Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ksp62 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T11:49:48.433Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grounded cognition: Comparing Language × Space interactions in first language and second language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2017

DANIELA KATHARINA AHLBERG Open the ORCID record for DANIELA KATHARINA AHLBERG [Opens in a new window] ,
HEIKE BISCHOFF ,
BARBARA KAUP ,
DOREEN BRYANT  and
JESSICA VANESSA STROZYK
DANIELA KATHARINA AHLBERG
Affiliation:
University of Tubingen
HEIKE BISCHOFF
Affiliation:
University of Tubingen
BARBARA KAUP
Affiliation:
University of Tubingen
DOREEN BRYANT
Affiliation:
University of Tubingen
JESSICA VANESSA STROZYK*
Affiliation:
University of Tubingen
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Jessica Strozyk, Department of Psychology, University of Tübingen, Schleichstrasse 4, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. E-mail: jessica.strozyk@uni-tuebingen.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The experiential traces account claims that language comprehension in one's first language (L1) is based on the reactivation of experiential traces that stem from experiencing the corresponding objects, states, or events. However, it remains unclear to what extent this is transferable to second language (L2) comprehension. In the present study, we compared German L1 speakers with German L2 speakers whose L1 uses similar or different spatial terms as German. In an adaptation of the Stroop paradigm, participants were instructed to respond to the font color of German spatial prepositions (e.g., auf “on,” über “above,” and unter “under/below”) by either an upward or a downward hand movement, resulting in compatible or incompatible responses. We found significant compatibility effects for all speakers, but also clear differences between speakers of different L1s. The results thereby support the assumption that experiential traces built during L1 usage play an important role in L2 processing.

Keywords

embodied cognitionexperiential tracessecond language processingspatial prepositions

Information

Type
Original Article
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , March 2018 , pp. 437 - 459
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Aksan, Y., Aksan, M., Koltuksuz, A., Sezer, T., Mersinli, Ü., Demirhan, U. U., . . . Yıldız, i. (2012). Construction of the Turkish National Corpus (TNC). Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluations, Istanbul. Retrieved from http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/991_Paper.pdf Google Scholar
Alonso, R., Cadierno, T., & Jarvis, S. (2016). Cross-linguistic influence in the acquisition of spatial prepositions in English as a L2. In Alonso, R. (Ed.), Cross-linguistic influence in SLA (pp. 93–120). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ansorge, U., Kiefer, M., Khalid, S., Grassl, S. I., & Koenig, P. (2010). Testing the theory of embodied cognition with subliminal words. Cognition, 116, 303–320. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.05.010 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660. doi:10.1017/S0140525X99002149 Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639 Google Scholar
Becker, A., & Carroll, M. (1997). The acquisition of spatial relations in a second language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergen, B., Lau, T. T. C., Narayan, S., Stojanovic, D., & Wheeler, K. (2010). Body part representations in verbal semantics. Memory & Cognition, 38, 969–981. doi:10.3758/MC.38.7.969 Google Scholar
Blumenfeld, H. K., & Marian, V. (2013). Parallel language activation and cognitive control during spoken word recognition in bilinguals. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 37–41. doi:10.1080/20445911.2013.812093.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624–652. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1996). Learning how to structure space for language. In Bloom, P., Peterson, M. A., Nadel, L., & Garrett, M. F. (Eds.), Language and space (pp. 385–436). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryant, D. (2012). Lokalisierungsausdrücke im Erst-und Zweitspracherwerb: Typologische, ontogenetische und kognitionspsychologische Überlegungen zur Sprachförderung in DaZ (Thema Sprache–Wissenschaft für den Unterricht, 2). Baltmannsweiler, Germany: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.Google Scholar
Choi, S., & Bowerman, M. (1991). Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns. Cognition, 41, 83–121. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(91)90033-Z Google Scholar
Choi, S., & Hattrup, K. (2012). Relative contribution of perception/cognition and language on spatial categorization. Cognitive Science, 36, 102–129. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01201.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coello, Y., & Fischer, M. H. (2016). Foundations of embodied cognition: Vol. 1. Perceptual and emotional embodiment. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Collins, L. (2002). The roles of L1 influence and lexical aspect in the acquisition of temporal morphology. Language Learning, 52, 43–94. doi:10.1111/1467-9922.00177 Google Scholar
Coventry, K., Guijarro-Fuentes, P., & Valdés, B. (2012). On the first and second language acquisition of spatial language. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 12, 219–230. doi:10.1080/13875868.2012. 713058 Google Scholar
Coventry, K. R., & Garrod, S. C. (2004). Saying, seeing and acting: The psychological semantics of spatial prepositions. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Coventry, K. R., Prat-Sala, M., & Richards, L. (2001). The interplay between geometry and function in the comprehension of over, under, above, and below. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 376–398. doi:10.1006/jmla.2000.2742 Google Scholar
Cuyckens, H., & Zawada, B. (Eds.). (2001). Polysemy in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2008) Word frequency data—Corpus of Contemporary American English. Retrieved May 4, 2016, from http://www.wordfrequency.info/ Google Scholar
De Grauwe, S., Willems, R. M., Rueschemeyer, S. A., Lemhöfer, K., & Schriefers, H. (2014). Embodied language in first- and second-language speakers: Neural correlates of processing motor verbs. Neuropsychologia, 56, 334–349. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.02.003 Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & Van Heuven, W. J. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 175–197. doi:10.1017/S1366728902003012 Google Scholar
Dudschig, C., de la Vega, I., & Kaup, B. (2014). Embodiment and second-language: Automatic activation of motor responses during processing spatially associated L2 words and emotion L2 words in a vertical Stroop paradigm. Brain & Language, 132, 14–21. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2014.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dudschig, C., de la Vega, I., & Kaup, B. (2015). What's up? Emotion-specific activation of vertical space during language processing. Acta Psychologica, 156, 143–155. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.09.015 Google Scholar
Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2016). Is it all task-specific? The role of binary responses, verbal mediation and saliency for eliciting language-space associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/xlm0000297 Google ScholarPubMed
Finkbeiner, M., Forster, K., Nicol, J., & Nakamura, K. (2004). The role of polysemy in masked semantic and translation priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 1–22. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.01.004 Google Scholar
Fischer, M. H., & Coello, Y. (2016). Foundations of embodied cognition: Vol. 2. Conceptual and interactive embodiment. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fries, C. (1945). Teaching and learning English as a foreign language. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M., Brown, M., & Levin, J. R. (2007). Enhancing comprehension in small reading groups using a manipulation strategy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 389–399. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.03.001 Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 558–565. doi:10.3758/BF03196313 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grießhaber, W. (1999). Die relationierende Prozedur. Zu Grammatik und Pragmatik lokaler Präpositionen und ihrer Verwendung durch türkische Deutschlerner. Münster, Germany: Waxmann.Google Scholar
Grimm, H. (1975). On the child's acquisition of semantic structure underlying the wordfield of prepositions. Language and Speech, 18, 97–119. doi:10.1177/002383097501800201 Google Scholar
Hernández-Chávez, E. (1972). Early code separation in the second language speech of Spanish-speaking children. Paper presented at the Stanford Child Language Research Forum, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (1977). Implicational patterns in interlanguage syntax variation. Language Learning, 27, 383–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N. (2003). Maturational constraints in second language acquisition. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 539–588). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ijaz, I. H. (1986). Linguistic and cognitive determinants of lexical acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 36, 401–451. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1986.tb01034.x Google Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A. (2008). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jirak, D., Menz, M. M., Buccino, G., Borghi, A. M., & Binkofski, F. (2010). Grasping language—A short story on embodiment. Consciousness and Cognition, 19, 711–720. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.06.020 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaltenbacher, E., & Klages, H. (2006). Sprachprofil und Sprachförderung bei Vorschulkindern mit Migrationshintergrund. In Ahrenholz, B. (Ed.), Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund. Spracherwerb und Fördermöglichkeiten (pp, 80–97). Freiburg, Germany: Fillibach.Google Scholar
Kaup, B., de la Vega, I., Strozyk, J., & Dudschig, C. (2016). The role of sensorimotor processes in meaning composition. In Fischer, M. H. & Coello, Y. (Eds.), Foundations of embodied cognition: Vol. 2. Conceptual and interactive embodiment (pp. 46–70). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Khalid, S., & Ansorge, U. (2013). The Simon effect of spatial words in eye movements: Comparison of vertical and horizontal effects and of eye and finger responses. Vision Research, 86, 6–14. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2013.04.001 Google Scholar
Klein, W. (1992). Zweitspracherwerb (Studienbuch Linguistik, 5th ed.). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Anton Hain.Google Scholar
Kleinmann, H. (1977). Avoidance behavior in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 27, 93–107.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. (1983). Newmark's “ignorance hypothesis” and current second language acquisition theory. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning (pp. 135–153). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., Bobb, S. C., & Hoshino, N. (2014). Two languages in mind: Bilingualism as a tool to investigate language, cognition, and the brain. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 159–163. doi:10.1177/0963721414528511 Google Scholar
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. doi:10.1006/jmla.1994.1008 Google Scholar
Lachmair, M., Dudschig, C., De Filippis, M., de la Vega, I., & Kaup, B. (2011). Root versus roof: Automatic activation of location information during word processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 1180–1188. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0158-x Google Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Leather, J. (2003). Phonological acquisition in multilingualism. In Mayo, M. García & Lecumberri, M. García (Eds.), Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language (pp. 23–58). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Loftus, G. R., & Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 476–490. doi:10.3758/bf03210951 Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251–285. doi:10.1017/S0272263100009165 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lütke, B. (2008). Beobachtungen zur Raumreferenz in mündlichen Erzählungen von Grundschulkindern mit Deutsch als Erst-und Zweitsprache. In Ahrenholz, B. (Ed.), Zweitspracherwerb. Diagnosen, Verlagno, Voraussetzungen (pp. 151–170). Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany: Fillibach.Google Scholar
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163–203. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.163 Google Scholar
Munnich, E., & Landau, B. (2010). Developmental decline in the acquisition of spatial language. Language Learning and Development, 6, 32–59. doi:10.1080/15475440903249979 Google Scholar
Munnich, E., Landau, B., & Dosher, B. (2001). Spatial language and spatial representation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cognition, 81, 171–208. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00127-5 Google Scholar
National Institute of Korean Language. (2005). Research of frequency of modern Korean usage (Hyeondae Gugeo Sayong Bindo Josa 2). Retrieved May 16, 2016, from http://korean.go.kr/front/reportData/reportDataView.do?mn_id=45&report_seq=1&pageIndex=1)Google Scholar
Newmark, L. (1966). How not to interfere with language learning. Language learning: The individual and the process. International Journal of American Linguistics, 40, 77–83.Google Scholar
Quasthoff, U., Fiedler, S., & Hallsteinsdóttir, E. (2011). Frequency dictionary German: Häufigkeitswörterbuch Deutsch. Leipzig, Germany: Leipziger Uni-Verlag.Google Scholar
Richter, T., Zwaan, R. A., & Hoever, I. (2009). Acquiring experiential traces in word-referent learning. Memory & Cognition, 37, 1187–1196. doi:10.3758/MC.37.8.1187 Google Scholar
Rösch, H. (2001). Deutsch als Zweit- und Fremdsprache. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72. doi:10.1177/026765839601200103 Google Scholar
Sharoff, S., Umanskaya, E., & Wilson, J. (2013). A frequency dictionary of Russian: Core vocabulary for learners. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking.” In Gumperz, J. & Levinson, S. (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stringer, D. (2010). The gloss trap. In Han, Z.-H. & Cadierno, T. (Eds.), Linguistic relativity in SLA: Thinking for speaking (pp. 102–124). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662. doi:10.1037/h0054651 Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (1983). How language structures space. In H. L. Pick & L. P. Acredolo (Eds.), Spatial orientation: Theory, research, and application (pp. 225–282). Boston: Springer.Google Scholar
Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Verhelst, N., Van Avermaet, P., Takala, S., Figueras, N., & North, B. (2009). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vukovic, N. (2013). When words get physical: Evidence for proficiency-modulated somatotopic motor interference during second language comprehension. In Knauff, M., Pauen, M., Sebanz, N., & Wachsmuth, I. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 3711–3716). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
White, L. (2003). Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., & Madden, C. J. (2005). Embodied sentence comprehension. In Pecher, D. & Zwaan, R. A. (Eds.), Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 224–245). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar