This paper was on lexical processing of L2 and L1 and how they interact. I have read several other papers in L2 processing, but most have focussed on syntax so it was interesting to read one on lexical processing. The most surprising part was in the number naming study where they showed it took longer for speakers to switch back into their native language rather than the other way around and that this supported the inhibitory control model. I think this probably explains why there have been many times when I have been trying to say something in my L3 and I am having trouble remembering a certain word, the only other option that pops into my head is from my L2 rather than my native language. Even though my L1 is normally more readily accessible, it is being strongly inhibited while speaking another language.
I thought it was interesting that the experiment results that showed picture naming and translation was the same time even for lower level L2 speakers. But, I wonder how activated Chinese was for the speakers prior to the experiment. I definitely think that speakers suppress their L1 lemmas during L2 production. When I am having trouble remembering a word for something in Russian, the Arabic word for it usually will surface rather than the English word. In addition, I was wondering if there are any experiments on how non-canonical orientation inhibits L1 activation. The paper seemed a little vague on how this mechanism works.
The topic of the paper is engaging, particularly because many of us are second language learners and/or bilinguals. I wanted to point out that the article is missing several pages. I am somewhat confused by the article’s reference to L1 and L2 in bilinguals. If one is bilingual, we might conceive there being a L1/L2 hybrid with integrated lexical forms and selective access that depends on context. Cross-language interaction in bilinguals seems evident however and what is interesting and promising for L2 learners is that their processing mechanisms come to resemble those that characterize the “fully formed lexicon†of bilinguals. This idea comes up again when it comes to the concept mediation model which posits that concepts can be directly accessed in the L2 without L1 mediation. The article states findings that corroborate this theory at the early stages of L2 acquisition and seem to validate the principles behind programs using language immersion pedagogy.
I’m interested in the part discussing how bilinguals manage to speak their ideas in the intended language. I am also a bilingual so that I change languages depending on situations. However, I really don’t know what is going on my mind when I produce English words. So, it is new to me to see the production in figure and it is interesting. There are missing pages in this article, so I am looking forward to have more information from the presentation.
I have had similar experiences to the ones mentioned by Kara and Bailey, when searching for words in my L3. When I was taking Russian, I would often come up with the German (L2) equivalent of word rather than the English one, when the Russian word was unknown to me.
In the implications section, the author notes that it is logical to assume that novice learners of an L2, like advanced learners, will experience activation of lexical and semantic information of their L1 during the comprehension and production of L1. As a teacher, I feel this is something of vital importance that needs to be kept in mind while teaching my students. I try to speak the target language as much as possible and keep the amount of English I use to a minimum.
I was most interested in the section of the article that discussed second language teaching methods. I have had great success using TPR in the high school classroom. I have never seen students more engaged, than when they are participating in a TPR story. When using the TPR method, the amount of L1 used in the classroom drops to almost nothing. Even students who are usually reluctant to participate are intrigued by the stories and the action taking place in the classroom. I have not had the opportunity to try TPR with the class I am teaching here at UMass, but I hope to do so before the semester ends.
The experiment was interesting to realize how the phonology of L2 is activated when native L1 are naming words in their own language. In other words, how reading words in L1 is influenced by being bilingual or knowledge of L2. The performance to name L1 words were slower when bilinguals had either English or French enemy words relative to control. I believe this is normal and it is related to the psychological aspect of human being or the brain reaction when exposed especially to enemy words (they differ by only single letter but pronounced differently) of two languages.
The outcome research refers to the result that both lexical and semantic information isactivated during both comprehension and production of L2. Accordingly, it’s assumed that less skilled L2 will activate L1 and will have more difficulty in controlling. Thus, the article is pointing very important methods in today’s communicative L2 Pedagogy using the cross-language compitition:
– Completely avoid the use of L1 in the classroom; which has been recently started to be followed in specific areas by some teachers in that hold new approaches to teaching L2 rather than the old method, explaining L2 by using L1.
– Translation is forbidden, instead; using various techniques like pictures and contexts.. Ultimately a new word is associated directly with “its meaning” and not with a “translation”. Resulted the assumption that L2 learners are like children, they acquire language through direct association of words with objects and actions and not translation!
I think this reading’s discussion of lexical and semantic access was very accessible. I think many of the experiments it cited had practical applications for both teachers and learners in the language classroom.
The authors introduced a few models that have been used to represent lexical and semantic representation: the word association model, the concept mediation model, and the revised hierarchical model, the last of which was developed to address the shift between the first two models. These models seem to accompany different stages of language development, in which our associations across languages shift. The authors then cited translation experiences which showed that language learners could translate from L1 to L2 at increasing rates as their time studying the language increased, but that the rate of translation from L2 to L1 remained essentially the same.
When we associate words in our L2 with direct equivalents in L1, as has been mentioned above, I feel like acquisition slows, and learning can in fact more difficult. Erika mentioned the TPR method used in language classrooms, which is something I found very interesting and would like to learn more about because of its high level of engagement in the L2 without using the L1 as a crutch.
I could relate to what Kara and Bailey are saying as I have similar experience when I cannot come up with a word in my L2 but instead that very word in my L3 pops out in my mind. I find it very interesting. Also, no matter how skilled I am in my L2, I still feel most comfortable using my L1 when counting or working with numbers.
As for reading, I have to say that the lexicons in all languages that one speaks whether they are activated or not do affect their reading in one language. I agree that lexical and semantic information in L1 is activated during both comprehension and production in L2 (and even L2 during L3, etc.) For example, when I was trying learn how to read Chinese, which uses some same characters as Japanese, I’ve found it harder to memorize the sound/pronunciation of the characters because what constantly pops in my mind is the way Japanese pronounce the character instead of the Chinese pronunciation.
I found the section that addressed whether semantic representations are shared across a bilinguals two languages to be very interesting. From my own experience, I agree with what was mentioned about this being mainly apparent in concrete nouns. While learning French or Italian, these languages are similar to each other, as well as very similar to English with their word’s semantic meaning. Therefore, I definitely feel strongly that I transfer semantic meaning of most words when learning and speaking my L2.
Thinking about some other languages though, the inability to semantically relate words may have an affect on a speakers effort to learn the language as their L2. There are definitely many languages across the world whose different perceptions are expressed through their language, and this difference may inhibit linguists or other individuals attempting to learn that language.
The experiment described in this article looks at how lexical forms in each language are represented and activated during reading. The experiment involved letter strings shown on computer screen and asking the participant to judge if it is a real word. They examined whether bilinguals two languages would interact during this process. It was found that participants’ judgement was influenced by orthographic neighbors in both languages. Even when only one language was involved, participants were influenced by neighboring words in both English and Dutch. The study points out that language similarly between dutch and English may be a factor in both languages having influence in word recognition. Based on their finding researchers held the theory that lexical access is not selective. The BIA model discussed within the article is that the bilinguals lexicon is integrated and that bilinguals cannont consciously control the influence of either language on word recognition.
My interpretation of the results shown in this article is that bilinguals having access to both languages in evaluation of words means they have a greater bank of knowledge to pull from when evaluating literature and vocabulary. This could lead to better literacy performance among bilinguals. This is greater support for incorporating bilingualism in schools and language arts programs.
I found the part about semantic representations really interesting because obviously the words in our first language are directly related to a semantic representation of a concept. And when you are bilingual and have two lexicons, then things could be different. You know both languages equally well so you have a concept that is mapped out in two different ways and I’ve never thought about if they are equal. I know that in most cases when learning a second language you start out by translating from your first language, so processing is slow because you first have to think of the word in your first language and then that brings you to the semantic meaning after.
I agree with Elena’s comments about the implications on pedagogy for bilinguals. The two lexicons that bilinguals have should not be compared to the lexicon that early L2 learners have. L2 learners are beginning to acquire their lexicon in the L2 and they have a greater lexicon in the L1 so it is only natural that there is interference when acquiring the L2. As far as programs for bilinguals in school, in order to expand their lexicon and skills I think a dual language program would be most beneficial.
This paper was on lexical processing of L2 and L1 and how they interact. I have read several other papers in L2 processing, but most have focussed on syntax so it was interesting to read one on lexical processing. The most surprising part was in the number naming study where they showed it took longer for speakers to switch back into their native language rather than the other way around and that this supported the inhibitory control model. I think this probably explains why there have been many times when I have been trying to say something in my L3 and I am having trouble remembering a certain word, the only other option that pops into my head is from my L2 rather than my native language. Even though my L1 is normally more readily accessible, it is being strongly inhibited while speaking another language.
I thought it was interesting that the experiment results that showed picture naming and translation was the same time even for lower level L2 speakers. But, I wonder how activated Chinese was for the speakers prior to the experiment. I definitely think that speakers suppress their L1 lemmas during L2 production. When I am having trouble remembering a word for something in Russian, the Arabic word for it usually will surface rather than the English word. In addition, I was wondering if there are any experiments on how non-canonical orientation inhibits L1 activation. The paper seemed a little vague on how this mechanism works.
The topic of the paper is engaging, particularly because many of us are second language learners and/or bilinguals. I wanted to point out that the article is missing several pages. I am somewhat confused by the article’s reference to L1 and L2 in bilinguals. If one is bilingual, we might conceive there being a L1/L2 hybrid with integrated lexical forms and selective access that depends on context. Cross-language interaction in bilinguals seems evident however and what is interesting and promising for L2 learners is that their processing mechanisms come to resemble those that characterize the “fully formed lexicon†of bilinguals. This idea comes up again when it comes to the concept mediation model which posits that concepts can be directly accessed in the L2 without L1 mediation. The article states findings that corroborate this theory at the early stages of L2 acquisition and seem to validate the principles behind programs using language immersion pedagogy.
I’ve updated the paper with all the pages.
I’m interested in the part discussing how bilinguals manage to speak their ideas in the intended language. I am also a bilingual so that I change languages depending on situations. However, I really don’t know what is going on my mind when I produce English words. So, it is new to me to see the production in figure and it is interesting. There are missing pages in this article, so I am looking forward to have more information from the presentation.
I have had similar experiences to the ones mentioned by Kara and Bailey, when searching for words in my L3. When I was taking Russian, I would often come up with the German (L2) equivalent of word rather than the English one, when the Russian word was unknown to me.
In the implications section, the author notes that it is logical to assume that novice learners of an L2, like advanced learners, will experience activation of lexical and semantic information of their L1 during the comprehension and production of L1. As a teacher, I feel this is something of vital importance that needs to be kept in mind while teaching my students. I try to speak the target language as much as possible and keep the amount of English I use to a minimum.
I was most interested in the section of the article that discussed second language teaching methods. I have had great success using TPR in the high school classroom. I have never seen students more engaged, than when they are participating in a TPR story. When using the TPR method, the amount of L1 used in the classroom drops to almost nothing. Even students who are usually reluctant to participate are intrigued by the stories and the action taking place in the classroom. I have not had the opportunity to try TPR with the class I am teaching here at UMass, but I hope to do so before the semester ends.
The experiment was interesting to realize how the phonology of L2 is activated when native L1 are naming words in their own language. In other words, how reading words in L1 is influenced by being bilingual or knowledge of L2. The performance to name L1 words were slower when bilinguals had either English or French enemy words relative to control. I believe this is normal and it is related to the psychological aspect of human being or the brain reaction when exposed especially to enemy words (they differ by only single letter but pronounced differently) of two languages.
The outcome research refers to the result that both lexical and semantic information isactivated during both comprehension and production of L2. Accordingly, it’s assumed that less skilled L2 will activate L1 and will have more difficulty in controlling. Thus, the article is pointing very important methods in today’s communicative L2 Pedagogy using the cross-language compitition:
– Completely avoid the use of L1 in the classroom; which has been recently started to be followed in specific areas by some teachers in that hold new approaches to teaching L2 rather than the old method, explaining L2 by using L1.
– Translation is forbidden, instead; using various techniques like pictures and contexts.. Ultimately a new word is associated directly with “its meaning” and not with a “translation”. Resulted the assumption that L2 learners are like children, they acquire language through direct association of words with objects and actions and not translation!
I think this reading’s discussion of lexical and semantic access was very accessible. I think many of the experiments it cited had practical applications for both teachers and learners in the language classroom.
The authors introduced a few models that have been used to represent lexical and semantic representation: the word association model, the concept mediation model, and the revised hierarchical model, the last of which was developed to address the shift between the first two models. These models seem to accompany different stages of language development, in which our associations across languages shift. The authors then cited translation experiences which showed that language learners could translate from L1 to L2 at increasing rates as their time studying the language increased, but that the rate of translation from L2 to L1 remained essentially the same.
When we associate words in our L2 with direct equivalents in L1, as has been mentioned above, I feel like acquisition slows, and learning can in fact more difficult. Erika mentioned the TPR method used in language classrooms, which is something I found very interesting and would like to learn more about because of its high level of engagement in the L2 without using the L1 as a crutch.
I could relate to what Kara and Bailey are saying as I have similar experience when I cannot come up with a word in my L2 but instead that very word in my L3 pops out in my mind. I find it very interesting. Also, no matter how skilled I am in my L2, I still feel most comfortable using my L1 when counting or working with numbers.
As for reading, I have to say that the lexicons in all languages that one speaks whether they are activated or not do affect their reading in one language. I agree that lexical and semantic information in L1 is activated during both comprehension and production in L2 (and even L2 during L3, etc.) For example, when I was trying learn how to read Chinese, which uses some same characters as Japanese, I’ve found it harder to memorize the sound/pronunciation of the characters because what constantly pops in my mind is the way Japanese pronounce the character instead of the Chinese pronunciation.
I found the section that addressed whether semantic representations are shared across a bilinguals two languages to be very interesting. From my own experience, I agree with what was mentioned about this being mainly apparent in concrete nouns. While learning French or Italian, these languages are similar to each other, as well as very similar to English with their word’s semantic meaning. Therefore, I definitely feel strongly that I transfer semantic meaning of most words when learning and speaking my L2.
Thinking about some other languages though, the inability to semantically relate words may have an affect on a speakers effort to learn the language as their L2. There are definitely many languages across the world whose different perceptions are expressed through their language, and this difference may inhibit linguists or other individuals attempting to learn that language.
The experiment described in this article looks at how lexical forms in each language are represented and activated during reading. The experiment involved letter strings shown on computer screen and asking the participant to judge if it is a real word. They examined whether bilinguals two languages would interact during this process. It was found that participants’ judgement was influenced by orthographic neighbors in both languages. Even when only one language was involved, participants were influenced by neighboring words in both English and Dutch. The study points out that language similarly between dutch and English may be a factor in both languages having influence in word recognition. Based on their finding researchers held the theory that lexical access is not selective. The BIA model discussed within the article is that the bilinguals lexicon is integrated and that bilinguals cannont consciously control the influence of either language on word recognition.
My interpretation of the results shown in this article is that bilinguals having access to both languages in evaluation of words means they have a greater bank of knowledge to pull from when evaluating literature and vocabulary. This could lead to better literacy performance among bilinguals. This is greater support for incorporating bilingualism in schools and language arts programs.
I found the part about semantic representations really interesting because obviously the words in our first language are directly related to a semantic representation of a concept. And when you are bilingual and have two lexicons, then things could be different. You know both languages equally well so you have a concept that is mapped out in two different ways and I’ve never thought about if they are equal. I know that in most cases when learning a second language you start out by translating from your first language, so processing is slow because you first have to think of the word in your first language and then that brings you to the semantic meaning after.
I agree with Elena’s comments about the implications on pedagogy for bilinguals. The two lexicons that bilinguals have should not be compared to the lexicon that early L2 learners have. L2 learners are beginning to acquire their lexicon in the L2 and they have a greater lexicon in the L1 so it is only natural that there is interference when acquiring the L2. As far as programs for bilinguals in school, in order to expand their lexicon and skills I think a dual language program would be most beneficial.