Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T01:49:54.043Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multilink for bilingual language production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2018

IVA IVANOVA  and
DANIEL KLEINMAN Open the ORCID record for DANIEL KLEINMAN [Opens in a new window]
IVA IVANOVA*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at El Paso
DANIEL KLEINMAN
Affiliation:
Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
*
Address for correspondence: Iva Ivanova, 500 W. University Ave, Department of Psychology, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso (TX), 79962, USAimivanova@utep.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A major benefit of computational models is their ability to demonstrate which theoretical assumptions are truly necessary to explain a pattern of data. Dijkstra, Wahl, Buytenhuijs, van Halem, Al-jibouri, de Korte, and Rekké (in press) have impressively shown with Multilink that it is possible to account for a range of findings from bilingual lexical decision, word naming, and forward and backward translation tasks with an integrated lexicon, without lateral connections between translation equivalents, and without inhibition. In this commentary, we consider the applicability of the current model to other multilingual language production tasks, and note where the model's assumptions might need revision as its scope is expanded.

Type
Peer Commentaries
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , August 2019 , pp. 687 - 688
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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.)

References

Colomé, À. (2001). Lexical activation in bilinguals' speech production: Language-specific or language-independent? Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 721–736.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (1999). Lexical selection in bilinguals: Do words in the bilingual's two lexicons compete for selection? Journal of Memory and Language, 41 (3), 365–397.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Wahl, A., Buytenhuijs, F., van Halem, N., Al-jibouri, Z., de Korte, M., & Rekké, S. (in press). Multilink: a computational model for bilingual word recognition and word translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.Google Scholar
Ibrahim, A., Cowell, P.E., & Varley, R.A. (2017). Word frequency predicts translation asymmetry. Journal of Memory and Language, 95, 49–67.Google Scholar
Ivanova, I. (in preparation). Bilingual – and monolingual? – language control.Google Scholar
Kleinman, D., & Gollan, T.H. (2018). Inhibition accumulates over time at multiple processing levels in bilingual language control. Cognition, 173, 115–132.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.Google Scholar
Tomoschuk, B., Duyck, W., Ferreira, V.S., Hartsuiker, R., & Gollan, T.H. (2017, November). When and why do non-native languages interfere more than native ones? Poster presented at the 58th Psychonomic Society Annual Meeting, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar