研究熟练双语者的模态和非模态语言加工:来自模态转换范式的证据。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience Pub Date : 2024-10-08 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2024.1426093
Dirk Wentura, Elisabeth Shi, Juliane Degner
{"title":"研究熟练双语者的模态和非模态语言加工:来自模态转换范式的证据。","authors":"Dirk Wentura, Elisabeth Shi, Juliane Degner","doi":"10.3389/fnhum.2024.1426093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent discussions have emphasized the significance of embodied processing in language comprehension. Nevertheless, continuous debates persist regarding the relative contribution of modal (embodied) and amodal (abstract) processing of language. The current study investigated the contribution of modal processing in the first (L1) and second (L2) language, hypothesizing higher level of abstract amodal symbol processing in L2 than L1, since the correspondence of L1 and L2 (i.e., the symbol-to-symbol assignment) is in the foreground when learning L2. We employed the modality-switch paradigm (Pecher et al., 2003) in both German and French versions with proficient sequential German and French bilinguals (<i>N</i> = 79). Participants were presented with noun-adjective pairs (e.g., keys - jingling) in both languages and decided whether the adjective could be applied to the noun. This task repeatedly requires switching modality between trials, (e.g., from auditory [keys - jingling] to olfactory [soap - perfumed]), typically causing switch costs on response latency as compared to maintaining the modality. Contrary to the hypothesis, we observed modality switch effects (MSE) in both L1 and L2. This result suggests that embodied language processing occurs not only in the first language but also extends to the second language thus challenging the assumption that L2 processing predominantly involves abstract amodal symbol processing. Notably, however, significant L1 and L2 MSEs were found for French, whereas for German already the L1 effect was rather weak (though significant); the corresponding L2 effect was not significant. Thus, the results hinted at differences between languages regarding the relative role of modal and amodal processing.</p>","PeriodicalId":12536,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Human Neuroscience","volume":"18 ","pages":"1426093"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11493593/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining modal and amodal language processing in proficient bilinguals: evidence from the modality-switch paradigm.\",\"authors\":\"Dirk Wentura, Elisabeth Shi, Juliane Degner\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fnhum.2024.1426093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Recent discussions have emphasized the significance of embodied processing in language comprehension. Nevertheless, continuous debates persist regarding the relative contribution of modal (embodied) and amodal (abstract) processing of language. The current study investigated the contribution of modal processing in the first (L1) and second (L2) language, hypothesizing higher level of abstract amodal symbol processing in L2 than L1, since the correspondence of L1 and L2 (i.e., the symbol-to-symbol assignment) is in the foreground when learning L2. We employed the modality-switch paradigm (Pecher et al., 2003) in both German and French versions with proficient sequential German and French bilinguals (<i>N</i> = 79). Participants were presented with noun-adjective pairs (e.g., keys - jingling) in both languages and decided whether the adjective could be applied to the noun. This task repeatedly requires switching modality between trials, (e.g., from auditory [keys - jingling] to olfactory [soap - perfumed]), typically causing switch costs on response latency as compared to maintaining the modality. Contrary to the hypothesis, we observed modality switch effects (MSE) in both L1 and L2. This result suggests that embodied language processing occurs not only in the first language but also extends to the second language thus challenging the assumption that L2 processing predominantly involves abstract amodal symbol processing. Notably, however, significant L1 and L2 MSEs were found for French, whereas for German already the L1 effect was rather weak (though significant); the corresponding L2 effect was not significant. Thus, the results hinted at differences between languages regarding the relative role of modal and amodal processing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12536,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Human Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"1426093\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11493593/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Human Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1426093\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Human Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1426093","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近的讨论强调了体现加工在语言理解中的重要性。然而,关于语言的模态(体现)和模态(抽象)加工的相对贡献的争论仍在继续。本研究调查了第一语言(L1)和第二语言(L2)中模态加工的贡献,假设 L2 比 L1 的抽象模态符号加工水平更高,因为在学习 L2 时,L1 和 L2 的对应关系(即符号到符号的分配)是最重要的。我们采用了德语和法语版本的模态转换范式(Pecher 等人,2003 年),对象是精通顺序德语和法语的双语者(79 人)。被试被呈现出两种语言的名词-形容词对(如钥匙-叮叮当当),并决定形容词是否可以用于名词。这项任务反复要求在试验之间切换模式(例如,从听觉[钥匙-叮当作响]切换到嗅觉[肥皂-香水味]),与保持模式相比,这通常会对反应潜伏期造成切换成本。与假设相反,我们在 L1 和 L2 中都观察到了模式转换效应(MSE)。这一结果表明,体现性语言加工不仅发生在第一语言中,而且还延伸到了第二语言中,从而对第二语言加工主要涉及抽象模态符号加工的假设提出了质疑。然而,值得注意的是,法语的 L1 和 L2 MSE 都很显著,而德语的 L1 效应已经很弱(尽管很显著);相应的 L2 效应并不显著。因此,结果暗示了不同语言在模态和调式处理的相对作用方面存在差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Examining modal and amodal language processing in proficient bilinguals: evidence from the modality-switch paradigm.

Recent discussions have emphasized the significance of embodied processing in language comprehension. Nevertheless, continuous debates persist regarding the relative contribution of modal (embodied) and amodal (abstract) processing of language. The current study investigated the contribution of modal processing in the first (L1) and second (L2) language, hypothesizing higher level of abstract amodal symbol processing in L2 than L1, since the correspondence of L1 and L2 (i.e., the symbol-to-symbol assignment) is in the foreground when learning L2. We employed the modality-switch paradigm (Pecher et al., 2003) in both German and French versions with proficient sequential German and French bilinguals (N = 79). Participants were presented with noun-adjective pairs (e.g., keys - jingling) in both languages and decided whether the adjective could be applied to the noun. This task repeatedly requires switching modality between trials, (e.g., from auditory [keys - jingling] to olfactory [soap - perfumed]), typically causing switch costs on response latency as compared to maintaining the modality. Contrary to the hypothesis, we observed modality switch effects (MSE) in both L1 and L2. This result suggests that embodied language processing occurs not only in the first language but also extends to the second language thus challenging the assumption that L2 processing predominantly involves abstract amodal symbol processing. Notably, however, significant L1 and L2 MSEs were found for French, whereas for German already the L1 effect was rather weak (though significant); the corresponding L2 effect was not significant. Thus, the results hinted at differences between languages regarding the relative role of modal and amodal processing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
6.90%
发文量
830
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Human Neuroscience is a first-tier electronic journal devoted to understanding the brain mechanisms supporting cognitive and social behavior in humans, and how these mechanisms might be altered in disease states. The last 25 years have seen an explosive growth in both the methods and the theoretical constructs available to study the human brain. Advances in electrophysiological, neuroimaging, neuropsychological, psychophysical, neuropharmacological and computational approaches have provided key insights into the mechanisms of a broad range of human behaviors in both health and disease. Work in human neuroscience ranges from the cognitive domain, including areas such as memory, attention, language and perception to the social domain, with this last subject addressing topics, such as interpersonal interactions, social discourse and emotional regulation. How these processes unfold during development, mature in adulthood and often decline in aging, and how they are altered in a host of developmental, neurological and psychiatric disorders, has become increasingly amenable to human neuroscience research approaches. Work in human neuroscience has influenced many areas of inquiry ranging from social and cognitive psychology to economics, law and public policy. Accordingly, our journal will provide a forum for human research spanning all areas of human cognitive, social, developmental and translational neuroscience using any research approach.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信