Literature DB >> 28649169

Form Overrides Meaning When Bilinguals Monitor for Errors.

Iva Ivanova1,2, Victor S Ferreira1, Tamar H Gollan2.   

Abstract

Bilinguals rarely produce unintended language switches, which may in part be because switches are detected and corrected by an internal monitor. But are language switches easier or harder to detect than within-language semantic errors? To approximate internal monitoring, bilinguals listened (Experiment 1) or read aloud (Experiment 2) stories, and detected language switches (translation equivalents or semantically unrelated to expected words) and within-language errors (semantically related or unrelated to expected words). Bilinguals detected semantically related within-language errors most slowly and least accurately, language switches more quickly and accurately than within-language errors, and (in Experiment 2), translation equivalents as quickly and accurately as unrelated language switches. These results suggest that internal monitoring of form (which can detect mismatches in language membership) completes earlier than, and is independent of, monitoring of meaning. However, analysis of reading times prior to error detection revealed meaning violations to be more disruptive for processing than language violations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  internal monitoring; language non-selectivity; language switches; listening comprehension; reading aloud; within-language semantic errors

Year:  2016        PMID: 28649169      PMCID: PMC5478198          DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.11.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mem Lang        ISSN: 0749-596X            Impact factor:   3.059


  40 in total

Review 1.  A theory of lexical access in speech production.

Authors:  W J Levelt; A Roelofs; A S Meyer
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  The size of the cross-lingual masked phonological priming effect does not depend on second language proficiency.

Authors:  Wouter Duyck; Kevin Diependaele; Denis Drieghe; Marc Brysbaert
Journal:  Exp Psychol       Date:  2004

3.  N-watch: a program for deriving neighborhood size and other psycholinguistic statistics.

Authors:  Colin J Davis
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2005-02

4.  Halting in Single Word Production: A Test of the Perceptual Loop Theory of Speech Monitoring.

Authors:  L Robert Slevc; Victor S Ferreira
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  When the brain tames the tongue: covert editing of inappropriate language.

Authors:  Els Severens; Ine Janssens; Simone Kühn; Marcel Brass; Robert J Hartsuiker
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 4.016

6.  The influence of lexical and conceptual constraints on reading mixed-language sentences: evidence from eye fixations and naming times.

Authors:  J Altarriba; J F Kroll; A Sholl; K Rayner
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1996-07

7.  Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity.

Authors:  M Kutas; S A Hillyard
Journal:  Science       Date:  1980-01-11       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Presidential address, 1980. Surprise!...Surprise?

Authors:  E Donchin
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 4.016

9.  Self-monitoring behavior in a case of severe auditory agnosia with aphasia.

Authors:  R C Marshall; B Z Rappaport; L Garcia-Bunuel
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 2.381

10.  A dual-route approach to orthographic processing.

Authors:  Jonathan Grainger; Johannes C Ziegler
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-04-13
View more
  5 in total

1.  A switch is not a switch: Syntactically-driven bilingual language control.

Authors:  Tamar H Gollan; Matthew Goldrick
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  The Domain-General Multiple Demand (MD) Network Does Not Support Core Aspects of Language Comprehension: A Large-Scale fMRI Investigation.

Authors:  Evgeniia Diachek; Idan Blank; Matthew Siegelman; Josef Affourtit; Evelina Fedorenko
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Cognates interfere with language selection but enhance monitoring in connected speech.

Authors:  Chuchu Li; Tamar H Gollan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-08

4.  Within-language lexical interference can be resolved in a similar way to between-language interference.

Authors:  Iva Ivanova; Dacia Carolina Hernandez
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2021-07-01

5.  What reading aloud reveals about speaking: Regressive saccades implicate a failure to monitor, not inattention, in the prevalence of intrusion errors on function words.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Schotter; Chuchu Li; Tamar H Gollan
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 2.138

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.