Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-6kn8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T21:33:48.617Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lexical alignment is affected by addressee but not speaker nativeness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 March 2021

Ellise Suffill ,
Timea Kutasi ,
Martin J. Pickering  and
Holly P. Branigan
Ellise Suffill*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, U.K.
Timea Kutasi
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, U.K.
Martin J. Pickering
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, U.K.
Holly P. Branigan
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, U.K.
*
Author for correspondence: Ellise Suffill, E-mail: suffill@wisc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Interlocutors tend to refer to objects using the same names as each other. We investigated whether native and non-native interlocutors’ tendency to do so is influenced by speakers’ nativeness and by their beliefs about an interlocutor's nativeness. A native or non-native participant and a native or non-native confederate directed each other around a map to deliver objects to locations. We manipulated whether confederates referred to objects using a favored or disfavored name, while controlling for confederates’ language behavior. We found evidence of audience design for native and non-native addressees: participants were more likely to use a disfavored name after a non-native confederate used that name than after a native confederate used that name; this tendency did not differ between native and non-native participants. Results suggest that both native and non-native speakers can adapt to the language of non-native partners through non-automatic, goal-directed mechanisms of alignment during cognitively demanding communicative tasks.

Keywords

lexical alignmentprimingaudience designnative–non-native interaction

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , August 2021 , pp. 746 - 757
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Footnotes

*

Denotes joint first authors.

References

Allen, ML, Haywood, S, Rajendran, G and Branigan, H (2011) Evidence for syntactic alignment in children with autism. Developmental Science 14, 540–548.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, D, Maechler, M, Bolker, B and Walker, S (2015) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1, 1–23.Google Scholar
Bent, T and Bradlow, AR (2003) The interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 114, 1600–1610.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bortfeld, H and Brennan, SE (1997) Use and acquisition of idiomatic expressions in referring by native and non-native speakers. Discourse Processes 23, 119–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branigan, HP and McLean, JF (2016) What children learn from adults’ utterances: An ephemeral lexical boost and persistent syntactic priming in adult–child dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language 91, 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branigan, HP, Pickering, MJ and Cleland, AA (2000) Syntactic co-ordination in dialogue. Cognition 75, B13-B25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Branigan, HP, Pickering, MJ, McLean, JF and Cleland, AA (2007) Syntactic alignment and participant role in dialogue. Cognition 104, 163–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Branigan, HP, Pickering, MJ, Pearson, J and McLean, JF (2010) Linguistic alignment between people and computers. Journal of Pragmatics 42, 2355–2368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branigan, HP, Pickering, MJ, Pearson, J, McLean, JF and Brown, A (2011) The role of beliefs in lexical alignment: Evidence from dialogs with humans and computers. Cognition 121, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Branigan, HP, Tosi, A and Gillespie-Smith, K (2016) Spontaneous lexical alignment in children with an autistic spectrum disorder and their typically developing peers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 42, 1821.Google ScholarPubMed
Brennan, SE and Clark, HH (1996) Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22, 1482.Google ScholarPubMed
Clark, HH and Schaefer, EF (1987) Collaborating on contributions to conversations. Language and Cognitive Processes 2, 19–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, A, Pickering, MJ and Sorace, A (2008) Alignment in second language dialogue. Language and Cognitive Processes 23, 528–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, CA (1975) Toward a characterization of English foreigner talk. Anthropological Linguistics 17 1–14.Google Scholar
Ferreira, VS, Kleinman, D, Kraljic, T and Siu, Y (2012) Do priming effects in dialogue reflect partner-or task-based expectations?. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 19, 309–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, VS and Pashler, H (2002) Central bottleneck influences on the processing stages of word production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28, 1187–1199.Google ScholarPubMed
Fussell, SR and Krauss, RM (1992) Coordination of knowledge in communication: Effects of speakers' assumptions about what others know. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62, 378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaies, SJ (1982) Native speaker-nonnative speaker interaction among academic peers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 5, 74–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, S and Anderson, A (1987) Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic co-ordination. Cognition 27, 181–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garrod, S and Pickering, MJ (2007) Alignment in dialogue. In Gaskell, G (ed), Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 443–451.Google Scholar
Garrod, S, Tosi, A and Pickering, MJ (2018) Alignment during interaction. In Rueschemeyer, SA and Gaskell, MG (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics, 2nd Edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 575–93.Google Scholar
Gass, SM and Varonis, EM (1994) Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16, 283–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giles, H, Coupland, N and Coupland, J (1991) Accommodation theory: Communication, context, and consequence. In Giles, H, Coupland, J and Coupland, N (eds), Contexts of accommodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, ST (2005) Syntactic priming: A corpus-based approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 34, 365–399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartsuiker, RJ, Bernolet, S, Schoonbaert, S, Speybroeck, S and Vanderelst, D (2008) Syntactic priming persists while the lexical boost decays: Evidence from written and spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language 58, 214–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, ZL and Branigan, HP (2020) Children show selectively increased language imitation after experiencing ostracism. Developmental Psychology. 56, 897–911. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/dev0000915CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopkins, Z, Yuill, N and Branigan, HP (2017) Inhibitory control and lexical alignment in children with an autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 58, 1155–1165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopkins, Z, Yuill, N and Keller, B (2015) Children with autism align syntax in natural conversation. Applied Psycholinguistics 37, 347–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanova, I and Costa, A (2008) Does bilingualism hamper lexical access in speech production?. Acta Psychologica 127, 277–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelley, JF (1984) An iterative design methodology for user-friendly natural language office information applications. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 2, 26–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemper, S, Herman, RE and Lian, CH (2003) The costs of doing two things at once for young and older adults: Talking while walking, finger tapping, and ignoring speech or noise. Psychology and Aging 18, 181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levelt, W. J.M. and Kelter, S (1982) Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology 14, 78–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, MH (1981) Input, interaction, and second-language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 379, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, MH (1983) Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics 4, 126–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malt, BC and Sloman, SA (2003) Linguistic diversity and object naming by non-native speakers of English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 6, 47–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, V, Blumenfeld, HK and Kaushanskaya, M (2007) The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 50, 940–967.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, DE and Schvaneveldt, RW (1971) Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology 90, 227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munro, MJ and Derwing, TM (1995), Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning 45, 73–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrand, R and Ferreira, VS (2019) Repeat after us: Syntactic alignment is not partner-specific. Journal of Memory and Language 108, 104037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pardo, JS (2006) On phonetic convergence during conversational interaction. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 119, 2382–2393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pickering, MJ and Garrod, S (2004) Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, MJ and Garrod, S (2006) Alignment as the basis for successful communication. Research on Language and Computation 4, 203–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, MJ and Garrod, S (2021) Understanding dialogue: Language use and social interaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pivneva, I, Palmer, C and Titone, D (2012) Inhibitory control and L2 proficiency modulate bilingual language production: Evidence from spontaneous monologue and dialogue speech. Frontiers in Psychology 3, 57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Power, MJ (1985) Sentence production and working memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 37, 367–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramponi, C, Richardson-Klavehn, A and Gardiner, JM (2007) Component processes of conceptual priming and associative cued recall: The roles of preexisting representation and depth of processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33, 843.Google ScholarPubMed
R Core Team (2019) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Reitter, D and Moore, JD (2014) Alignment and task success in spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language 76, 29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roßnagel, C (2000) Cognitive load and perspective-taking: applying the automatic-controlled distinction to verbal communication. European Journal of Social Psychology 30, 429Ð445.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N and Hulstijn, J (2005) Automaticity in Bilingualism and Second Language Learning. In Kroll, JF and de Groot, AMB (eds), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 371–388.Google Scholar
Slocombe, KE, Alvarez, I, Branigan, HP, Jellema, T, Burnett, HG, Fischer, A, Li, YH, Garrod, S and Levita, L (2012) Linguistic alignment in adults with and without Asperger's syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 43, 1423–1436. doi:10.1007/s10803-012-1698-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumner, M and Samuel, AG (2009) The effect of experience on the perception and representation of dialect variants. Journal of Memory and Language 60, 487–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D (1989) Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tobar-Henríquez, A, Rabagliati, H and Branigan, HP (2019) Lexical entrainment reflects a stable individual trait: Implications for individual differences in language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 46, 1091–1105.Google ScholarPubMed
van Baaren, RB, Holland, RW, Steenaert, B and van Knippenberg, A (2003) Mimicry for money: Behavioral consequences of imitation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 39, 393–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Engen, KJ, Baese-Berk, M, Baker, RE, Choi, A, Kim, M and Bradlow, AR (2010) The Wildcat Corpus of native-and foreign-accented English: Communicative efficiency across conversational dyads with varying language alignment profiles. Language and Speech 53, 510–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiss, D and Dempsey, JJ (2008) Performance of bilingual speakers on the English and Spanish versions of the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT). Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 19, 5–17.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, B (2001) ‘Foreigner talk’: An important element in cross-cultural management education and training. International Review of Administrative Sciences 67, 621–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Suffill et al. supplementary material

Suffill et al. supplementary material

Download Suffill et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 182.3 KB