Chapter 11 - Language (and Bilingualism) Flashcards
1- What is language?
What is language?
A shared symbolic system for purposeful communication
* Symbolic: There are units to reference something else
* Shared: It is common among a group of people
* Purposeful: To communicate and translate thoughts
Is Human Language Unique?
* Ants pass chemical signals to each other through antenna
* Bees communicate through body movements
* Some monkeys have basic vocalization styles
* Human language can generate an infinite variety of sequences in novel ways
Languages adapt to the environment
* Vocabulary shaped by environment and culture
* Morphology (complexity) decreases with languages spoken by more people
* Lexical tones are partly determined by climate
Gender style and language
* Countries with gendered languages (Spanish) experience higher average
gender inequality
* Gender affects language use
- Women use more adjectives and first-person plurals than men (“We need to hurry”) and use a ‘reverse accent’ more than men (end statements like questions)
* Change language to help make changes in society
2- Language representation in the brain
Aphasia
Impaired language function from brain injury
-Broca’s Non-fluent aphasia
-Wernicke’s Fluent aphasia
-Conduction aphasia
Broca’s aphasia and patient Tan
(understand, hard talk)
* Expressive aphasia
* Intact language comprehension,
* Impaired speed production and articulation
* First described in Patient Tan
- Could only speak one syllable (Tan)
- Still tried to communicate via gestures, tone, inflection
- Large lesion in the left inferior frontal gyrus
- Broca’s area
* Speech is halting and difficult to produce
- Mostly just nouns and verbs
* Typically writing is affected in an
analogous manner
* Impairments range from deficits in
producing certain words à problems
generating all forms of language
- Depends on damage to Broca’s area
Wernicke’s aphasia
(can’t understand, speak but nonsense)
* Posterior superior temporal lobe
damage, typically left hemisphere
* Comprehension, both written
and spoken
* Language content is not
meaningful nor comprehensible
- “Word salad”
Paraphasias
* Verbal: substituting a word with something semantically-related
- Shares meaning with intended word
- Ex: Swapping term brother with sister
* Phonemic (literal): swapping or adding speech sounds
- Shares sounds with intended word
- Ex: Calling Crab Salad: Sad Cralad
* Neologisms: using a made-up word
- Mansplain
Conduction aphasia
(can’t repeat)
* Neural pathway from between Broca’s and Wernicke’s area (arcuate fasciculus)
* Production intact
* Comprehension intact
* Impaired repetition
- Load dependent
Language and lateralization
* Aphasia indicate that language is left lateralized
* Lateralization not fully understood nor linked to handedness?
- New data indicating up to 70% of left-handed people demonstrate left hemisphere language dominance
* Broader aspects of language are supported by the right hemisphere
- Prosody and pitch to convey intonation, mood, attitude, gestural communication
Updating classic model
See image
3- Language acquisition
Language acquisition
Are we pre-equipped with language capabilities?
* Nuturist view: No. Language is acquired through the same
mechanisms as skill learning
* Naturist view: Yes. We are born with the innate capacity to learn language
Behaviourist view (nurturist)
* Language acquisition is skill or associative
learning
* Explicit training of language
* Trial and error reinforcement as well as
modelling other people shapes language
feedback for correct and incorrect language
Chomsky’s chomp on behaviorism (naturist)
* Language is too complex and acquire
too rapidly for behaviorist view of
language learning
* Language is not stimulus dependent
* Language is not determined by
reinforcement
* We learn language rapidly
* We can understand and speak
sentences we have not heard before
The innateness hypothesis (naturist)
* Grammar, syntactic structure, is separate from semantic meaning
“Colorless green ideas sleep furiously”
* We are born with principles of grammar
* Language Acquisition Device (LAD): abstracted entity that supports
language
* Universal grammar: a part of the LAD that includes rules for all languages
* Children only need to learn language-specific aspects to put “on top” of
Universal grammar
Support for innateness: Convergence
* Children are exposed to different learning situations, yet converge on the same grammar
* Anyone who is interested can see me later.
1.Is anyone who interested can see me later?
2.Can anyone who is interested see me later?
Both assume a rule, but most children use (2), which is more “grammatical” than (1)
Support for innateness: Uniformity
Language develops in stages at same ages for children (mostly)
see image
Support for innateness: Poverty of stimulus argument
* The linguistic environment of a child is not sufficient enough to allow that child to learn a language via reinforcement, rules or imitation
* A child doesn’t hear enough language samples to acquire all language, doesn’t have enough opportunities to learn from
mistakes
* There must be something innate about language
BUT
This argument cannot address these questions
* What information is innate?
* How can you disprove this argument?
* How do you provide a complete account of all the linguistic data available to a child?
Support for NOT INNATE:
The environment is not so impoverished
Reformulatingmthe child’s sentence
* Adult reformulations of children’s speech target the structure but not meaning
Ex: kid: I want butter mine. parent: Ok I will put butter on it. kid: I need butter on it.
* Children extract regularities from experiences to form rules
* Evidence that rules are not all innate
Support for NOT INNATE: Infant directed speech
* Parentese (baby talk) helps babies learn the basic building blocks of language
o Sing-song like cadence
o Exaggerated vowels
* Enhances the ability to identify sounds, syllables and finally words and sentences
* The better infants are at distinguishing the phonetic units, through motherese (baby talk), the better complex language skills they have years later
4- Language comprehension: Dealing with phonological, lexical and syntactic ambiguity
Psycholinguistics
* The building blocks of language
* Phonemes: smallest linguistic unit /d/, /o/, /g/
* English has a few dozen phonemes to produce morphemes
* Morphemes and Words: the smallest meaningful units of language
/dog/
* Syntax: rules that govern how words are arranged in a sentence
* Semantics: the meaning
Language comprehension
* Understanding the message – semantics – from language
* Requires resolving many types of linguistic ambiguity using context and top-down processing (link to other lectures)
* Phonological – within a sound
* Lexical – within a word
* Syntactic or parsing - within a sentence
Phonological ambiguity
* Phonemes: small unit of speech that can change the meaning of a word
* Determining phonemes depends on audio signal, often noisy
* You use context and internal knowledge of speech sounds to “hear’
- Remember the McGurk effect? Demonstrates we use more than just
auditory input for language comprehension
Example of phonological ambiguity: Yanny vs. Laurel
Lexical ambiguity
* A single word form can refer to more than one different concept
* BARK (dog barking or tree bark)
* Over 80% of common English words have more than one dictionary entry
* Basis of Puns
- “What did the fish say when he swam into a wall? Dam.”
What are some homophones?
Ex: bat (animal) and bat (baseball)
* The “right” meaning is resolved by sentence context
“The baseball player picked up the bat.”
Cross modal priming task:
* Bug primes spy (context inappropriate) just as much as ant (context related) at shorter SOA (right after hearing word bug)
* Bug primes only ant and not spy at longer SOA (3 syllables later)
* Both meanings initially retrieved (when immediately after bug), Contextually inappropriate meaning is quickly discarded (3 syllables later)
Parsing and syntactic ambiguity
* Parsing a sentence is dividing a sentence into parts and identifying them as elements
(nouns, articles, verbs)
* Ambiguity
- We hear sentences incrementally, partial
information
- There is often more than one way parse a sentence
* Garden path sentence
- Grammatical sentences with multiple syntax structure show we parse incrementally
Example of ambiguity:
The complex houses married and single soldiers and their family.
If we see complex as an adjective and houses as a noun, the sentence is confusing and doesn’t make sense.
But here complex is a noun and houses is a verb. Then it makes sense.
*Syntax first approach
* We read via grammar principles alone, in one direction
The horse raced past the barn fell
….The horse, which was raced past the barn, fell
*Constraint-based models
* Constraints used to resolve ambiguity
- Semantic and thematic context
- Expectation
- Frequency
* Eye-tracking study as reading two types of sentences:
1 “The defendant examined by the lawyer turned out to be unreliable.” (temporally ambiguous)
2 “The evidence examined by the lawyer turned out to be unreliable.”
Trueswell et al., 1994
Strong semantic fit
(1) Longer reading time and move eye movements back than (2)
5- Reading and dyslexia
Reading is a newer form of language (5,500 years old)
Printed Word to Mental Dictionary (Lexicon) to Speech
Forms of dyslexia
Surface Dyslexia: impaired at producing irregular words (25% of English words), like ‘Comb” or “Thought”
* Reading happens letter-by-letter
* Difficulty matching words to mental dictionary
Phonological Dyslexia: impaired at reading non-words or new words
* Readings happens by comparing whole words to mental dictionary (lexicon)
* Difficulty reading letter by letter
Dual route model of reading
Printed Word to Mental Dictionary (Lexicon) to Speech
BUT add Grapheme-Phoneme Conversion
(Letter by letter) from Printed Word to Speech
6- Language and the link to thought
Nativism:
Language and thought are
independent
VS.
Linguistic relativity:
Language and thought are
interconnected
Language of thought hypothesis
* A nativist view
* Mentalese, an innate non-spoken
to represent all conceptual content
and propositions to create thought
* Explains why children (and
animals) without a spoken
language can have thoughts
Linguistic relativity: An origin story
* A fire occurred at a gasoline business, but how!?!
* Gasoline drums are explosive, so workers were careful about these
* Drums with the label ”empty” presumed safe
* A worker tossed cigarette near these, led to fire
* A drum marked “empty” considered not so dangerous, fostered the concept of “void”
* Language changes how we think and perceive
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
* Linguistic determinism states a person’s thoughts are determined by language
* The Hopi Indians do not have a word for time, so can they think about
time?
* Hopi do not have words for airplane and insect, so can they distinguish
these objects?
- Evidences suggest the answers to these questions are yes
* Maybe a person’s thoughts are just influenced by language?
Color language studies (linguistic relativity)
* Berinmo tribe in Papua New Guinea: 5 color terms
- The color boundary between English blue and green does not exist
* English speakers
- The color boundary for Berinmo words nol and wor does not exist
Berinmo Tribe members impaired at blue/green pair trials
*English speakers were impaired on the nol-wor pair trials
*Language shapes color memory
BUT
Color language: Inconsistent findings
* Participants
- English Language speakers: 11 words for color
- Dani tribe in Indonesia: 2 words for color
* Tests and Results
- Test 1: Named color patches: two groups performed this differently
- Test 2: Match /categorize learned color patches - both groups performed
equally
* Accessing color category without language labels does not change across language
Language and spatial frames of reference
* Intrinsic frame: Spatial relations described in
terms of objects
- Drake is next to Diamond (dog)
* Relative frame: Spatial relations described from an observer’s viewpoint
- Drake is to the right of Diamond
* Absolute frame: Spatial relations described as map coordinates
- Drake is to the west of Diamond
Language and space
* Does a languages method of describing space (frame of reference) affect thought and behavior?
* Dutch speakers prefer a relative frame of reference
* Speakers of Tzeltal (Mayan Language) only use an absolute frames of reference with no systematic use of left and right
(relative frame of reference)
* View card (Table 1)
* Rotated 180 degrees to pick a card matching on relative and absolute frame of
references.
* Mayan speakers selected card representing absolute frame of reference
In other words, because of language, different behaviour
7- Terminology of bilingualism
A word on terminology
We adopt a broad definition of bilingualism to include all individuals who use more than one language. We distinguish bilingual groups not only with respect to their proficiency, dominance, and age of acquisition in
each language but also by virtue of where they live and the demands that are placed on them to use each language.
L1 = first (native) language
L2 = second language
What % of the world is bilingual?
Approximately 60%
What % of people in Canada are bilingual?
In 2021:
Canada= 18%
Québec= 46.4%
Montréal= 69.8%
Rise of Bilingualism in the US
Language other than English at home: 21.7%
Spanish at home: 13.3%
8- The traditional story (of bilingualism) in psycholinguistics
Until very recently, most research on language and cognition examined only speakers of a single (typically English) language. Monolinguals were the model subjects of study. Only the native language could provide an ideal basis for understanding the nature of language
system.
On this view, bilinguals have been considered a special group of language users, much like
brain damaged patients, children with language disorders, or deaf individuals.
Each of these groups holds genuine interest for the field, but their performance is not necessarily taken to provide the primary source of evidence for the study of language and mind.
Even highly successful late L2 learners speak with an accent and appear to fail to acquire subtle aspects of the L2 grammar. The older individuals were when first exposed to the L2, the more accented their speech is perceived to be.
For these reasons, the evidence on bilingualism has been taken to suggest
that the L2 is fundamentally different and separate from the L1.
* Late bilinguals are special with a
mixed language system that includes
a full native L1 and a “funky” L2
* Bilinguals should be “functionally
monolingual” in the L1.
* The L1 should transfer to the L2 but
not the other way around.
9- A new attitude about bilingualism
There is greater plasticity than
previously understood.
Language learning occurs at all
ages and language processes
are dynamic.
Bilingualism provides a lens for
examining aspects of cognition
that are obscured by studying
monolinguals alone.
Three discoveries about bilingualism
1. Bilinguals are not two monolinguals in one. Both languages are active and competing.
2. The bilingual’s language system is permeable in both directions. Critically, the L1 changes in the response to learning and using an L2.
3. Not all bilinguals are the same. Bilinguals differ by virtue of where they live and the demands that are placed on them to use each language.
10- 1. Bilinguals are not two monolinguals in one. Both languages are active and competing.
Parallel activation:
Both languages are active regardless of the requirement to use one language alone.
What is the evidence?
One way to examine parallel activation is to take advantage of the fact that many languages have words that share properties between languages.
Cognates: = form, = meaning. Ex: piano in french and english
Homographs: = form, different meaning. Ex: coin in french (corner) and coin in english (money)
Many studies have demonstrated that bilinguals recognize cognates more quickly but homographs more slowly that control words. Monolinguals do not show these effects.
Lexical information is activated in target AND
non-target languages.
Ex: english=guitar, spanish=guitarra, japanese=gi.ta.a (cognates)
vs. noncognate: glasses, gafas, me.ga.ne
(see results????)
Faster to name objects when cognates vs. non cognates
Libben & Titone (2009)
Do bilinguals show effects of parallel activation during reading?
If the sentence provides a cue to language membership, then no cognate/homograph effects should be observed.
cognates: faciliation. jungle
homographs: inference. chat (cat or chatting)
What is the time-course of cross-language effects?
Initial stages of comprehension: First fixation duration: length of the 1st time eye fixates on the target
Later stages of comprehension: Total fixation duration: length of all eye fixations on target
Longer fixation durations linked to greater comprehension difficulty.
Low constraint= not easily predictable
High constraint= more easily predictable (more context)
Results:
Both early and late stages of comprehension, In low constraint, cognate=facilitation and homograph= interference (more reading difficulty/longer fixation on the target word and even reggression)
In early stages of comprehension, in high constraint, still have cognate facilitation and homograph interference. BUT FOR late stages of comprehension, in high constraint, no cognate facilitation and no homograph interference. Basically, no parallel activation.
Summary:
Early stages: Parallel activation regardless of sentence constraint (low or high).
Late stages of comprehension: Parallel activation resolved (no more) aka no facilitation and no interference for contexts that provide a high semantic constraint.
Semantic relatedness task
(clap if two words are semantically related)
Morford et al. (2011)
Are ASL-English bilinguals affected by their knowledge of sign language
even though ASL was not present in the experiment?
In English, clap if semantically related
Results:
Bilinguals are faster to judge English when the ASL converges and slower when it conflicts. Monolinguals do not show these effects.
Ex: if two words are semantically related in English AND have a similar sign in ASL (aka they converge), they are FASTER at judging.
if two words are semantically unrelated in English (like movie and paper), but they have a similar sign in ASL, they are SLOWER at judging.
Summary:
Bilinguals are NOT two monolinguals in one
11- 2. The bilingual’s language system is permeable in both directions. Critically, the L1 changes in the response to learning and using an L2.
Bice & Kroll (2015)
Examined cognate effects in monolinguals and L2 learners of Spanish.
Would the newly acquired L2 affect the L1?
Cognates: tomato - tomate
Noncognates: book - libro
- Behavior: yes or no. Behaviorally, no cognate effect for either group.
- ERP responses: Will brain activity show an effect of L2 on L1?
Results:
For early L2 learners, reduce N400 for cognates (but no noncognates). No effect for monolinguals.
The native language is affected by the second language.
Verbal Fluency Task
Ex: say as many animals as you can
Linck et al. (2009)
Classroom Learners vs. Immersed Learners (are learning IN SPAIN, surrounded by spanish)
In English, the classroom learners produced more exemplars. In Spanish, the immersed learners produced more exemplars.
Results:
Compared to classroom learners, immersed learners produced less L1 (English) exemplars. The L1 (English) is suppressed while living in an L2 context (ex: Spain).
Dussias & Sagarra (2007)
The influence of L2 on L1 is not limited to words. It’s also about the grammar.
Someone shot the maid of the actress
who was divorced.
Who was divorced?
Native English speakers: the actress
Native Spanish speakers: the maid….but think the maid less (higher fixation) the more bilingual spanish speakers are exposed to L2 (English)
Bilingualism has consequences for both languages..
.
12- 3. Not all bilinguals are the same. Bilinguals differ by virtue of where they live and the demands that are placed on them to use each language.
Characterizing bilingual language experience
ex:
in England
Predominant language: immersed more in first or second language?
Habits of language use: keep them separate or use interchangeably?
Contextual linguistic diversity: surrounded by others or no? context where can talk in L2 or no?
Gullifer et al. (2018)
MONTRÉAL
French-English bilinguals reporting greater
linguistic diversity:
* Show a higher reliance on contextual cues
* Exhibit higher connectivity between regions
implicated in monitoring such as the anterior
cingulate cortex and the putamen.
Language use shapes language processing
Competitive contexts:
L1 & L2 are compartmentalized
Cooperative contexts:
L1 & L2 are integrated
Beatty-Martínez & Dussias (2017)
Unilingual sentences:
La mujer colocó el tenedor en la mesa.
The woman placed the fork on the table.
Codeswitched sentences:
La mujer colocó el tenedor on the table.
La mujer colocó el fork on the table
Early switch effect.
Larger N400 for rare codeswitches
Non-Codeswitchers:
processing cost regardless of
the type of codeswitch
Results:
Codeswitchers: only rare codeswitches elicit processing costs. Processing costs depend on not only the type of codeswitch but also on
the nature of the bilingual.
?????
The interactional context of language use is important and language experiences are multifaceted.
