Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

, Volume 36, Issue 5, pp 383–409 | Cite as

The Effect of Phonological Structure on Visual Word Access in Bilinguals

Original Paper
  • 92 Downloads

Abstract

Two experiments examined if visual word access varies cross-linguistically by studying Spanish/English adult bilinguals, priming two syllable CVCV words both within (Experiment 1) and across (Experiment 2) syllable boundaries in the two languages. Spanish readers accessed more first syllables based on within syllable primes compared to English readers. In contrast, syllable-based primes helped English readers recognize more words than in Spanish, suggesting that experienced English readers activate a larger unit in the initial stages of word recognition. Primes spanning the syllable boundary affected readers of both languages in similar ways. In this priming context, primes that did not span the syllable boundary helped Spanish readers recognize more syllables, while English readers identified more words, further confirming the importance of the syllable in Spanish and suggesting a larger unit in English. Overall, the experiments provide evidence that readers use different units in accessing words in the two languages.

Keywords

Bilingualism Spanish/English Reading Visual word activation Priming 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alameda, J. R., & Cuetos, F. (Eds.). (1995). Diccionario de frecuencias de las unidades linguísticas del castellano. Oviedo: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Oviedo.Google Scholar
  2. Álvarez C., Carreiras M., de Vega M. (2000). Syllable-frequency effect in visual word recognition: Evidence of sequential-type processing. Psicologica, 21(3): 341–374Google Scholar
  3. Álvarez C., Carreiras M., Perea M. (2004). Are syllables phonological units in visual word recognition?. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(3): 427–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Álvarez C.J., Carreiras M., Taft M. (2001). Syllables and morphemes: Contrasting frequency effects in Spanish. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27(2): 545–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Álvarez C., de Vega M., Carreiras M. (1998). The syllable as an activational unit in reading trisyllabic words. Psicothema, 10(2): 371–386Google Scholar
  6. Ashby J., Rayner K. (2004). Representing syllable information during silent reading: Evidence from eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(3): 391–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baayen R.H., Piepenbrock R., Gulikers L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (version release 2) [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia, PA, Linguistic Data Consortium, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  8. Berent I., Bouissa R., Tuller B. (2001). The effect of shared structure and content on reading nonwords: Evidence for a CV skeleton. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27: 1042–1057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berent I. Perfetti C. (1995). A rose is a reez: The two-cycles model of phonology assembly in reading English. Psychological Review, 102(1): 146–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berent I., Shimron J., Vaknin V. (2001). Phonological constraints on reading: evidence from the obligatory contour principle. Journal of Memory and Language, 44: 644–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blevins J. (1995). The syllable in phonological theory. In: Goldsmith J. (eds). The handbook of phonological theory. Cambridge, MA, Blackwell, pp. 206–244Google Scholar
  12. Bowey J.A. (1990). Orthographic onsets and rimes as functional units of reading. Memory and Cognition, 18: 419–427Google Scholar
  13. Butterworth, B. (1983). Lexical representation. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language Production, Vol.1, pp. 257–294. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Carreiras M., Álvarez C., de Vega M. (1993) Syllable frequency and visual word recognition in Spanish. Journal of Memory & Language, 32(6): 766–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carreiras M., Perea M. (2002). Masked priming effects with syllabic neighbors in a lexical decision task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28(5): 1228–1242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chialant D., Caramazza A. (1995). Where is morphology and how is it processed? The case of written word recognition. In: Feldman L. (eds). Morphological aspects of language processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
  17. Cohen J.D., MacWhinney B., Flatt M., Provost J. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 25: 257–271Google Scholar
  18. Cole P., Beauvillain C., Seguí J. (1989). On the representation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: A differential frequency effect. Journal of Memory & Language, 28(1): 1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Coltheart M., Curtis B., Atkins P., Haller M. (1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Psychological Review, 100(4): 589–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Coltheart M., Rastle K., Perry C., Langdon R., Ziegler J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108(1): 204–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Domínguez A., de Vega M., Cuetos F. (1997). Lexical inhibition from syllabic units in Spanish visual word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12(4): 401–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Favreau M., Komoda M., Segalowitz N. (1980). Second language reading: Implications of the word superiority effect in skilled bilinguals. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34(4): 370–380Google Scholar
  23. Favreau M., Segalowitz N. (1983). Automatic and controlled processes in the first- and second-language reading of fluent bilinguals. Memory & Cognition, 11(6): 565–574Google Scholar
  24. Ferrand L. Seguí J., Humphreys G. (1997). The syllable’s role in word naming. Memory & Cognition, 25(4): 458–470Google Scholar
  25. Harris J. (1983). Syllable structure and stress in Spanish: A nonlinear analysis. Cambridge, Ma, MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  26. Jared D., Seidenberg M. (1990). Naming multisyllabic words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16: 92–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jensen J. (2000). Against Ambisyllabicity. Phonology, 17: 187–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kahn, D. (1976). Syllable-based generalization in English phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, M.I.T.Google Scholar
  29. Koda K. (1989). Effects of L1 orthographic representation on L2 phonological coding strategies. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18(2): 201–222Google Scholar
  30. Lukatela G., Gligorijevic B., Kostic A., Turvey M. (1980), Representation of inflected nouns in the internal lexicon. Memory & Cognition, 8: 415–423Google Scholar
  31. Lukatela G., Turvey M. (2000). An evaluation of the two-cycles model of phonology assembly. Journal of Memory & Language, 42(2): 186–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Naish P. (1980). The effects of graphemic and phonemic similarity between targets and masks in backward visual masking paradigms. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32: 57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nespor M., Vogel I. (1986). Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht, ForisGoogle Scholar
  34. Oren R., Breznitz Z. (2005). Reading processes in L1 and L2 among dyslexic as compared to regular bilingual readers: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 18(2): 127–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Perea M., Carreiras M. (1998). Effects of syllable frequency and syllable neighborhood frequency in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24(1): 134–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Perfetti C., Bell L. (1991). Phonemic activation during the first 40 ms of word identification: Evidence from backward masking and priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 30: 473–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Perfetti C., Bell L., Delaney S. (1988). Automatic (prelexical) phonetic activation in silent reading: evidence from backward masking. Journal of Memory and Language, 27: 59–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Perfetti C., Zhang S., Berent I. (1992). Reading in English and Chinese: Evidence for a ‘universal’ phonological principle. In: Katz L. (eds). Orthography, phonology, morphology and meaning. Amsterdam, Elsevier, pp. 227–248Google Scholar
  39. Perry C., Zieglar J. (2002). On the nature of phonological assembly: Evidence from backward masking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17(1): 31–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Plaut D., McClelland J., Seidenberg M., Patterson K. (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological Review, 103(1): 56–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Prinzmetal W., Millis-Wright M. (1984). Cognitive and linguistic factors affect visual feature integration. Cognitive Psychology, 16: 305–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Prinzmetal W., Treiman R., Rho S. (1986). How to see a reading unit. Journal of Memory and Language, 25: 461–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rapp B. (1992). The nature of sublexical orthographic organization: the bigram trough hypothesis examined. Journal of Memory and Language, 31: 33–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rapp B., Folk J., Tainturier M.J. (2001). Word reading. In: Rapp B. (eds). The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology: What deficits reveal about the human mind. Philadelphia, Psychology Press, pp. 233–262Google Scholar
  45. Rubach J. (1996). Shortening and ambisyllabicity in English. Phonology, 13:197–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sánchez-Casas R. (1996). Lexical access in visual word recognition: The contribution of word form. In: Carreiras M., García-Albea J., Sebastián-Gallés N. (eds). Language processing in Spanish. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 21–59Google Scholar
  47. Saito H., Inoue M., Nomura Y. (1979). Information processing of Kanji and Kana. Psychologia, 22: 195–206Google Scholar
  48. Schiller N. (2000). Single word production in English: The role of the subsyllabic units during phonological encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(2): 512–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Seidenberg M. (1987). Sublexical structures in visual word recognition: access units of orthographic redundancy?. In: Coltheart M. (eds). Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading. Hove, UK, Lawrence Erlblaum Associates Ltd, pp. 245–263Google Scholar
  50. Selkirk E. (1982). The syllable. In: van der Hulst H., Smith N. (eds). The structure of phonological representations, Part 2. Dordrecht, Foris, pp. 337–383Google Scholar
  51. Shimron J., Sivan T. (1994). Reading proficiency and orthography: Evidence from Hebrew and English. Language Learning, 44(1): 5–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spoehr K., Smith E. (1973). The role of syllables in perceptual processing. Cognitive Psychology, 5(1): 71–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Taft M. (1979). Lexical access via an orthographic code: The basic orthographic syllabic structure (BOSS). Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(1): 21–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Taft M. (1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9(3): 271–294Google Scholar
  55. Taft M., Forster K. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14(6): 638–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Taft M., Forster K. (1976). Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(6): 607–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Treiman R. (1986). The division between onsets and rimes in English syllables. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(4): 476–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Treiman R., Chaftez J. (1987). Are there onset- and rime-like units in written words?. In: Coltheart M. (eds). Attention and performance XII. London, Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 281–298Google Scholar
  59. Treiman R., Danis C. (1988a). Syllabification of Intervocalic Consonants. Journal of Memory and Language, 27: 87–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Treiman R., Danis C. (1988b). Short-term memory errors for spoken syllables are affected by the linguistic structure of the syllables. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 14(1): 145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Treiman R., Straub K., Lavery P. (1994). Syllabification of bisyllabic nonwords: evidence from short-term memory errors. Language and Speech, 37(1): 45–60Google Scholar
  62. Wang M., Koda K., Perfetti C. (2003). Alphabetic and nonalphabetic L1 effects in English word identification: A comparison of Korean and Chinese English L2 learners. Cognition, 87(2): 129–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wang M., Perfetti C. Liu Y. (2003). Alphabetic readers quickly acquire orthographic structure in learning to read Chinese. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7(2): 183–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Woodcock R.W. (1987). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests - Revised. Circle Pines, MN, American Guidance ServiceGoogle Scholar
  65. Woodcock R.W. Muñoz-Sandoval A. (1995). La Batería Woodcock-Muñoz. Chicago, Riverside PublishingGoogle Scholar
  66. Xu B. Perfetti C. (1999). Nonstrategic subjective threshold effects in phonemic masking. Memory & Cognition, 27(1): 26–36Google Scholar
  67. Ziegler J C. Goswami U. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory." Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 3–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Communication Science and DisordersNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA
  3. 3.Department of LinguisticsNortheastern Illinois UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations