Abstract
This study examined the processing of hyponymy in L1 and two levels of performance (overall and high proficiency) in L2 in a group of Persian-English bilinguals. In two experiments, the same participants detected semantic relation in hyponymy pairs (i.e., hyponym-superordinate vs. superordinate-hyponym) in L1 (experiment 1) and L2 (experiment 2). The variables of pair type, stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), language, and language proficiency were manipulated. Overall, the results showed that participants' median RTs and SDs were significantly greater in L2. This suggests that L2 processing in unbalanced bilinguals is less automatic than L1 processing. The findings of experiment 2 with the higher proficiency group showed a trend toward performance in L1 and therefore confirmed the prediction of the hierarchical model of bilingual memory that lexical processes in more-fluent bilinguals approximate those of L1 speakers. The results of the two experiments also showed that participants were significantly faster when presented with superordinate-hyponym word pairs than with hyponym-superordinate word pairs at 100-ms SOA in both L1 and L2 conditions. The results at 200-ms SOA, however, showed an opposite trend, although the results with L2 did not reach significance. This trend of results points to a possibility of automatic vs. strategic processing in the sense that participants' processing of hyponymy relation was more strategic than automatic at 200-ms SOA.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
REFERENCES
Beeman, W. O. (1986). Language, status and power in Iran. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Caramazza, A. (1997). How many levels of processing are there in lexical access? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14, 177-208.
Chaffin, R., & Glass, A. (1990). A comparison of hyponym and synonym decisions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 19, 265-280.
Corrigan, A., Dobson, B., Kellman, E., Spaan, M., Strowe, L., & Tyma, S. (1979). Michigan test of English language proficiency (Form Q). Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.
Costa, A., Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (1999). Lexical selection in bilinguals: Do words in the bilingual's two lexicons compete for selection? Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 365-397.
Crystal, D. (1991). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics (3rd ed.), Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Del Toro, J. F. (1999). An examination of automatic versus strategic semantic priming effects in Broca's aphasia. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 60(3-B), 1322.
Dufour, R., & Kroll, J. F. (1995). Matching words to concepts in two languages: A test of the concept mediation model of bilingual representation. Memory & Cognition, 23, 166-180.
Frenck-Mestre, C., & Prince, P. (1997). Second language autonomy, Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 481-501.
Grainger, J., & Beauvillain, C. (1988). Associative priming in bilinguals: Some limits of interlingual facilitation effects. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 42, 261-273.
Grimes, B. F. (Ed.) (1996) Ethnologue: Languages of the world (13th ed.). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Heredia, R. R. (1995). Concreteness effects in high frequency words: A test of the revised hierarchical and the mixed models of bilingual memory representations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Kennepohl, S. (1999). Toward a cultural neuropsychology: An alternative view and a preliminary model. Brain and Cognition, 41, 365-380.
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149-174.
Kroll, J. F., & Sholl, A. (1992). Lexical and conceptual memory in fluent and nonfluent bilinguals. In R. J. Harris (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 191-204.
La Heij, W. Kerling, R., & van der Velden, E. (1996). Nonverbal context effects in forward and backward translation: Evidence for concept mediation. Journal of Memory & Language, 35, 648-665.
Lucy, J. A. (1992). Grammatical categories and cognition: A case study of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
McClelland, J., & Rumelhart, D. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
Paivio, A., & Desrochers, A. (1980). A dual-coding approach to bilingual memory. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 390-401.
Paivio, A., & Lambert, W. (1981). Dual coding and bilingual memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 532-239.
Potter, M. C., So, K. F., Von Echardt, B., & Feldman, L. B. (1984). Lexical and conceptual representation in beginning and proficient bilinguals. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 23-28.
Samani, R., & Sharifian, F. (1997). Cross-language hierarchical spreading of activation. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), Proceedings of the Conference on Language, Cognition, and Interpretation. Isfahan: IAU Press.
Segalowitz, N. S., & Segalowitz, S. J. (1993). Skilled performance, practice, and the differentiation of speed-up from automatization effects. Journal of Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 369-385.
Sharifian, F. (1996). The system of mental representation of lexical meanings. In C. Lucas (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent and Cognitive Systems. Tehran: IPM Press.
Sharifian, F., & Samani, R. (1997) Hierarchical spreading of activation. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), Proceedings of the Conference on Language, Cognition, and Interpretation. Isfahan: IAU Press.
Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., & Rips, L. J. (1974). Structure and process in semantic memory: A featural model for semantic decisions. Psychological Review, 81, 214-241.
Yu-Huan, H., Ying-Guan, Q., & Gui-Quing, Z. (1990). Crossed aphasia in Chinese: A clinical survey. Brian and Language, 39, 374-356.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sharifian, F. Processing Hyponymy in L1 and L2. J Psycholinguist Res 31, 421–436 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019526009927
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019526009927