Skip to main content
×
×
Home

What do foreign neighbors say about the mental lexicon?*

  • MICHAEL S. VITEVITCH (a1)
Abstract

A corpus analysis of phonological word-forms shows that English words have few phonological neighbors that are Spanish words. Concomitantly, Spanish words have few phonological neighbors that are English words. These observations appear to undermine certain accounts of bilingual language processing, and have significant implications for the processing and representation of word-forms in bilinguals.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      What do foreign neighbors say about the mental lexicon?*
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      What do foreign neighbors say about the mental lexicon?*
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      What do foreign neighbors say about the mental lexicon?*
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence . The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.
Corresponding author
Address for correspondence: Michael S. Vitevitch, Spoken Language Laboratory, Department of Psychology, 1415 Jayhawk Blvd., University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA mvitevit@ku.edu
Footnotes
Hide All
*

This research was supported in part by a grant from the National Institutes of Health to the University of Kansas through the Schiefelbusch Institute for Life Span Studies: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders R01 DC 006472. I would like to thank Melissa Stamer for helpful comments and suggestions on earlier drafts, and Holger Mitterer for suggesting the analysis that took vowel assimilation into account.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Arbesman S., Strogatz S. H., & Vitevitch M. S. (2010). The structure of phonological networks across multiple languages. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 20, 679685.
Bates E., D'Amico S., Jacobsen T., Szekely A., Andonova E., Devescovi A., Herron D., Lu C.-C., Pechmann T., Pleh C., Wicha N., Federmeier K., Gerdjikova I., Gutierrez G., Hung D., Hsu J., Iyer G., Kohnert K., Mehotcheva T., Orozco-Figueroa A., Tzeng A., & Tzeng O. (2003). Timed picture naming in seven languages. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 344380.
Bialystok E. (2010). Bilingualism. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1, 559572.
Brauer M. (1998). Stroop interference in bilinguals: The role of similarity between the two languages. In Healy A. F. & Bourne L. E. Jr. (eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention, pp. 317337. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Costa A., Caramazza A., & Sebastián-Gallés N. (2000). The cognate facilitation effect: Implications for models of lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 12831296.
Costa A., Santesteban M., & Ivanova I. (2006). How do highly proficient bilinguals control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 32, 10571074.
Cutler A., Sebastián-Gallés N., Soler-Vilageliu O., & van Ooijen B. (2000). Constraints of vowels and consonants on lexical selection: Cross-linguistic comparisons. Memory & Cognition, 28, 746755.
Dale P. S., & Fenson L. (1996). Lexical development norms for young children. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 125127.
De Groot A. M. B., Delmaar P., & Lupker S. J. (2000). The processing of interlexical homographs in translation recognition and lexical decision: Support for non-selective access to the bilingual memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2, 397428.
Dijkstra A. [F. J.], & Van Heuven W. J. B. (1998). The BIA-model and bilingual word recognition. In Grainger J. & Jacobs A. M. (eds), Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition, pp. 189225. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dijkstra A. F. J., & Van Heuven W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 175197.
Dijkstra T. [A. F. J.], Miwa K., Brummelhuis B., Sappelli M., & Baayen H. (2010). How cross-language similarity and task demands affect cognate recognition. Journal of Memory & Language, 62, 284301.
Duyck W. (2005). Translation and associative priming with cross-lingual pseudohomophones: Evidence for nonselective phonological activation in bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 6, 13401359.
García Lecumberri M. L., & Cenoz Iragui J. (1997). L2 perception of English vowels: Testing the validity of Kuhl's prototypes. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 10, 5568.
Gaskell M. G., & Marslen-Wilson W. D. (1997). Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 613656.
Green D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico–semantic system. Bilingualism: Language & Cognition, 1, 6781.
Greenberg J. H., & Jenkins J. J. (1967). Studies in the psychological correlates of the sound system of American English. In Jakobovits L. A. & Miron M. S. (eds.), Readings in the psychology of language, pp. 186200. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ju M., & Luce P. A. (2004). Falling on sensitive ears: Constraints on bilingual lexical activation. Psychological Science, 15, 314318.
Landauer T. K., & Streeter L. A. (1973). Structural differences between common and rare words: Failure of equivalence assumptions for theories of word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 12, 119131.
Lemhöfer K., & Dijkstra T. [A. F. J.] (2004). Recognizing cognates and interlingual homographs: Effects of code similarity in language-specific and generalized lexical decision. Memory & Cognition, 32, 533550.
Lemhöfer K., Dijkstra T. [A. F. J.], Schriefers H., Baayen R. H., Grainger J., & Zwisterlood P. (2008). Native language influences on word recognition in a second language: A megastudy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 34, 1231.
Levenshtein V. I. (1966). Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady, 10, 707710.
Luce P. A., & Large N. R. (2001). Phonotactics, density and entropy in spoken word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16, 565581.
Luce P. A., & Pisoni D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19, 136.
MacKain K. W., Best C. T., & Strange W. (1981). Categorical perception of English /r/ and /l/ by Japanese bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 2, 369390.
Marian V., & Blumenfeld H. (2006). Phonological neighborhood density guides lexical access in native and non-native language production. Journal of Social and Ecological Boundaries, 2, 335.
McClelland J. L., & Elman J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 186.
Meara P. (2006). Emergent properties of multilingual lexicons. Applied Linguistics, 27, 620644.
Norris D. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition, 52, 189234.
Nusbaum H. C., Pisoni D. B., & Davis C. K. (1984). Sizing up the Hoosier mental lexicon: Measuring the familiarity of 20,000 words (Research on Speech Perception, Progress Report No. 10). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, Psychology Department, Speech Research Laboratory.
Roodenrys S., Hulme C., Lethbridge A., Hinton M., & Nimmo L. M. (2002). Word-frequency and phonological-neighborhood effects on verbal short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 10191034.
Sandoval T. C., Gollan T. H., Ferreira V. S., & Salmon D. P. (2010). What causes the bilingual disadvantage in verbal fluency? The dual-task analogy. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 231252.
Sebastián-Gallés N., Marti-Antonin M. A., Carreiras-Valina M. F., & Cuetos-Vega F. (2000). Lexesp. Lexico informatizado del espanol. In Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona. [CD-ROM]
Storkel H. L., Armbruster J., & Hogan T. P. (2006). Differentiating phonotactic probability and neighborhood density in adult word learning. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 11751192.
Storkel H. L., & Hoover J. R. (2010). An on-line calculator to compute phonotactic probability and neighborhood density based on child corpora of spoken American English. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 497506.
Vitevitch M. S. (2002). The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 28, 735747.
Vitevitch M. S. (2008). What can graph theory tell us about word learning and lexical retrieval? Journal of Speech Language Hearing Research, 51, 408422.
Vitevitch M. S., & Luce P. A. (2004). A web-based interface to calculate phonotactic probability for words and nonwords in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 481487.
Vitevitch M. S., & Rodríguez E. (2005). Neighborhood density effects in spoken word recognition in Spanish. Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders, 3, 6473.
Vitevitch M. S., & Stamer M. K. (2006). The curious case of competition in Spanish speech production. Language & Cognitive Processes, 21, 760770.
Vitevitch M. S., & Stamer M. K. (2009). The influence of neighborhood density (and neighborhood frequency) in Spanish speech production: A follow-up report (University of Kansas). Spoken Language Laboratory Technical Report, 1, 16.
Vitevitch M. S., Stamer M. K., & Sereno J. A. (2008) Word length and lexical competition: Longer is the same as shorter. Language & Speech, 51, 361383.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
  • ISSN: 1366-7289
  • EISSN: 1469-1841
  • URL: /core/journals/bilingualism-language-and-cognition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 18
Total number of PDF views: 159 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 270 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 16th January 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.