Phonologically-mediated meaning activation in monolinguals and bilinguals
Evidence from homophone effects in ERP
The current study investigated how language experience impacts phonologically-mediated meaning activation. Monolinguals and bilinguals made living/non-living judgments on English homophones (e.g., beech, beach) while Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) were recorded. Context was manipulated by making the preceding trial either unrelated (e.g., servant → beech) or semantically-related, creating priming. The related context either strengthened (e.g., oak → beech) or diminished (e.g., oak → beach) a homophone’s meaning. In the unrelated context, both groups utilized phonology similarly to access meaning, as evidenced by a later N400 and a larger late positive component (LPC) for homophones than for non-homophonic words. However, when the context primed the incorrect meaning (e.g., oak → beach), only monolinguals exhibited N400 attenuation and delayed LPCs, indicating that they were mistakenly using phonology and context to access meaning and were then required to reanalyze their interpretation. These results provide insight into how oral language experience impacts phonological activation of meaning.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Method
- 2.1Participants
- 2.2Tasks & Procedures
- 2.2.1Language and Social Background Questionnaire (LSBQ; Luk & Bialystok, 2013)
- 2.2.2Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III (PPVT; Dunn & Dunn, 1997)
- 2.2.3Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test (Cattell, 1957)
- 2.2.4Semantic Classification Task
- 2.3EEG Recording
- 3.Results
- 3.1Background Measures
- 3.2Behavioral Results
- 3.3ERP Results
- 3.3.1Facilitation Block: Unrelated Condition (servant → beech & beetle)
- 3.3.2Facilitation Block: Related Condition (oak → beech & beetle)
- 3.3.3Misleading Block: Unrelated Condition (servant → beach & bench)
- 3.3.4Misleading Block: Related Condition (oak → beach & bench)
- 4.Discussion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (48)
References
Anderson, J.E., & Holcomb, P. J. (1995). Auditory and visual semantic priming using different stimulus onset asynchronies: An event-related brain potential study. Psychophysiology, 321, 177–190. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H. (1993). The CELEX lexical database (CD-ROM). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania. Linguistic Data Consortium.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bentin, S., McCarthy, G., & Wood, C. C. (1985). Event-related potentials, lexical decision and semantic priming. Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology, 601, 343–355. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bialystok, E., & Luk, G. (2012). Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual adults. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 151, 397–401. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brysbaert, M., Van Dyck, G., & Van de Poel, M. (1999). Visual word recognition in bilinguals: Evidence from masked phonological priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 251, 137–148. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cattell, R. B. (1957). Culture fair intelligence test, a measure of “g”: Scale 3, forms A and B (high school pupils and adults of superior intelligence). Savoy, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. T., & Besner, D. ((1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI1 (pp. 535–555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (1999). Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and Language, 411, 496–518. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J.B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition, 51, 175–197. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test (3rd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Friederici, A.D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 61, 78–84. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Friesen, D. C., & Jared, D. (2012). Cross-language phonological activation of meaning: Evidence from category verification. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 151, 145–156. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Friesen, D. C., Jared, D., & Haigh, C.A. (2014). Phonological processing dynamics in bilingual word naming. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 681, 179–193. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Frost, R. (1998). Towards a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails. Psychological Bulletin, 1231, 71–99. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gollan, T. H., Slattery, T. J., Goldenberg, D., van Assche, E., Duyck, W., & Rayner, K. (2011). Frequency drives lexical access in reading but not in speaking: The frequency-lag hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1401, 186–209. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grosjean, F. (2012). Bilingual: Life and Reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 1111, 662–720. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jared, D., Levy, B. A., & Rayner, K. (1999). The role of phonology in the activation of word meanings during reading: Evidence from proofreading and eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1281, 219–264. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jared, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1991). Does word identification proceed from spelling to sound to meaning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1201, 358–394. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kerkhofs, R., Dijkstra, T., Chwilla, D. J., & de Bruijn, E. R. A. (2006). Testing a model for bilingual semantic priming with interlingual homographs: RT and N400 effects. Brain Research, 1068, 120–183. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kerswell, L., Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Sears, C. R., & Owen, W. J. (2007). Homophone effects in visual word recognition depend on homophone type and task demands. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 611, 322–327. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kotz, S. A. (2001). Neurolinguistic evidence for bilingual language representation: a comparison of reaction times and event related brain potentials. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 41, 143–154. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lau, E. F., Phillips, C., & Poeppel, D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nature, 91, 920–933. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lehtonen, M., Hultén, A., Rodríguez-Fornells, A., Cunillera, T., Tuomainen, J.
, &
Laine, M. (2012). Differences in word recognition between early bilinguals and monolinguals: Behavioral and ERP evidence. Neuropsychologia, 501, 1362–1371. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lemhöfer, K., Dijkstra, T., Schriefers, H., Baayen, R. H., Grainger, J., & Zwitserlood, P. (2008). Native language influences on word recognition in a second language: A megastudy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 341, 12–31. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Luk, G., & Bialystok, E. (2013). Bilingualism is not a categorical variable: Interaction between langauge proficiency and usage. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 251, 605–621. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lukatela, G., & Turvey, M. T. (1994). Visual lexical access is initially phonological: I. Evidence from associative priming by words, homophones, and pseudohomophones. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1231, 107–128. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Makeig, S., Bell, A. J., Jung, T. P., & Sejnowski, T.J. (1996). Independent component analysis of electroencephalographic data. Advances in Neural Information Processing systems, 81, 145–151.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mennes, M., Wouters, H., Vanrumste, B., Lagae, L., & Stiers, P. (2010). Validation of ICA as a tool to remove eye movement artifact from EEG/ERP. Psychophysiology, 471, 1142–1150. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Newman, R. L., & Connolly, J. F. (2004). Determining the role of phonology in silent reading using event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research, 211, 94–105. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Newman, R. L., Jared, D., & Haigh, C. A. (2012). Does phonology play a role when skilled readers read high-frequency words? Evidence from ERPs. Language and Cognitive Processes, 271, 1361–1384. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Niznikiewicz, M., & Squires, N. K. (1996). Phonological processing and the role of strategy in silent reading: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Brain and Language, 521, 342–364. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
O’Brien, B. A., van Orden, G. C., & Pennington, B. F. (2013). Do dyslexics misread a ROWS for a ROSE? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 261, 381–402. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 311, 785–806. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pexman, P. M., Lupker, S. J., & Jared, D. (2001). Homophone effects in lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 271, 139–156. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Phillips, N.A., Segalowitz, N., O’Brien, I., & Yamasaki, N. (2004). Semantic priming in a first and second language: Evidence from reaction time variability and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 171, 237–262. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Polinsky, M. & Kagan, O. (2007). Heritage languages: In the ‘wild’ and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1/51, 368–395. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Savill, N., Lindell, A., Booth, A., West, G., & Thierry, G. (2011). Literate humans sound out words during silent reading. NeuroReport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research, 221, 116–120. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 961, 523–568. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 551, 151–218. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taft, M. & van Graan, F. (1998). Phonological mediation in a semantic categorization task. Journal of Memory and Language, 381, 203–224. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thierry, G. & Wu, Y. J. (2007). Brain potentials reveal unconscious translation during foreign-language comprehension. PNAS, 1041, 12530–12535. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Unsworth, S. J., & Pexman, P. (2003). The impact of reader skill on phonological processing in visual word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 561, 63–811. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Orden, G. C. (1987). A ROWS is a ROSE: Spelling, sound, and reading. Memory & Cognition, 151, 181–198. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Orden, G. C., Johnston, J. C., & Hale, B. L. (1988). Word identification in reading proceeds from spelling to sound to meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 371–386. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Von Studnitz, R. E., & Green, D. (2002). Interlingual homograph interference in German-English bilinguals: Its modulation and locus of control. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 51, 1–23. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ziegler, J. C., Benraïss, A., & Besson, M. (1999). From print to meaning: An electrophysiological investigation of the role of phonology in accessing meaning. Psychophysiology, 361, 775–785. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Friesen, Deanna C., Veronica Whitford, Debra Titone & Debra Jared
2020.
The impact of individual differences on cross-language activation of meaning by phonology.
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 23:2
► pp. 323 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.