Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T13:16:33.700Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

L2 exposure modulates the scope of planning during first and second language production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2020

Annie C. Gilbert Open the ORCID record for Annie C. Gilbert [Opens in a new window] ,
Maxime Cousineau-Perusse  and
Debra Titone
Annie C. Gilbert*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montréal, Canada School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, McGill University, Montréal, Canada Center for Research on Brain, Language, and Music, Montréal, Canada
Maxime Cousineau-Perusse
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montréal, Canada
Debra Titone
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montréal, Canada Center for Research on Brain, Language, and Music, Montréal, Canada
*
Address for correspondence: Annie C. Gilbert, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The psycholinguistic literature suggests that the length of a to-be-spoken phrase impacts the scope of speech planning, as reflected by different patterns of speech onset latencies. However, it is unclear whether such findings extend to first and second language (L1, L2) speech planning. Here, the same bilingual adults produced multi-phrase numerical equations (i.e., with natural break points) and single-phrase numbers (without natural break points) in their L1 and L2. For single-phrase utterances, both L1 and L2 were affected by L2 exposure. For multi-phrase utterances, L1 scope of planning was similar to what has been previously reported for monolinguals; however, L2 scope of planning exhibited variable patterns as a function of individual differences in L2 exposure. Thus, the scope of planning among bilinguals varies as a function of the complexity of their utterances: specifically, by whether people are speaking in their L1 or L2, and bilingual language experience.

Keywords

scope of planningspeech productionbilingualismsecond language exposureindividual differencesbilingual experience
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 23 , Issue 5 , November 2020 , pp. 1093 - 1105
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

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

Alario, FX, Ferrand, L, Laganaro, M, New, B, Frauenfelder, UH and Segui, J (2004) Predictors of picture naming speed. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers 36, 140–155. doi:10.3758/BF03195559CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allum, PH and Wheeldon, LR (2007) Planning scope in spoken sentence production: the role of grammatical units. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33, 791–810. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.791Google ScholarPubMed
Baayen, RH (2008) Analyzing linguistic data : a practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, DJ, Levy, R, Scheepers, C and Tily, HJ (2013) Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68, 255–278. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, D, Maechler, M, Bolker, B and Walker, S (2014) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. (Version R package version 1.1-6). Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4Google Scholar
Brown-Schmidt, S and Konopka, AE (2015) Processes of incremental message planning during conversation. Psychonomic bulletin & review 22, 833–843. doi:10.3758/s13423-014-0714-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chakraborty, R and Goffman, L (2011) Production of Lexical Stress in Non-Native Speakers of American English: Kinematic Correlates of Stress and Transfer. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 54, 821–835A. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clément, R, Gardner, RC and Smythe, PC (1977) Motivational variables in second language acquisition: A study of Francophones learning English. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement 9, 123–133. doi:10.1037/h0081614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clément, R, Gardner, RC and Smythe, PC (1980) Social and individual factors in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement 12, 293–302. doi:10.1037/h0081081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, A and Caramazza, A (2002) The Production of Noun Phrases in English and Spanish: Implications for the Scope of Phonological Encoding in Speech Production. Journal of Memory and Language 46, 178–198. doi:10.1006/jmla.2001.2804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, N (2005) Working memory capacity. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Damian, MF, Bowers, JS, Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H and Spalek, K (2010) Does word length affect speech onset latencies when producing single words? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 36, 892–905. doi:10.1037/a0019446Google ScholarPubMed
Damian, MF and Dumay, N (2007) Time pressure and phonological advance planning in spoken production. Journal of Memory and Language 57, 195–209. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Groot, AMB (2011) Language and cognition in bilinguals and multilinguals: An introduction. New York, NY: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F (1991) Effects of length and syntactic complexity on initiation times for prepared utterances. Journal of Memory and Language 30, 210–233. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(91)90004-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F and Swets, B (2002) How Incremental Is Language Production? Evidence from the Production of Utterances Requiring the Computation of Arithmetic Sums. Journal of Memory and Language 46, 57–84. doi:10.1006/jmla.2001.2797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finch, G (2000) Linguistic Terms and Concepts. UK: Macmillan Education.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, J (2003) Effect Displays in R for Generalised Linear Models. Journal of Statistical Software 8, 1–27. doi:10.18637/jss.v008.i15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gollan, TH, Montoya, RI, Cera, C and Sandoval, TC (2008) More use almost always means a smaller frequency effect: Aging, bilingualism, and the weaker links hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language 58, 787–814. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gollan, TH, Slattery, TJ, Goldenberg, D, Van Assche, E, Duyck, W and Rayner, K (2011) Frequency drives lexical access in reading but not in speaking: The frequency-lag hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 140, 186–209. doi:10.1037/a0022256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, DW (1998) Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1, 67–81. doi:10.1017/S1366728998000133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, ZM (2003) A reversed word length effect in coordinating the preparation and articulation of words in speaking. Psychonomic bulletin & review 10, 603–609. doi:10.3758/bf03196521CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hermans, D, Bongaerts, T, De Bot, K and Schreuder, R (1998) Producing words in a foreign language: Can speakers prevent interference from their first language? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1, 213–229. doi:10.1017/S1366728998000364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermans, D, Ormel, E, van Besselaar, R and van Hell, J (2011) Lexical activation in bilinguals’ speech production is dynamic: How language ambiguous words can affect cross-language activation. Language and Cognitive Processes 26, 1687–1709. doi:10.1080/01690965.2010.530411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, VM (1988) Hesitations and sentence planning. Language and Cognitive Processes 3, 323–361. doi:10.1080/01690968808402093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, A, Fricke, M and Kroll, JF (2016) Cross-Language Activation Begins During Speech Planning and Extends Into Second Language Speech. Language Learning 66, 324–353. doi:10.1111/lang.12148CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, JF and Bialystok, E (2013) Understanding the Consequences of Bilingualism for Language Processing and Cognition. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 25, 497–514. doi:10.1080/20445911.2013.799170CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, JF, Bobb, SC and 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:10.1177/0963721414528511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, JF, Bobb, SC and Wodniecka, Z (2006) Language selectivity is the exception, not the rule: Arguments against a fixed locus of language selection in bilingual speech. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9, 119–135. doi:10.1017/S1366728906002483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A, Brockhoff, PB and Christensen, RHB (2015) lmerTest: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 2.0-29.Google Scholar
Levelt, WJM (1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lindsley, JR (1975) Producing simple utterances: How far ahead do we plan? Cognitive Psychology 7, 1–19. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90002-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, V, Blumstein, SE 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. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/067)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, RC, Crowther, JE, Knight, M, Tamborello II, FP and Yang, C.-L. (2010) Planning in sentence production: Evidence for the phrase as a default planning scope. Cognition 116, 177–192. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.04.010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, RC, Miller, M and Vu, H (2004) Lexical-semantic retention and speech production:further evidence from normal and brain-damaged participants for a phrasal scope of planning. Cognitive Neuropsychology 21, 625–644. doi:10.1080/02643290342000302CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, AS (1996) Lexical Access in Phrase and Sentence Production: Results from Picture–Word Interference Experiments. Journal of Memory and Language 35, 477–496. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, AS, Belke, E, Häcker, C and Mortensen, L (2007) Use of word length information in utterance planning. Journal of Memory and Language 57, 210–231. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.10.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, AS, Sleiderink, AM and Levelt, WJ (1998) Viewing and naming objects: eye movements during noun phrase production. Cognition 66, B25–833. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00009-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, AS and van der Meulen, FF (2000) Phonological priming effects on speech onset latencies and viewing times in object naming. Psychonomic bulletin & review 7, 314–319. doi:10.3758/BF03212987CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michel Lange, V, Cheneval, PP, Python, G and Laganaro, M (2017) Contextual phonological errors and omission of obligatory liaison as a window into a reduced span of phonological encoding. Aphasiology 31, 201–220. doi:10.1080/02687038.2016.1176121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppermann, F, Jescheniak, JD and Schriefers, H (2010) Phonological advance planning in sentence production. Journal of Memory and Language 63, 526–540. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2010.07.004CrossRefGoogle 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. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00057CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prior, A, Katz, M, Mahajna, I and Ribinsten, O (2015) Number word structure in first and second language influences arithmetic skills. Frontiers in Psychology 6(266). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00266CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team. (2010) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from www.R-project.orgGoogle Scholar
Salillas, E and Wicha, NY (2012) Early learning shapes the memory networks for arithmetic: Evidence from brain potentials in bilinguals. Psychological science 23, 745–755. doi:10.1177/0956797612446347CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, M and Wheeldon, L (1999) High level processing scope in spoken sentence production. Cognition 73, 205–246. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00053-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, M and Wheeldon, L (2004) Horizontal information flow in spoken sentence production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30, 675–686. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.30.3.675Google ScholarPubMed
Spelke, E and Tsivkin, S (2001) Language and number: A bilingual training study. Cognition 78, 45–88. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00108-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swets, B, Jacovina, ME and Gerrig, RJ (2014) Individual differences in the scope of speech planning: evidence from eye-movements. Language and Cognition 6, 12–44. doi:10.1017/langcog.2013.5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tabachnick, BG and Fidell, LS (2007) Using multivariate statistics (5th ed. ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Thordardottir, E (2011) The relationship between bilingual exposure and vocabulary development. International Journal of Bilingualism 15, 426–445. doi:10.1177/1367006911403202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thordardottir, E and Brandeker, M (2013) The effect of bilingual exposure versus language impairment on nonword repetition and sentence imitation scores. Journal of Communication Disorders 46, 1–16. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2012.08.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Rinsveld, A, Brunner, M, Landerl, K, Schiltz, C and Ugen, S (2015) The relation between language and arithmetic in bilinguals: Insights from different stages of language acquisition. Frontiers in Psychology 6(265). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00265CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Rinsveld, A, Dricot, L, Guillaume, M, Rossion, B and Schiltz, C (2017) Mental arithmetic in the bilingual brain: Language matters. Neuropsychologia 101, 17–29. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.05.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Rinsveld, A, Schiltz, C, Brunner, M, Landerl, K and Ugen, S (2016) Solving arithmetic problems in first and second language: Does the language context matter? Learning and Instruction 42, 72–82. doi:10.1016/j.lerninstruc.2016.01.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeer, A (2001) Breadth and depth of vocabulary in relation to L1/L2 acquisition and frequency of input. Applied Psycholinguistics 22, 217–234. doi:10.1017/s0142716401002041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, V, Jescheniak, JD and Schriefers, H (2010) On the flexibility of grammatical advance planning during sentence production: Effects of cognitive load on multiple lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 36, 423–440. doi:10.1037/a0018619Google ScholarPubMed
Wheeldon, LR and Lahiri, A (1997) Prosodic units in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language 37, 356–381. doi:10.1006/jmla.1997.2517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeldon, LR and Lahiri, A (2002) The minimal unit of phonological encoding: prosodic or lexical word. Cognition 85, B31–B41. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00103-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wickham, H (2009) ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, J.-C. and Yang, Y.-F. (2008) Horizontal Flow of Semantic and Phonological Information in Chinese Spoken Sentence Production. Language and speech 51, 267–284. doi:10.1177/0023830908098543CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, L.-M., Alario, FX and Yang, Y.-F. (2015) Grammatical planning scope in sentence production: Further evidence for the functional phrase hypothesis. Applied Psycholinguistics 36, 1059–1075. doi:10.1017/S0142716414000046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Gilbert et al. supplementary material

Appendices A and B

Download Gilbert et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 603.6 KB