This study used medium-term auditory repetition priming to investigate word-recognition processes. Highly fluent Catalan-Spanish bilinguals whose first language was either Catalan or Spanish were tested in a lexical decision task involving Catalan words and nonwords. Spanish-dominant individuals, but not Catalan-dominant individuals, exhibited repetition priming for minimal pairs differing in only one feature that is nondistinctive in Spanish (e.g., /netə/ vs. /n∊tə/), thereby indicating that they processed these words as homophones. This finding provides direct evidence both that word recognition uses a language-specific phonological representation and that lexical entries are stored in the mental lexicon as abstract forms.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BestC.T.
(1995).
A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In
StrangeW. (Ed.),
Speech perception and linguistic experience (pp. 171–206).
Baltimore: York Press.
2.
BoschL.CostaA.Sebastián-GallésN.
(1994, April). La estructura interna de las categorías fonéticas: Percepción de vocales e identificación de prototipos en catalán y español. Paper presented at the XII Congreso Nacional Asociación Española de Lingüística Aplicada: Nuevos Horizontes de la Lingüística, Barcelona, Spain.
3.
BoschL.CostaA.Sebastián-GallésN.
(2000).
First and second language vowel perception in early bilinguals.
European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,
12, 189–221.
4.
FlegeJ.E.
(1995).
Second language speech learning: Theory, findings and problems. In
StrangeW. (Ed.),
Speech perception and linguistic experience (pp. 233–272).
Baltimore: York Press.
5.
FlegeJ.E.Yeni-KomshianG.H.LiuS.
(1999).
Age constraints on second-language acquisition.
Journal of Memory and Language,
41, 78–104.
6.
GoldingerS.D.
(1992).
Words and voices: Implicit and explicit memory for spoken words. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
7.
GoldingerS.D.
(1996).
Words and voices: Episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
22, 1166–1183.
8.
GotoH.
(1971).
Auditory perception by normal Japanese adults of the sounds “l” and “r.”Neuropsychologia,
9, 317–323.
9.
JusczykP.W.
(1993).
From general to language-specific capacities: The WRAPSA Model of how speech perception develops.
Journal of Phonetics,
21, 3–28.
10.
KlattD.H.
(1979).
Speech perception: A model of acoustic-phonetic analysis and lexical access.
Journal of Phonetics,
7, 279–312.
11.
KlattD.H.
(1981).
Lexical representations for speech production and perception. In
MyersT.LaverJ.AndersonJ. (Eds.),
The cognitive representation of speech (pp. 11–31).
Amsterdam: North-Holland.
12.
LivelyS.E.PisoniD.B.YamadaR.A.TohkuraY.YamadaT.
(1994).
Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: III. Long-term retention of new phonetic categories.
Journal of the Acoustic Society of America,
96, 2076–2087.
13.
MackM.
(1989).
Consonant and vowel perception and production: Early English-French bilinguals and English monolinguals.
Perception & Psychophysics,
46, 189–200.
14.
MannV.A.
(1986).
Distinguishing universal and language-dependent levels of speech perception: Evidence from Japanese listeners' perception of English [l] and [r].
Cognition,
24, 169–196.
15.
MayberryR.EichenE.
(1991).
The long-lasting advantage of learning sign language in childhood: Another look at the critical period for language acquisition.
Journal of Memory and Language,
30, 486–512.
16.
McClellandJ.L.ElmanJ.L.
(1986).
The TRACE models of speech perception.
Cognitive Psychology,
18, 1–86.
17.
McClellandJ.L.ThomasA.McCandlissB.D.FiezJ.A.
(1999).
Understanding failures of learning: Hebbian learning, competition for representational space, and some preliminary experimental data. In
ReggiaJ.RuppinE.GlanzmanD. (Eds.),
Disorders of brain, behavior, and cognition: The neurocomputational perspective (Progress in Brain Research, Vol.
121, pp. 75–80).
Oxford, England: Elsevier.
18.
MiyawakiK.StrangeW.VerbruggeR.R.LibermanA.M.JenkinsJ.J.FujimuraO.
(1975).
An effect of linguistic experience: The discrimination of [r] and [l] by native speakers of Japanese and English.
Perception & Psychophysics,
18, 331–340.
19.
NorrisD.
(1994).
Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition.
Cognition,
52, 189–234.
20.
PallierC.BoschL.Sebastián-GallésN.
(1997).
A limit on behavioral plasticity in vowel acquisition.
Cognition,
64, B9–B17.
21.
PallierC.DupouxE.JeanninX.
(1997).
EXPE: An expandable programming language for on-line psychological experiments.
Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,
29, 322–327.
22.
PisoniD.B.
(1996).
Some thoughts on normalization in speech perception. In
JohnsonK.MullennixJ.W. (Eds.),
Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 9–32).
San Diego: Academic Press.
23.
PolivanovE.
(1932).
La perception des sons d'une langue étrangére.
Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague,
4, 79–96.
24.
SchacterD.L.ChurchB.
(1992).
Auditory priming: Implicit and explicit memory for words and voices.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
18, 915–930.
25.
Sebastián-GallésN.Soto-FaracoS.
(1999).
On-line processing of native and non-native phonemic contrasts in early bilinguals.
Cognition,
72, 112–123.
26.
StrangeW.
(1995).
Cross-language studies of speech perception: A historical review. In
StrangeW. (Ed.),
Speech perception and linguistic experience (pp. 3–48).
Baltimore: York Press.
27.
TrubetzkoyN.
(1969).
Principles of phonology
(BaltaxeC.A., Trans.).
Berkeley: University of California Press. (Original work published 1939)
28.
WerkerJ.F.TeesR.C.
(1984).
Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life.
Infant Behavior and Development,
7, 49–63.
