双语者语言转换中非目标语言的加工机制

语言转换是指双语者由所掌握的一种语言转换到另一种语言的现象, 这一现象近些年来引起了研究者的广泛关注。针对语言转换中双语者在从心理词典中顺利提取所需要的语言(称之为目标语言)时如何加工在当前任务中不使用的那种语言(称之为非目标语言), 研究者进行了大量研究。仔细分析这些研究, 可以看出这些研究主要围绕着3个核心问题: (1)语言转换中双语者使用目标语言时非目标语言是否激活; (2)若非目标语言激活, 这种激活发生在何种层面(概念层面还是词汇层面); (3)激活的非目标语言会对目标语言产生什么样的影响。以此为基础, 本文从语言产生转换和语言理解转换两大领域对相关研究进行了总结和梳理, 最后对未来的语言转换研究进行了展望。     

语言产生过程中非目标语言的激活与抑制

运用长时重复启动范式, 探讨熟练和非熟练中－英双语者语言产生过程中非目标语言的激活与抑制。实验1探讨双语被试在学习阶段使用中文进行图片命名任务时, 非目标语言英文概念层面的激活与抑制情况, 结果发现, 两种熟练水平的被试均没有出现重复启动效应; 实验2探讨双语被试在学习阶段使用英文进行图片命名任务时, 非目标语言中文概念层面的激活与抑制情况, 结果发现, 熟练双语被试没有出现重复启动效应, 而非熟练双语被试出现了重复启动效应; 实验3探讨非熟练双语被试在学习阶段使用英文进行图片命名任务时, 非目标语言中文词汇层面的激活与抑制情况, 结果没有出现重复启动效应。综合三个实验的结果可以表明, 熟练中－英双语者语言产生过程中在概念层面上就对非目标语言(不管是一语还是二语)进行了抑制, 而非熟练中－英双语者使用一语时可以在概念层面上抑制非目标语言(二语), 但使用二语时不能在概念层面上抑制非目标语言(一语), 要在词汇层面上才能抑制非目标语言(一语)。     

词汇熟悉度对非熟练中英双语者语言理解转换中非目标语言激活的影响

采用改造后的长时重复启动范式,探讨母语为汉语的非熟练中英双语者语言理解转换中非目标语言的激活层面,以及词汇熟悉度的影响。实验1考察学习阶段不同熟悉度的非目标词在测验阶段呈现时能否出现长时重复启动效应,从而检测双语者语言理解转换中非目标语言是否自动激活,实验2探究学习阶段不同熟悉度的非目标词在测验阶段以翻译对等词呈现时能否出现长时重复启动效应,从而检测双语者语言理解转换中非目标语言的语义层面能否激活。结果发现:非熟练中英双语者语言理解转换中非目标语言不管为中文还是英文,都能自动激活,但激活层面会受到词汇熟悉度的影响;当非目标语言为二语时,熟悉度高的二语词能激活到语义层面,熟悉度低的二语词只能激活到词汇层面;当非目标语言为一语时,不管词汇熟悉度高还是低,都能够激活到语义层面。     

双语词汇理解切换中非目标语言加工

实验采用直接语音掩蔽启动范式,通过掩蔽词的有、无呈现对切换后单词的读音判断反应时产生影响,进而了解非熟练双语者双语理解切换中非目标语言加工状态。实验结果表明,无呈现掩蔽词组的反应时比有呈现组的判断反应时长;不同掩蔽词呈现时间两组中切换反应时判断不显著。实验证明无论是哪一种语言作为非目标语言,其在词汇层上均都不会被激活;双语词汇理解切换中,切换至熟练语言比切换至不熟练语言切换代价小。     

双语经验影响言语产生过程中通达能力的研究综述

本文介绍了双语经验对言语产生过程中通达能力的影响,言语产生是指个体通过口头言语表达想法、感受,而通达过程是言语产生的关键过程。基于语言系统的层次性,本文从亚词汇、词汇、短语和句子四个语言水平归纳了双语经验对通达能力造成消极影响的证据。基于此,从跨语言干扰、语言使用频率和词汇量三个角度梳理了相关解释。未来研究需要关注双语经验对言语加工中不同方面的影响,不同双语经验对通达能力的影响,并整合相关解释。     

双语经验降低言语产生过程中通达能力的研究综述

言语产生是指个体通过口头言语表达想法、感受,而通达过程是言语产生的关键过程。本文以言语产生的不同语言水平为线索,综合分析双语经验对言语产生过程中通达能力的影响,结果发现双语经验降低了言语产生中的通达效率。在此基础上,从跨语言干扰、语言使用频率和词汇量三个角度归纳双语通达劣势的原因。未来的研究应该考察双语经验对言语加工中不同方面的影响,并且对相关解释进行整合。     

中-英双语者语言理解中非加工语言的自动激活

采用长时重复启动范式探讨母语为汉语的中-英双语者语言理解中非加工语言的激活状况。实验1和实验2使用词汇判断任务, 实验3和实验4使用概念判断任务。在每个实验的第一个小实验中, 非加工语言是英文, 在每个实验的第二个小实验中, 非加工语言是中文。实验1和实验3探讨学习阶段的非加工词在测验阶段呈现时能否出现长时重复启动效应, 从而检验双语者语言理解中非加工语言有没有自动激活; 实验2和实验4探讨学习阶段的非加工词在测验阶段以翻译对等词呈现时能否出现长时重复启动效应, 从而检验双语者语言理解中非加工语言的语义有没有自动激活。总的实验结果表明, 母语为汉语的中-英双语者在语言理解过程中, 加工一种语言(目标语言)时, 非加工语言(要求被试忽略的另一种语言)会自动激活, 但在词汇任务情境中, 非加工语言只在词汇层面上激活, 其语义不会自动激活, 而在概念任务情境中, 非加工语言的词汇层面和语义层面都会自动激活。     

言语产生中音节频率效应的认知机制：跨语言视角

在口语词汇产生过程中,音节频率效应(syllablefrequencyeffect)指的是高频音节相对于低频音节的加工优势。综述了言语产生过程中音节频率效应的表现形式和理论基础,从影响因素、发生阶段和神经机制等角度阐述了印欧语系和汉语中音节频率效应的跨语言差异。基于口语产生的理论模型和合适单元假说,结合不同语言的固有特性,分析了音节频率效应存在跨语言差异的原因,提出了一个有关汉语口语词汇产生中音节作用机制的模型,为音节在汉语和字母语言口语产生过程中的作用提供了新的视角。未来应进一步探究音节频率的两种测量方式对音节频率效应产生影响的具体机制,加强对汉语口语词汇产生中音节频率效应的考察,利用多种实验技术和范式深入探讨言语产生过程中音节加工的跨语言差异。     

语言理解转换中非目标语言影响目标语言的时间进程

运用跨语言即时启动和延时启动范式,要求被试完成生物属性的语义判断任务,研究语言理解转换中非目标语言影响目标语言语义理解的时间进程。实验1非目标语言为英文,目标语言为中文,结果表明,无论是即时启动(t = -0.423, p = 0.676),还是延时启动(t = -0.82, p = 0.419),语义相关组与语义无关组都无显著差异。实验2非目标语言为中文,目标语言为英文,结果表明,在即时启动条件下,语义相关组显著快于语义无关组(t = -3.05, p = 0.006),但延时条件下语义相关组与语义无关组无显著差异(t = -0.63, p = 0.536)。综合两个实验结果表明,晚期熟练双语者在双语语言理解转换过程中语义的即时启动影响存在不对称性,语义相关的非目标语言中文对目标语言英文语义理解起促进作用;但是语义启动效应没有得到延时体现。     

双语者言语产生中语码切换代价——从孤立词汇到句子语境

语码切换代价是指双语者从正在使用的语言切换到另一种语言时反应时变长和错误率增加的现象。语码切换代价的存在,提示双语者对两种语言系统的加工可能存在差异。而由于言语产生中的语码切换充分体现了双语者对语言系统认知加工的自主控制能力,言语产生的语码切换研究备受重视。研究首先考察了语码切换代价的表现模式,然后深入探讨语码切换代价的来源及产生机制;随着以孤立词汇为加工对象的语码切换研究的发展,句子语境等因素开始纳入研究范围。研究发现语境中的语码切换加工与孤立词汇产生的语码切换加工存在差异,两者差异可从"线索—感知—预期"三个层面进行分析。有关研究从孤立词汇产生到引入句子语境的发展,反映研究范式向自然言语产生任务靠拢,以揭示双语者在实际言语产生时语码切换的实质。     

言语产生的认知神经机制

从认知神经科学的角度阐述了言语产生中时间进程及其激活脑区的研究进展。首先简单介绍了言语产生中词汇通达的2种理论观点。在此基础上介绍了运用电生理技术指标LRP和N200,采用双重判断任务范式对言语产生的时间进程的研究。最后论述了有关语言产生的神经心理学研究和脑成像研究,重点阐述了言语产生中时间进程相对应的激活脑区,言语产生的脑区表现出左侧化趋势。     

言语产生中的词汇通达理论

首先简单介绍了言语产生中词汇产生研究方法,然后重点介绍了言语产生中的2类重要的词汇通达理论：交互激活理论和独立阶段理论,围绕词汇通达中的3个重要问题：词汇通达的阶段、词汇通达的时间进程、词汇通达阶段是分离独立的还是交互作用的展开论述,阐述了2类理论的相同点和相异点。     

Bilinguals in a monolingual and a bilingual speech mode: The effect on lexical access

The time course of lexical access in fluent Portuguese-English bilinguals and in English speaking monolinguals was examined during the on-line processing of spoken sentences using the phoneme-triggered lexical decision task (Blank, 1980). The bilinguals were tested in two distinct speech modes: a monolingual, English or Portuguese, speech mode, and a bilingual, code-switching, speech mode. Although the bilingual’s lexical decision response times to word targets in the monolingual speech modes were identical to those of the monolingual subjects, their response times to code-switched word targets in the bilingual mode were significantly slower. In addition, the bilinguals took longer to detect nonwords in both the monolingual and bilingual modes. These results confirm that bilinguals cannot totally deactivate their other language when in a monolingual speech mode. It is hypothesized that bilinguals search both lexicons when confronted with nonwords, even when in a totally monolingual mode, and that they search the base-language lexicon before the other lexicon when in a bilingual, code-switching, speech mode.     

前额叶在双语词汇通达中的抑制作用——对一例前额叶损伤双语病人的研究

先前研究表明,双语词汇产生和双语词汇理解过程中存在着抑制机制。本实验以一例前额叶损伤中-英双语病人为研究对象,通过让其完成系统的语言测试任务和认知实验任务,考察了双语词汇通达过程中抑制机制的神经基础。总的实验结果初步表明,前额叶在双语词汇通达过程中发挥着重要的抑制作用。     

Brain bases of English morphological processing: A comparison between Chinese-English,Spanish-English bilingual,and English monolingual children

How do early bilingual experiences influence children's neural architecture for word processing? Dual language acquisition can yield common influences that may be shared across different bilingual groups, as well as language-specific influences stemming from a given language pairing. To investigate these effects, we examined bilingual English speakers of Chinese or Spanish, and English monolinguals, all raised in the US (N = 152, ages 5–10). Children completed an English morphological word processing task during fNIRS neuroimaging. The findings revealed both language-specific and shared bilingual effects. The language-specific effects were that Chinese and Spanish bilinguals showed principled differences in their neural organization for English lexical morphology. The common bilingual effects shared by the two groups were that in both bilingual groups, increased home language proficiency was associated with stronger left superior temporal gyrus (STG) activation when processing the English word structures that are most dissimilar from the home language. The findings inform theories of language and brain development during the key periods of neural reorganization for learning to read by illuminating experience-based plasticity in linguistically diverse learners.     

Sub-syllabic Processing in Young Korean–English Bilinguals: Semivowel Placement Differences Between Korean and English

This study investigated the sub-syllabic awareness of two groups of 86 Korean kindergarteners learning English as a foreign language (EFL) or English as a second language (ESL). In addition, it explored the cross-language transfer of sub-syllabic units between Korean and English by taking into account their lexical abilities with respect to the two languages. The participants were assessed in Korean and English based on their sound oddity and similarity judgments with respect to sub-syllabic units in spoken pseudo-syllables containing semivowels (e.g., /j/ and /w/) as well as on a lexical ability test. The results indicate that EFL and ESL children preferred body structure and rime structure, respectively, regardless of the language. These results provide support for the bilingual interactive activation model; that is, bilingual lexicon may be represented in language non-selective access. Further, the differences in semivowel placement between Korean and English may be a possible resource for language-specific sub-syllabic awareness.     

Markedness effects in Norwegian–English bilinguals: Task-dependent use of language-specific letters and bigrams

This study investigates how bilinguals use sublexical language membership information to speed up their word recognition process in different task situations. Norwegian–English bilinguals performed a Norwegian–English language decision task, a mixed English lexical decision task, or a mixed Norwegian lexical decision task. The mixed lexical decision experiments included words from the nontarget language that required a “no” response. The language specificity of the Bokmål (a Norwegian written norm) and English (non)words was varied by including language-specific letters (“smør”, “hawk”) or bigrams (“dusj”, “veal”). Bilinguals were found to use both types of sublexical markedness to facilitate their decisions, language-specific letters leading to larger effects than language-specific bigrams. A cross-experimental comparison indicates that the use of sublexical language information was strategically dependent on the task at hand and that decisions were based on language membership information derived directly from sublexical (bigram) stimulus characteristics instead of indirectly via their lexical representations. Available models for bilingual word recognition fail to handle the observed marker effects, because all consider language membership as a lexical property only.     

ERP correlates of a receptive language-switching task

Previous research has shown large response time costs (in excess of 50 ms) when bilingual speakers switch predictably back and forth between naming items (a productive switching task) in their first (L1) and second languages (L2). A recent study using event-related potentials (ERPs) has shown that switching between languages is associated with activity over frontal (N2) and parietal (late positive complex) areas of cortex (Jackson, Swainson, Cunnington, & Jackson, 2001). Switching between naming in different languages requires a switch in both language representations and language-specific motor responses. The current study investigated a receptive (input) language-switching task with a common manual response. Number words were presented in L1 and L2, and participants were required to judge whether the words were odd or even (a parity judgement). Response costs were considerably reduced, and the frontal and parietal switch related activity reported in the productive switching task was absent. Receptive switching was associated with early switch-related activity over central sensors that were not language specific. These results are discussed in relation to the idea that there is no language-specific lexical selection mechanism. Instead the costs of receptive language switching may arise from outside the bilingual lexicon.