{"title":"为 L3 中的非同义词提供便利","authors":"Agnieszka Lijewska, Robertus de Louw","doi":"10.1075/lab.21016.lij","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In the present study we aimed to obtain with trilinguals the cognate inhibitory effects reported earlier for\n bilingual speakers who performed L2 lexical decision tasks (LDTs) with non-identical cognates and controls. To that end,\n Polish–English–Dutch trilinguals performed two LDTs in their L3. In Experiment 1, the stimuli included two types of double\n non-identical cognates Polish–Dutch (e.g., SMAK–SMAAK), and English–Dutch (e.g., BUTTER–BOTER)\n as well as matched non-cognate Dutch controls (e.g., JASJE). In Experiment 2, we tested triple non-identical\n cognates shared across Polish, English and Dutch (e.g., GRUPA–GROUP–GROEP) and Dutch controls (e.g.,\n BROEK). We failed to find the bilingual inhibitory effects. In contrast, significant facilitation for\n English–Dutch and for Polish–English–Dutch cognates was found, even though no identical cognates were used. However, Polish–Dutch\n cognates yielded null results. The current findings emphasize the influence of the levels of form similarity on the observed\n cognate effects and point to the important role of stimulus list composition in cognate processing.","PeriodicalId":48664,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Approaches To Bilingualism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facilitation for non-identical cognates in L3\",\"authors\":\"Agnieszka Lijewska, Robertus de Louw\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/lab.21016.lij\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In the present study we aimed to obtain with trilinguals the cognate inhibitory effects reported earlier for\\n bilingual speakers who performed L2 lexical decision tasks (LDTs) with non-identical cognates and controls. To that end,\\n Polish–English–Dutch trilinguals performed two LDTs in their L3. In Experiment 1, the stimuli included two types of double\\n non-identical cognates Polish–Dutch (e.g., SMAK–SMAAK), and English–Dutch (e.g., BUTTER–BOTER)\\n as well as matched non-cognate Dutch controls (e.g., JASJE). In Experiment 2, we tested triple non-identical\\n cognates shared across Polish, English and Dutch (e.g., GRUPA–GROUP–GROEP) and Dutch controls (e.g.,\\n BROEK). We failed to find the bilingual inhibitory effects. In contrast, significant facilitation for\\n English–Dutch and for Polish–English–Dutch cognates was found, even though no identical cognates were used. However, Polish–Dutch\\n cognates yielded null results. The current findings emphasize the influence of the levels of form similarity on the observed\\n cognate effects and point to the important role of stimulus list composition in cognate processing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistic Approaches To Bilingualism\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistic Approaches To Bilingualism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.21016.lij\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic Approaches To Bilingualism","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.21016.lij","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
In the present study we aimed to obtain with trilinguals the cognate inhibitory effects reported earlier for
bilingual speakers who performed L2 lexical decision tasks (LDTs) with non-identical cognates and controls. To that end,
Polish–English–Dutch trilinguals performed two LDTs in their L3. In Experiment 1, the stimuli included two types of double
non-identical cognates Polish–Dutch (e.g., SMAK–SMAAK), and English–Dutch (e.g., BUTTER–BOTER)
as well as matched non-cognate Dutch controls (e.g., JASJE). In Experiment 2, we tested triple non-identical
cognates shared across Polish, English and Dutch (e.g., GRUPA–GROUP–GROEP) and Dutch controls (e.g.,
BROEK). We failed to find the bilingual inhibitory effects. In contrast, significant facilitation for
English–Dutch and for Polish–English–Dutch cognates was found, even though no identical cognates were used. However, Polish–Dutch
cognates yielded null results. The current findings emphasize the influence of the levels of form similarity on the observed
cognate effects and point to the important role of stimulus list composition in cognate processing.
期刊介绍:
LAB provides an outlet for cutting-edge, contemporary studies on bilingualism. LAB assumes a broad definition of bilingualism, including: adult L2 acquisition, simultaneous child bilingualism, child L2 acquisition, adult heritage speaker competence, L1 attrition in L2/Ln environments, and adult L3/Ln acquisition. LAB solicits high quality articles of original research assuming any cognitive science approach to understanding the mental representation of bilingual language competence and performance, including cognitive linguistics, emergentism/connectionism, generative theories, psycholinguistic and processing accounts, and covering typical and atypical populations.