W ORD R ECOGNITION
4.3 Visual Lexical Decision
4.3.1 Translation Priming
4.3.1.2 Unmasked Translation Priming from L1−L2 (Experiment 1A)
Experiment 1A of the present study consisted of unmasked translation priming paradigm in which Bodo−Assamese bilinguals were presented with translation word pairs in the L1−L2 direction.
4.3.1.2.1 Method
Participants.
A total of fifty-one participants took part in this and the rest of the translation priming experiments. Participants ranged in age from 23 to 40 years (mean age = 33.7 years, SD = 4.6). All of the bilinguals who were included in this and the subsequent experiments were native speakers of Bodo (L1) and spoke Assamese as a second language (L2). Each participant completed a languagebackground questionnaire in which they rated their abilities in speaking, reading, writing and comprehension in both languages. They also rated their age of acquisition and daily usage in both languages. Table 4.2 shows the language background data reported for three groups of bilinguals.
Table 4.2 Self-report Ratings in Bodo and Assamese for All Three Bilingual Groups in Experiment 1A
Bodo (L1) Assamese (L2)
Early (n = 21 )
Late High (n = 14 )
Late low (n = 16 )
Early (n = 21)
Late High (n = 14)
Late Low (n = 16)
Age of acquisition (years) 2.5 2 2 3.2 8.5 9
Mean daily usage (%) 50.6 % 49.2 % 49.8 % 35.8 % 29.1% 18%
Self-ratings (7 point scale)
Speaking 6.3
(1.0)
7 (0)
6.5 (0.7)
6.7 (0.8)
6.5 (0.7)
4 (0)
Reading 6.5
(0.8)
7 (0)
7 (0)
6.5 (0.8)
6.3 (0.7)
4.5 (0.7)
Writing 6.3
(0.8)
7 (0)
6.5 (0.7)
5.3 (2.6)
4.1 (0.7)
3 (0)
Comprehension 5.5
(1.4)
7 (0)
5.5 (2.1)
5.5 (2.6)
4.5 (1.4)
1 (0)
The results of the self-report ratings show that the Bodo ratings of the three groups of bilinguals on all four proficiency measures are similar. However, the Assamese ratings on all four proficiency measures are higher for the high proficient groups than for the low proficient group. In order to further assess the proficiency levels of the bilinguals, all participants took part in an objective naming test. Table 4.3 provides the mean scores on the objective naming test in both Bodo and Assamese.
Table 4.3 Mean Scores on the Objective Naming Test in Bodo and Assamese for All Three Bilingual Groups in Experiment 1A
Bilingual Group Bodo Assamese
Early High Proficient 53.2 48.2
Late High Proficient 54.1 47.3
Late Low Proficient 52.2 38.3
The results of the Objective Naming Test show that the average L1 score for all three bilingual groups is similar. In case of L2, the average score for the Late High Proficient group matches the average score for the Early High Proficient group (47.3 vs. 48.2 respectively) and the scores do not yield a significant difference [t(48) = 1.16, p = .823]. This indicates that the proficiency level of the two groups is similar.
However, the average score of the Late High Proficient group is noticeably higher than the average score of the Late Low Proficient group (47.3 vs. 38.3) and the scores yield a significant difference [t(48) = 10.66, p = .000].
Stimuli.
Eighty Bodo words were used as primes and eighty Assamese words were used as targets. The critical stimuli consisted of forty cognate translation equivalents and forty non-cognate translation equivalents. Word length (i.e., the number of letters) for the Assamese targets was matched for the cognate and non-cognate priming conditions.The translation equivalents used in this and the other translation priming experiments were originally selected in a norming experiment by ten participants (who did not take part in this experiment) as the most common translations in the dialect of the bilinguals (see Appendix E (i) and Appendix G for full description of material). In addition to word targets, eighty pronounceable nonword targets were created manually by changing one letter in the respective Assamese targets. Table 4.4 provides an example of a stimulus set.
Table 4.4 Examples of a Stimulus Set Used in Experiment 1A
Cognate Non-cognate
Prime Type Word Nonword Word Nonword
Translation !फथा−,#
‘pancake’
!फथा−# उदै−0,'
‘stomach−stomach’
उदै−0'
Control सानजा−,#
‘east−pancake’
सानजा−# राव−0,'
‘language−stomach’
राव−0'
Note. !फथा [phitha]; ,# [pitha]; सानजा [sanza]; # [bitha]; उदै [udwi]; 0,' [pet]; राव [rau]; 0' [ghet]
Procedure.
Participants were tested individually in a quiet room. Verbal and written instructions about the task were given in Assamese before the experiment proper. Each trial began with the presentation of a fixation “+” (plus sign) for 500 ms in the center of the screen. This was followed by a prime word in Bodo which appeared for 100 ms and was then immediately replaced by an Assamese target word (or nonword). The target remained on the screen until the participants responded or for a maximum of 2,000 ms (see Figure 4.2). Participants were instructed to press the “m” key on the keyboard with their right index finger if the target letter string was a real word and the “z” key with their left index finger if a nonword appeared. They were told to respond as quickly and as accurately as possible. There were fifteen practice trials before the main trial.Figure 4.1 A schematic illustration of the procedure adopted for Experiment 1A.
This illustration depicts the sequence of events for each trial. Words ना [na] and [mas] ‘fish’ represent a prime-target pair that are translation equivalents.
4.3.1.2.2 Results
A mixed-effects analysis was conducted on the reaction time data and error data separately. The analysis conducted on the reaction time data did not reveal a main
ना
+
Fixation 500 ms
Prime 100 ms
Target 2,000 ms
RT
effect of Prime Type [F(1,155) = 1.953, p = .164]. Translation (879 ms) and control (860) word pairs were responded similarly. The main effect of Cognate Status also did not approach significance [F(1,152) = 1.042, p = .309]. Cognate words (877 ms) and non-cognate words (863 ms) had similar reaction times. The mean reaction times and percentage of error for each of the prime-target condition are presented in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5 Mean RTs (ms) and Percentage of Errors for Cognate and Non-Cognate Targets Primed by Translation Equivalents and by Unrelated Control Primes in Experiment 1A
Cognate Status
Overall Cognate Non-cognate
Prime Type RT (Error %) RT (Error %) RT (Error %) Cognate effect
Translation 876 (5.5) 882 (3.9) 876 (6.8) −6
Control 860 (17.2) 871 (18.1) 849 (16.4) −22
Priming −16 −11 −27
There was a significant interaction between Prime Type and Bilingual Group [F(2,6860) = 54.811, p = .000]. This finding suggests that Early High Proficient and Late High Proficient bilinguals were significantly faster to respond to translation word pairs than to control ones when the target words were cognates. Another interesting finding is the significant interaction between Cognate Status and Bilingual Group [F(2,6844) = 8.362, p = .000], suggesting that a cognate facilitation effect of 34 ms was obtained only for the Late High Proficient bilinguals. Finally, a significant three-way interaction was also observed [F(2,6844) = 9.091, p = .000].
Planned comparisons performed on the individual priming effects for the three groups of bilinguals revealed significant magnitudes of facilitation for only high proficient bilinguals. Significant translation priming effects of 31 ms and 46 ms were obtained in the cognate condition for Early High Proficient and Late High Proficient bilinguals respectively, indicating a cognate priming advantage. The mean reaction times and percentage of errors as a function of Prime Type, Cognate Status, and Bilingual Group are presented in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6 Mean RTs (ms) and Percentage of Errors for Cognate and Non-Cognate Targets Primed by Translation Equivalents and by Unrelated Control Primes for All Three Bilingual Groups in Experiment 1A
Cognate Status/Bilingual Group
Cognate Non-cognate
Early Late high Late low Early Late high Late low Prime Type RT
(Error %)
RT (Error %)
RT (Error %)
RT (Error %)
RT (Error %)
RT (Error %) Translation 871
(1.3)
844 (9.3)
932 (4)
864 (3.6)
878 (13.1)
887 (7.2)
Control 902
(3.3)
890 (10.5)
822 (5.6)
860 (1.2)
874 (10.7)
815 (5.3)
Priming 31 46 −110 −4 −4 −72
Results of the error data revealed a significant main effect of Prime Type [F(1,155)
= 6.523, p = .001]. Targets were responded to more accurately when they were primed by translation primes (5.5%) as compared to when they were primed by unrelated controls (17.2%). The error data did not reveal a main effect of Cognate Status [F< 1]. However, the main effect of Bilingual Group approached significance in the error analysis [F(2,6860) = 5.326, p = .005]. Fewer errors were observed for the Early High Proficient bilinguals and greater errors were observed for the Late High Proficient bilinguals. Lastly, comparisons of the nonword data were conducted. Analyses of the mean reaction times to nonwords showed that the participants took significantly longer to respond to nonwords (939 ms) than to words (882 ms).
4.3.1.2.3 Discussion
The data from Experiment 1A showed clear priming for cognate translations and no priming for non-cognates when measured against unrelated controls. Robust
translation priming effects were observed in case of Early High Proficient and Late High Proficient Bodo−Assamese bilinguals only in the cognate condition which indicates the use of different processing mechanisms by High and Low Proficient bilinguals. This confirms to the predictions of the RHM. Moreover, significantly shorter RTs were observed in the cognate condition than in the non-cognate condition which strongly indicates the processing advantage of cognates over non- cognates.