The Impact of Color Cues on Word Segmentation by L2 Chinese Readers: Evidence from Eye Movements.

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Lin Li, Yaning Ji, Jingxin Wang, Kevin B Paterson
{"title":"The Impact of Color Cues on Word Segmentation by L2 Chinese Readers: Evidence from Eye Movements.","authors":"Lin Li, Yaning Ji, Jingxin Wang, Kevin B Paterson","doi":"10.3390/bs15070904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Chinese lacks explicit word boundary markers, creating frequent temporary segmental ambiguities where character sequences permit multiple plausible lexical analyses. Skilled native (L1) Chinese readers resolve these ambiguities efficiently. However, mechanisms underlying word segmentation in second language (L2) Chinese reading remain poorly understood. Our study investigated: (1) whether L2 readers experience greater difficulty processing temporary segmental ambiguities compared to L1 readers, and (2) whether visual boundary cues can facilitate ambiguity resolution in L2 reading. We measured the eye movements of 102 skilled L1 and 60 high-proficiency L2 readers for sentences containing temporarily ambiguous three-character incremental words (e.g., \"\" [musical]), where the initial two characters (\"\" [music]) also form a valid word. Sentences were presented using either neutral mono-color displays providing no segmentation cues, or color-coded displays marking word boundaries. The color-coded displays employed either uniform coloring to promote resolution of the segmental ambiguity or contrasting colors for the two-character embedded word versus the final character to induce a segmental misanalysis. The L2 group read more slowly than the L1 group, employing a cautious character-by-character reading strategy. Both groups nevertheless appeared to process the segmental ambiguity effectively, suggesting shared segmentation strategies. The L1 readers showed little sensitivity to visual boundary cues, with little evidence that this influenced their ambiguity processing. By comparison, L2 readers showed greater sensitivity to these cues, with some indication that they affected ambiguity processing. The overall sentence-level effects of color coding word boundaries were nevertheless modest for both groups, suggesting little influence of visual boundary cues on overall reading fluency for either L1 or L2 readers.</p>","PeriodicalId":8742,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences","volume":"15 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12292455/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15070904","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Chinese lacks explicit word boundary markers, creating frequent temporary segmental ambiguities where character sequences permit multiple plausible lexical analyses. Skilled native (L1) Chinese readers resolve these ambiguities efficiently. However, mechanisms underlying word segmentation in second language (L2) Chinese reading remain poorly understood. Our study investigated: (1) whether L2 readers experience greater difficulty processing temporary segmental ambiguities compared to L1 readers, and (2) whether visual boundary cues can facilitate ambiguity resolution in L2 reading. We measured the eye movements of 102 skilled L1 and 60 high-proficiency L2 readers for sentences containing temporarily ambiguous three-character incremental words (e.g., "" [musical]), where the initial two characters ("" [music]) also form a valid word. Sentences were presented using either neutral mono-color displays providing no segmentation cues, or color-coded displays marking word boundaries. The color-coded displays employed either uniform coloring to promote resolution of the segmental ambiguity or contrasting colors for the two-character embedded word versus the final character to induce a segmental misanalysis. The L2 group read more slowly than the L1 group, employing a cautious character-by-character reading strategy. Both groups nevertheless appeared to process the segmental ambiguity effectively, suggesting shared segmentation strategies. The L1 readers showed little sensitivity to visual boundary cues, with little evidence that this influenced their ambiguity processing. By comparison, L2 readers showed greater sensitivity to these cues, with some indication that they affected ambiguity processing. The overall sentence-level effects of color coding word boundaries were nevertheless modest for both groups, suggesting little influence of visual boundary cues on overall reading fluency for either L1 or L2 readers.

颜色线索对二语汉语读者分词的影响:来自眼动的证据。
中文缺乏明确的词边界标记,在字符序列允许多种似是而非的词法分析的情况下,产生了频繁的临时分词歧义。熟练的母语(L1)中文读者能有效地解决这些歧义。然而,对二语汉语阅读中的分词机制了解甚少。我们的研究调查了:(1)与母语读者相比,二语读者在处理暂时的歧义时是否遇到了更大的困难;(2)视觉边界线索是否有助于二语阅读中歧义的解决。我们测量了102名熟练的母语读者和60名熟练的第二语言读者在阅读含有暂时模糊的三个字符增量词(例如,“”[musical])的句子时的眼球运动,其中开头的两个字符(“”[music])也构成一个有效词。句子要么使用中性的单色显示,不提供分词线索,要么使用标记单词边界的彩色编码显示。颜色编码显示要么采用统一的颜色来促进分词歧义的解决,要么采用双字符嵌入词与最终字符的对比色来诱导分词错误分析。第二语言组的阅读速度比第一语言组慢,他们采用谨慎的逐字阅读策略。然而,两组似乎都有效地处理了分词歧义,这表明有共同的分词策略。L1阅读者对视觉边界线索的敏感度较低,几乎没有证据表明这影响了他们的歧义处理。相比之下,二语读者对这些线索表现出更大的敏感性,有迹象表明它们影响了歧义处理。然而,在两组中,颜色编码词边界的整体句子水平效应都不大,这表明视觉边界线索对第一语言或第二语言读者的整体阅读流畅性影响不大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Behavioral Sciences
Behavioral Sciences Social Sciences-Development
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
429
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信