Non-Selective Lexical Access in Late Arabic–English Bilinguals: Evidence from Gating
- 154 Downloads
Previous research suggests that late bilinguals who speak typologically distant languages are the least likely to show evidence of non-selective lexical access processes. This study puts this claim to test by using the gating task to determine whether words beginning with speech sounds that are phonetically similar in Arabic and English (e.g., [b,d,m,n]) give rise to selective or non-selective lexical access processes in late Arabic–English bilinguals. The results show that an acoustic-phonetic input (e.g., [bæ]) that is consistent with words in Arabic (e.g., [bædrun] “moon”) and English (e.g., [bæd] “bad”) activates lexical representations in both languages of the bilingual. This non-selective activation holds equally well for mixed lists with words from both Arabic and English and blocked lists consisting only of Arabic or English words. These results suggest that non-selective lexical access processes are the default mechanism even in late bilinguals of typologically distant languages.
KeywordsArabic–English bilingualism Cross-language acoustic-phonetic similarities Gating
The research was funded by the following UAEU-FHSS Grant G00001813 and G00002367. The author would like thank an anonymous reviewer for their helpful suggestions.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The author has no conflict of interest to declare.
This study is approved by the United Arab Emirates University Research Ethics Committee: ERH_2016_5442.
- Albert, M. L., & Obler, L. K. (1978). The bilingual brain: Neuropsychological and neurolinguistic aspects of bilingualism. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (CD-ROM). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
- Best, C. (1995). A direct realistic view of cross-language speech perception. In Winifred Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 171–204). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
- Dijkstra, T., & Van Heuven, W. J. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 175–197.Google Scholar
- Dijkstra, T., Van Heuven, W. J., & Grainger, J. (1998). Simulating cross-language competition with the bilingual interactive activation model. Psychologica Belgica, 38, 177–196.Google Scholar
- Embarki, M. (2013). Phonetics. In J. Owens (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of Arabic linguistics (pp. 23–44). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Elman, J. L., Bates, E. A., Johnson, M. H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking innateness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning theory, findings, and problems. In Winifred Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233–277). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
- Ghazeli, S. (1977). Back consonants and backing coarticulation in Arabic. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
- Grosjean, F., & Li, P. (2012). The psycholinguistics of bilingualism. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Grosjean, F., & Soares, C. (1986). Processing mixed language: Some preliminary findings. In J. Vaid (Ed.), Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguistic and neuropsychological perspectives (pp. 145–179). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Heredia, R. R., & Altarriba, J. (Eds.). (2013). Foundations of bilingual memory. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Kroll, J. F., & De Groot, A. M. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Ladefoged, P. (1962). Elements of acoustic phonetics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Léwy, N. (2015). Computational psycholinguistics and spoken word recognition in the bilingual and the monolingual. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland.Google Scholar
- Léwy, N., & Grosjean, F. (2008). The Léwy and Grosjean BIMOLA model. In F. Grosjean (Ed.), Studying bilinguals (pp. 201–210). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Penfield, W., & Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and brain mechanisms. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Simmonds, A. J., Wise, R. J., & Leech, R. (2011). Two tongues, one brain: Imaging bilingual speech production. Frontiers in Psychology, 166, 1–13.Google Scholar