Butler, L. K., Bohnemeyer, J., and Jaeger, T. F. 2014. Order of nominal conjuncts in visual scene description depends on language. In TBA (eds.) Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci14), TBA. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Competing Perspectives on Frames of Reference in Language and Thought
A study found that Dutch-speaking children who prefer egocentric (left/right) reference frame when describing spatial relationships, and Hai||om-speaking children who use a geocentric (north/south) frame had difficulty recreating small-scale spatial arrays using their language-incongruent system (Haun et al., 2011). In five experiments, we reconciled these results with another study showing that English (egocentric) and Tseltal Mayan (geocentric) speakers can flexibly use both systems (Li et al., 2011; Abarbanell, 2010). In replicating and extending Haun et al. (Experiment 1), English- but not Tseltal-speaking children could use their language-incongruent system when the instructions used their non-preferred frame of reference. Perseveration due to task order may explain the discrepancies between present English- and previous Dutch-speaking children, while not understanding task instructions using left/right language may explain why present Tseltal- and previous Hai||om-speaking children had difficulty with their language-incongruent systems. In support, Tseltal-speaking children could use an egocentric system when the instructions were conveyed without left/right language (Experiments 2-4), and many did not know left/right language (Experiment 5). These findings help reconcile seemingly conflicting sets of results and suggest that task constraints, rather than language, determine which system is easier (Experiment 2 vs. 3).
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
2016
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition / FirstView Article / August 2016, pp 1 14 DOI: 10.1017/S1366728916000717, Published online: 19 August 2016 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract\_S1366728916000717 How to cite this article: GUNNAR JACOB, KALLIOPI KATSIKA, NEILOUFAR FAMILY and SHANLEY E. M. ALLEN The role of constituent order and level of embedding in cross-linguistic structural priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, Available on CJO 2016 doi:10.1017/S1366728916000717 Request Permissions : Click here
2016. Bilingualism, language shift and the corresponding expansion of spatial cognitive systems.
Neo-Whorfians argue that the structures our language uses to encode spatial relations influence the way we conceptualise space. One explicit test of this link has been studies of how speakers of different languages configure arrays of objects in non-linguistic rotation tasks. Subjects perform these tasks differently depending on their dominant linguistic frame of reference: relative e.g. left/right terms, or absolute e.g. N/S/W/E terms. One prediction is that changes in the linguistic system should result in corresponding cognitive changes. Such a linguistic shift has occurred among Gurindji people (Australia). Traditionally Gurindji people used a system of cardinal directions, however many have now also been exposed to the English left/right system. This paper demonstrates that this language difference is reflected cognitively. The 'Animals-in-a-row' task was administered to 107 GuriNeo-Whorfians argue that the structures our language uses to encode spatial relations influence the way we conceptualise space. One explicit test of this link has been studies of how speakers of different languages configure arrays of objects in non-linguistic rotation tasks. Subjects perform these tasks differently depending on their dominant linguistic frame of reference: relative e.g. left/right terms, or absolute e.g. N/S/W/E terms. One prediction is that changes in the linguistic system should result in corresponding cognitive changes. Such a linguistic shift has occurred among Gurindji people (Australia). Traditionally Gurindji people used a system of cardinal directions, however many have now also been exposed to the English left/right system. This paper demonstrates that this language difference is reflected cognitively. The 'Animals-in-a-row' task was administered to 107 Gurindji people. The results show strong 'viewpoint independent' responses, nonetheless those with a Tertiary education gave significantly more 'viewpoint dependent' responses which we attribute to exposure to English, and perhaps associated literacy practices.ndji people. The results show strong 'viewpoint independent' responses, nonetheless those with a Tertiary education gave significantly more 'viewpoint dependent' responses which we attribute to exposure to English, and perhaps associated literacy practices.
This thesis investigates how individuals understand so-called placement events through their native (L1) or second (L2) language. Placement events are events where an agent moves an object to a certain location, as in: He puts the book on the shelf. The key motivation to study this topic is as follows. Actions of “putting” and “taking” are an ubiquitous part of everyday human experience and “putting” and “taking” verbs are among the most frequent and earliest learned verbs in a language. However, speakers of different languages employ different kind of verbs to describe placement events (Kopecka & Narasimhan, 2012). Drawing on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (Whorf, 1956), this leads one to wonder whether such cross linguistic differences affect how L1 speakers of different languages understand placement events. In extension, an interesting question is whether changes in an individual ́s language system - by learning an L2 – can affect how s/he understands placement events. Approximately 360 participants participated in the studies in this thesis: 60 L1 speakers of German, 60 L1 speakers of Spanish, 120 German learners of L2 Spanish and 120 Spanish learners of L2 German. The L2 learners were learning their L2 in a foreign language context (e.g. German learners of L2 Spanish in Germany). These adult L2 learners acquired the L2 after the age of 12 or post-puberty. The aim of this thesis was to advance theories on language and perception. Therefore, we studied cross linguistic differences in the expression of placement events from three major theoretical perspectives on language and perception. Results are reported in three separate research papers. First, we studied placement events in light of the Sapir-Whorf (Whorf, 1956) and the Thinking-for-Speaking (Slobin, 1996) hypotheses. In particular, we investigated whether cross linguistic differences affect how individuals categorize (Paper 1) and memorize (Paper 2) aspects within placement events. We presented them with pictures depicting placement events (Paper 1) or sentences describing placement events followed by depicted placement events (Paper 2) and investigated whether language affected their perception of object orientation and gender of agents. In Paper 1, we investigated L1 German and L1 Spanish speakers. In Paper 2, we compared Spanish learners of L2 German and German learners of L2 Spanish with L1 German and Spanish control speakers. The results of these studies show the following. In Paper 1, we found that in a context with no overt language use, cross linguistic differences did not affect how speakers categorize object orientation or gender of agents. Moreover, this study showed that although cross linguistic differences between languages exist, speakers may employ alternative linguistic strategies that result in similar descriptions of object orientation and gender of agents across languages. In Paper 2, we found that language affected perception of object orientation. We found that L1 German speakers had better recognition memory for object orientation than L1 Spanish speakers. When Spaniards learned L2 German and performed the task in German, their recognition memory for object orientation improved and was as good as that of L1 German speakers. When Germans learned L2 Spanish and performed the task in Spanish, their recognition memory of object orientation was similar to L1 Spanish speakers ́ memory. We found no effects for gender of agents. Second, we examined placement events from a grounded cognition perspective (Paper 3). In particular, we investigated whether L1 and L2 speakers make “mental simulations” during language comprehension (Barsalou, 1999). We presented them with sentences describing placement events, which contained language-specific forms (verbs, suffixes) and investigated whether this led them to simulate object orientation and size as shown by so-called “match effects”. In Paper 3, we compared Spanish learners of L2 German and German learners of L2 Spanish with L1 German and Spanish control speakers. The results of this study show the following. We found no support that L2 readers simulate object orientation through German placement verbs. However, we did find support that L2 readers of Spanish augmentative suffixes make simulations of object size. In addition, we found that L2 readers process meaning slower than L1 readers. Third, we investigated whether L2 learner differences affected (our measures of) their behavior in the studies reported in Paper 2 and 3. In particular, we investigated the role of L2 proficiency and the related factors L2 exposure and motivation. In Paper 2 we found that differences in general L2 proficiency did not cause differences in L2 learners ́ memory. In Paper 3, we found that differences in specific L2 proficiency affected how fast L2 learners processed meaning. In addition, we found that the amount of L2 exposure affected how fast L2 German learners processed meaning. In its entirety, this thesis contributes to theoretical advance in the following ways. We have expanded on three theoretical perspectives on language and perception, investigating a single domain of investigation, which is placement. First of all, our research provided evidence against the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, but in favor of TFS effects on L1 and L2 speakers ́ memory. Moreover, we found that L2 learners ́ memory may differ from that of L1 speakers, irrespective of L2 proficiency. Thus, TFS effects in L1 and L2 speakers’ memory seems an interesting topic for further investigation. Second, we found partial evidence in favor of theory on mental simulation in L1 speakers and L2 learners. On the one hand, this questions whether humans routinely make mental simulations for all types of object properties. On the other hand, there are several accounts that explain why simulation effects may be found or not. Thus, further research is needed to determine if and when simulation occurs. Third, we found that general L2 proficiency did not affect memory performance in Paper 2. Specific measures of L2 proficiency did reveal RT differences in L2 learner ́ behavior in Paper 3. Amount of L2 exposure only reliably affected L2 German learners’ speed of reaction in Paper 3, but not L2 Spanish learners’ speed of reaction. There are two ways to interpret these results. First, it may be that in relatively simple language tasks, such as reading sentences, general language background differences do not affect L2 learners’ behavior, thus no effects exist. Second, it may be that (our) measures of general L2 proficiency, L2 exposure and motivation are not fine-grained enough to convincingly reveal differences in L2 sentence comprehension. All in all, we have shown that despite the universality of actions of placement, cross linguistic differences may indeed affect how L1 speakers understand placement events if critical language is present. Moreover, how L2 speakers understand placement events may change following their L2. General L2 learner differences do not convincingly seem to affect speed of meaning processing or memory accuracy. Only specific measures of L2 proficiency revealed differences in meaning processing. Therefore, the following lines of research seem more promising in making theoretical advance. First, more research comparing L1 and L2 speakers’ TFS and its effect on memory is needed. Second, mental simulation theory needs to be further evaluated. In this quest, different conceptual domains (gender and size) and novel experimental tasks (such as the memory task employed in Paper 2) should be considered to determine whether and how effects of language on perception structurally occur.
Is the direction of the script able to cause spatial biases in the mental models that understanders build when listening to language? In order to answer this question, we manipulated experimentally the experience of reading a script with different directionalities. Spanish monolinguals read either normal (left-to-right), mirror reversed (right-to-left), rotated downward (up-down), or rotated upward (down-up) text, and then drew the contents of auditory descriptions such as "the square is between the cross and the triangle". The directionality of the drawings showed that a brief reading experience is enough to cause congruent and very specific spatial biases in mental model construction. However, there were limits to this flexibility: there was a strong overall preference to arrange the models along the horizontal dimension.
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2018
Recent research proposes that language bias and proficiency modulate crosslanguage activation in comprehension and production, but it is unclear how they operate and whether they interact. This study investigates whether stress differences between Spanish-English cognates (material, final-syllable stress in Spanish) affect how native-English second-language-Spanish bilinguals recognize Spanish words (materia "subject/matter, " second-syllable stress in Spanish). In a Spanish-English eye-tracking experiment (and parallel production task), participants heard/produced trisyllabic Spanish targets with second-syllable stress (materia) and saw four orthographic words, including the target and a Spanish-English cognate competitor. Cross-language activation was examined by manipulating the stress of the cognate in English. In comprehension, English cognates with the same stress as the Spanish target (materia vs material) were predicted to cause more cross-language interference than English cognates with a different stress (litera "bunk bed, " vs literal), but the reverse pattern was expected in production. Participants were assigned to a Spanish-bias condition (20% of English (filler) items), or an English-bias condition (65% of English (filler) items). Results indicate that English cognates with the same stress as the Spanish target interfered with the recognition of the Spanish target only in the English-bias condition (but facilitated its production), while increasing Spanish proficiency helped reduce this cross-linguistic interference.
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2023
Becoming literate has been argued to have a range of social, economic and psychological effects. Less examined is the extent to which repercussions of becoming literate may vary as a function of writing system variation. A salient way in which writing systems differ is in their directionality. Recent studies have claimed that directional biases in a variety of spatial domains are attributable to reading and writing direction. This claim is the focus of the present paper, which considers the scope and possible mechanisms underlying script directionality effects in spatial cognition, with particular attention to domains with real-world relevance. Three questions are addressed: (1) What are possible mediating and moderator variables relevant to script directionality effects in spatial cognition? (2) Does script directionality exert a fixed or a malleable effect? and (3) How can script directionality effects be appropriately tested? After discussing these questions in the context of specific studies, we highlight general methodological issues in this literature and provide recommendations for the design of future research.