that when your L2 knowledge increases

• interpret L1 sentences by using L2 knowledge, but only when L2 proficiency increases

reading: define “discursive transfer”

during oral or written discourse, our thoughts are organized according to how we converse → this will affect writing in another language

reading: define “pragmatism”

language use in different contexts (meaning of words in different situations)

reading: define “pragmatic transfer”

illocutionary (language usage to communicate) and sociolinguistic competences when transferring to other languages

reading: define “sociolinguistic transfer”

how social contexts for one language influence usage and knowledge for another language

reading: what are the factors that can influence sociolinguistic transfer? (3)

• social distance

• gender

• status relationship

*sociolinguistic transfer: how social contexts for one language influence the usage and knowledge for another language

reading: what are the factors that interact with cross-linguistic influence (CLI)? (5)

• linguistic and psycholinguistic factors: cross-linguistic similarity/cognate, linguistic domain and use, markedness and prototypicality

• cognitive, attentional and developmental factors: cognitive maturity, development of language acquisition, learning abilities, attention and awareness of language

• cumulative language experience and knowledge; age, frequency of input, intensity and length of language exposure, length of residence, dominance and proficiency, number and order of acquired languages

• learning environment: formal/naturalistic exposure, form/meaning, communication

• language use: level of formality, language task

reading: what are the aspects of the linguistic and psycholinguistic factor? (4)

*no need to remember, just know

• cross-linguistic similarity and cognate status

• linguistic domain and use

• markedness and prototypicality

• linguistic context

reading: what are the aspects of the cognitive, attention and developmental factor? (4)

*no need to remember, just know

• level of cognitive maturity

• developmental and universal processes of language acquisition

• cognitive language learning abilities

• attention to and awareness of language

reading: what are the aspects of the cumulative language experience and knowledge factor? (6)

*no need to remember, just know

• age

• frequency of language input

• intensity and length of language exposure

• length of residence

• language dominance and proficiency

• number and order of acquired languages

reading: what are the aspects of the factor related to the learning environment? (3)

*no need to remember, just know

• formal VS naturalistic exposure

• learner is focused on form VS meaning

• communication

reading: what are the aspects of the factor related to language use? (2)

*no need to remember, just know

• level of formality

• language task

reading: true or false: proficiency doesn’t affect the nature and occurrence of cross-linguistic influence (CLI)

false: it does

reading: in cross-linguistic influence (CLI), why do we know more about the affecting/target language rather than the affected/recipient language?

because the affected/recipient language is often the L1 (I know, weird), so we are unsure if effects are due to the L2 or if L1 proficiency decreases

reading: what are the issues explored by Arguri and Sorace? (3)

• if language dominance affects occurrence and magnitude of cross-linguistic influence (CLI)/transfer

• direction of the cross-linguistic influence (CLI) (L1 to L2, L2 to L1?)

• through which syntactic structures can we see effects

reading: when does the cross-linguistic influence (CLI) persists over time with an unidirectional effect on syntax and pragmatics?

this only happened in English-dominant bilinguals

reading: true or false: the number of inputs doesn’t impact the effects of the cross-linguistic influence (CLI)

false: it does

reading: what does transfer effects (CLI) of vocabulary depend on?

proficiency (it impacts basically all CLI)

what’s the difference between phonetics and phonology?

• phonetics: how sounds are produced

• phonology: how sounds are organized

reading: true or false: proficiency is the main predictor of CLI

true (I hope you got that with the amount of cards on that)

reading: why has there been less research on phonology and how it’s transferred? (2)

• sounds that aren’t used often or that aren’t important are harder to acquire

• sounds might transfer from one language to another differently

reading: define “contact variety approach”

frequency of L1 input affect L2 acquisition for simultaneous bilingual kids (before 3 years old)

*incorrect hypothesis: it cannot explain the influence of other languages this early and CLI depends on language complexity and fluency