Word Frequency Effects and Plurality in L2 Word Recognition—A Preliminary Study—/CELES2015
Tamura, Y., & Nishimura, Y. (2015). Word frequency effects and plurality in L2 word recognition: A preliminary study. Paper presented at the 45th Annual Conference of the Chubu English Language Education Society (CELES 2015). Wakayama, Japan.
stronger the connection between concepts and L2 becomes (e.g., Kawakami, 1994) • the more proﬁciency develops, the less interference effects of L1 occur (e.g., Sunderman & Kroll, 2006) • conceptual links and processing skills gradually develop (e.g., Yamashita, 2007) Background 13 Bilingual Mental Lexicon
L2 words activate conceptual links (e.g., Habuchi, 2005) • Concreteness • concrete and high frequency words processed through concept mediation (e.g., Nakagawa, 2009) Background 14 Bilingual Mental Lexicon
“the numerosity of the subject’s referent in the speaker’s mental model” (Humphreys & Bock, 2005) • e.g., scissors, [bacon and eggs] • grammatical number • linguistically expressed number • e.g., plural marker -s in English Background 17 Plurality
• grammatical information <-this should also be stored with L2 words and used in processing • As a preliminary study • this study focused on plurality (number information) Background 19 Motivation of the study
strong link to plurality • L2 learners’ use of conceptual plurality • Plural dominant-plurals might be processed through conceptual link? • This advantage might not be found through L1 route <- Japanese doesn’t mark number morphologically. Background 20 Hypothesis
some experience in staying in English-speaking countries (Min = 2 weeks, Max = 54 months) Table 1. Background Information of the Participants The Present Study 24 Participants Age TOEIC Score N M SD M SD Participants 32 24.77 5.34 824.22 113.12
the three groups Table 2. Mean Frequency and SD in Parentheses The Present Study 27 Stimuli n singular plural base sig-domminant 12 25.55 (15.26) 10.38 (6.82) 35.93 (21.52) pl-dominant 12 9.23 (5.71) 21.84 (16.52) 31.06 (21.63) control 12 18.50 (9.89) 18.08 (10.32) 36.58 (19.45) Note. frequency is based on per million
• Task: • Picture naming in English and Japanese • Results: • All the test pictures correctly named as target L2 and L1 • All the ﬁller pictures elicited non-target words -> NO responses could work The Present Study 29 Stimuli
/ picture • 36 test items (12*3) presented either in singular or plural form • 18 test items (6*3) per task • Carefully counterbalanced • 18 test items -> always YES response • 36 ﬁller items -> YES: 18 items, NO: 18 items The Present Study 32 Experiment
L1, L1 -> Pic • After the two tasks • Familiarity questionnaire (instructions are in Japanese) • 5-point Likert scale • 36 items (singular or plural form) which the participants did not see in the matching tasks • “How much have you seen or heard the words?” (1: I’ve never seen – 5: I’ve often seen ) The Present Study 33 Experiment
than singular-dominant plurals… • if singular-dominant singulars are processed faster than plural dominant singulars… -> frequency effects • However, this was not the case in L1 matching condition. • Both plurals were processed through morphological decomposition Discussion 60 L1 Matching
(L1) • No number information needed to process • Always morphological decomposition irrespective of frequency • Picture matching • L2 words -> conceptual information (Picture) • Strong connection between plural-dominant plurals and plurality may result in making faster processing route to concepts Discussion 66 Assymetrical Frequency Effects?
full-form storage? • L1-matching condition • task effects (L2 -> L1) led the learners to process through morphological decomposition • Singular-dominant singulars • Picture-matching condition • no frequency advantage -> enough time for singular-dominant plurals to be decomposed? Discussion 67 Assymetrical Frequency Effects?
frequency and frequency dominance • Only concretes items can be used • Intervals between the recognition of L2 and L1 or Picture • How can we handle plural forms of abstract nouns? • What if the picture would have been multilple objects? Discussion 69 Limitations
• full-form processing • Singulars with high frequency • no ﬁrm evidence of frequency effects • singular is always easy to process irrespective of frequency? • Future research • different type of nouns • not only reception but production 71 Frequency and Plurality Conclusion
morphological complexity of simplex nouns. Linguistics, 35, 861–877. doi:10.1515/ling.19188.8.131.521 Baayen, R., Levelt, W., Schreuder, R., & Ernestus, M. (2007). Paradigmatic structure in speech production. Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 43, 1–29. Retrieved from http:// www.ingentaconnect.com/content/cls/pcls/2007/00000043/00000001/art00001 Barker, J., & Nicol, J. (2000). Word frequency effects on the processing of subject-verb number agreement. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 99–106. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ 10723714 Beyersmann, E., Dutton, E. M., Amer, S., Schiller, N. O., & Biedermann, B. (2015). The production of singular- and plural-dominant nouns in Dutch. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30, 867–876. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1027236 Biedermann, B., Beyersmann, E., Mason, C., & Nickels, L. (2013). Does plural dominance play a role in spoken picture naming? A comparison of unimpaired and impaired speakers. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 26, 712– 736. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2013.05.001 Bock, K., & Miller, C. A. (1991). Broken agreement. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 45–93. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(91)90003-7 Eberhard, K. M. (1999). The Accessibility of Conceptual Number to the Processes of Subject–Verb Agreement in English. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 560–578. doi:10.1006/jmla.1999.2662 Habuchi, Y. (2005). Daini gengo gakusyu-sya no tango syori ni oyobosu goi to gainen no rengo-kyodo no eikyo [The effects of associative strength between lexical and conceptual representations on word processing in second language learners]. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 76,1–9. Humphreys, K. R., & Bock, K. (2005). Notional number agreement in English. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 689–95. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16447383 References 72
no eikyo [The effect of proﬁciency in a second language on lexical-conceptual representation]. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 64, 426–433. Kroll, J. F., & De Groot, A. M. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. Oxford University Press. Kusanagi, K., Tamura, Y., & Fukuta, J. (2015). The notional number attraction in English as a foreign language: A self-paced reading study. Journal of the Japan Society for Speech Sciences, 16, 77–96. Nakagawa, C. (2009). Examination of the developmental hypothesis on the revised hierarchical model. Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 20, 121–130. New, B., Brysbaert, M., Segui, J., Ferrand, L., & Rastle, K. (2004). The processing of singular and plural nouns in French and English. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 568–585. Sereno, J. A., & Jongman, A. (1997). Processing of English inﬂectional morphology. Memory & Cognition, 25, 425– 437. doi:10.3758/BF03201119 Stemberger, J. P., & MacWhinney, B. (1986). Frequency and the lexical storage of regularly inﬂected forms. Memory & Cognition, 14, 17–26. doi:10.3758/BF03209225 Taft, M. (2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A, Human Experimental Psychology, 57, 745–765. Vigliocco, G., Butterworth, B., & Semenza, C. (1995). Constructing Subject-verb agreement in speech: The role of semantic and morphological factors. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 186–215. doi:10.1006/jmla. 1995.1009 Vigliocco, G., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Kolk, H. H. J. (1996). One or More Labels on the Bottles ? Notional Concord in Dutch and French. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 407–442. Yamashita, J. (2007). Investigating asymmetry in EFL Learners’ mental lexicon: Connections between lexical and Conceptual representations in Ll and L2. JACET Journal, 45, 63–79. References 73
singular−dominant singular form plural form L1 Pic 0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000 1500 plural−dominant singular form plural form L1 Pic 0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000 1500 control singular form plural form L1 Pic Mean Raw RT Plot (N = 32)