Introducing
Prezi AI.
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Loading…
Transcript
Cognitive restructuring in the multilingual
mind: language-specific effects on processing
efficiency of caused motion events in
Cantonese–English–Japanese speakers
By: Wang & Wei
Talmy’s typological distinctions
S-languages:
Satellite-framed languages
V-languages
Verb-framed languages
Background
- Path of motion: where is it going
(into, out of)
- Cause: means of direction
(take, carry)
- Manner of cause: how did one move it (push, pull)
- Manner of the object: how did the object move (roll, slide)
English & German
Japanese, Greek & French
E-languages:
Equipollent-framed languages
Cantonese
Linguistic Elements
- S-languages: Manner of cause is encoded with verb & the path is encoded outside the verb. Manner can be conflated w/ motion
The man pushed a box into a cave
- V-languages: Path is encoded with the verb. Motion is conflated w/ path, leaving manner unexpressed leaving interpretation to default
He moved up the goods
- E-language: manner & path are conflated and encoded w/ the verb; incorporated both V & S-languages
He pulled a car up a hill
Linguistic Elements
TASK 1 LINGUISTIC ENCODING
Task 1
- 48 animated cartoons w/ 36 test items & 12 control items.
- Each animation was shown for 6 seconds using four different types of manners of cause (pull, push, drag, and kick) & four different types of path (into, out of, across, and along)
- They were asked to watch the clip then describe what happened
- In this study participants were either monolingual, bilingual, or multilingual
- Monolinguals narrated in L1 (their only language), Bilinguals in English (L2), & multilinguals in Japanese (L3)
TASK 2
NON-LINGUISTIC CATEGORIZATION
Task 2
- 18 animated videos, 12 test rials, & 6 sets of filler items.
- Filler items were used as a distractor and to mask the contrast of interest.
- This task contained a target video then two other videos with manner and path as the contrast on interest.
- Target video was played by itself followed by the two alternatives playing simultaneously, side by side.
- Participants were asked to decide which video was more similar to the target video. Indications were produced by pushing either A or L key on a keyboard. They were asked to make a decision as quick as possible.
Example
A boy pulled a chair out of the room
Example
A boy pulled a chair into the room
A boy pushed a chair out of the room
(into, across, etc)
(Pull, drag, kick, push)
Task 1 - Graph
- English monolinguals & bilinguals were equally likely to encode manner in the verb form & more frequently than Cantonese monolinguals
- English and bilinguals didn't encode path in the main verb & multilinguals used more path verbs
Manner verbs:
Positively correlated with English use
Negatively correlated with use of Japanese
Task 2 - Graph
Task 1 Discussion
- English (S-languages) expressed manner of cause (push, pull) more frequently than Cantonese (E-languages)
- Japanese (V-languages) displayed the lowest frequency of manner encoding - This is because the cause of motion is conflated with path & can easily be added or dropped
- There's no syntactic "slot" for encoding the manner of cause
- Japanese have a limited set of lexical devices & tend to encode a more general expression (e.g. took)
Discussion
Monolinguals
All three monolingual groups experienced a ceiling effect - indicating that path is the central element in motion events
Monolinguals
English monolinguals:
- Encoded manner w/ the main verb
- Reacted quicker in making manner-match vs. path-match choices
- Had the fastest reaction time (compared to Japanese monos, all multilinguals & bilinguals) for those manner-match choices
Japanese monolinguals:
- Reacted quicker in path-match compared to manner-match
- Had the quickest RT in path-match compared to all other groups
Cantonese monolinguals:
- Cantonese speakers had equal efficiency in path & manner-match choices
- Cantonese speakers encoded both manner and path in a verb-compound
English Bilinguals
Bilinguals
- Displayed the same patterns as English monolinguals in both the manner section & semantic distribution
- Bilinguals reacted to manner-match quicker than path-match
Japanese Multilinguals
Multilingual
- showed a tendency to reacted quicker to path-match rather than manner-match irrespective of the categorization preference
- The more of a language participants used, the more patterns for that language were present
- The amount of L1 (Cantonese) use wasn't a core predictor
- L2 & L3, however, did serve as a main predictor for the amount of cognitive reconstruction that was displayed
Choose a template
Presentations from around the world
Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi