The current study investigated how the processing of triple cognates (words sharing form and meaning across three languages) is modulated by the semantic bias of sentence context in a reading task. In the study, Polish–German–English trilinguals read English sentences while their eye movements were monitored. The sentences were either semantically biased (high-context) or neutral (low-context) towards target words. The targets were either Polish–German–English cognates whose cross-language form overlap was incomplete (e.g. DIAMENT–DIAMANT–DIAMOND) or English-only controls (e.g. KURCZAK–HÄHNCHEN–CHICKEN). The results revealed a significant effect of context in gaze durations and in total reading time. Importantly, no cognate facilitation effect was identified in any reading measure. The gaze duration data additionally revealed that English-only controls were read slower in low-context sentences than in high-context sentences but gaze durations for cognates were not affected by the sentence context. Thus, prior bilingual findings were only partially replicated in the current study with trilinguals. This suggests that bilingual models of language processing should be carefully adapted to trilinguals. The current data may also mean that non-identical cognates (even those shared across three languages) induce relatively small effects and large samples of participants and items may be needed to detect such effects across reading measures.
BallingLW (2012) Reading authentic texts: What counts as cognate?Bilingualism: Language and Cognition16: 637–53.
2.
BatesDMächlerMBolkerB, et al. (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software67: 1–48.
3.
BultenaSDijkstraTVan HellJG (2014) Cognate effects in sentence context depend on word class, L2 proficiency, and task. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology67: 1214–41.
4.
Carrasco-OrtizHAmengualMGriesSTh (2021) Cross-language effects of phonological and orthographic similarity in cognate word recognition: The role of language dominance. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism11: 389–417.
5.
ComesañaMSánchez-CasasRSoaresAP, et al. (2012) The interplay of phonology and orthography in visual cognate word recognition: An ERP study. Neuroscience Letters529: 75–79.
6.
ComesañaMFerréPRomeroJ, et al. (2015) Facilitative effect of cognate words vanishes when reducing the orthographic overlap: The role of stimuli list composition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition41: 614–35.
7.
ComesañaMHaroJMacizoP, et al. (2021) Disentangling the role of deviant letter position on cognate word processing. Frontiers in Psychology12: 731312.
8.
ConklinKPellicer-SánchezA (2016) Using eye-tracking in applied linguistics and second language research. Second Language Research32: 453–67.
9.
CopUDriegheDDuyckW (2015) Eye movement patterns in natural reading: A comparison of monolingual and bilingual reading of a novel. PLoS ONE10: e0134008.
10.
CopUKeuleersEDriegheD, et al. (2015) Frequency effects in monolingual and bilingual natural reading. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review22: 1216–34.
11.
CopUDirixNVan AsscheE, et al. (2017) Reading a book in one or two languages? An eye movement study of cognate facilitation in L1 and L2 reading. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition20: 747–69.
12.
De AngelisG (2007) Third or additional language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
13.
DijkstraT (2003) Lexical processing in bilinguals and multilinguals: The word selection problem. In: CenozJHufeisenBJessnerU (eds) The multilingual lexicon. Dordrecht / Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic, pp. 11–26. Available at: http://site.ebrary.com/id/10181070 (accessed September 2022).
14.
DijkstraTVan HellJG (2003) Testing the language mode hypothesis using trilinguals. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism6: 2–16.
15.
DijkstraTvan HeuvenWJB (2002) The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition5: 175–97.
16.
DijkstraTMiwaKBrummelhuisB, et al. (2010) How cross-language similarity and task demands affect cognate recognition. Journal of Memory and Language62: 284–301.
17.
DijkstraTWahlABuytenhuijsF, et al. (2019) Multilink: A computational model for bilingual word recognition and word translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition22: 657–79.
18.
DriegheD (2011) Parafoveal-on-foveal effects on eye movements during reading. In: LiversedgeSPGilchristIDEverlingS (eds) The Oxford handbook of eye movements. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 840–55.
19.
DussiasPE (2010) Uses of eye-tracking data in second language sentence processing research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics30: 149–66.
20.
DuyckWVan AsscheEHartsuikerR (2007) Visual word recognition by bilinguals in a sentence context: Evidence for nonselective lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition33: 663–79.
21.
GodfroidAHuiB (2020) Five common pitfalls in eye-tracking research. Second Language Research36: 277–305.
22.
HerediaRRCieślickaAB (eds) (2020) Bilingual lexical ambiguity resolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
HoppH (2017) Cross-linguistic lexical and syntactic co-activation in L2 sentence processing. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism7: 96–130.
24.
JuhaszBPollatsekA (2011) Lexical influences on eye movements in reading. In: LiversedgeSPGilchristIDEverlingS (eds) The Oxford handbook of eye movements. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 895–909.
25.
KrollJFStewartE (1994) Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language33: 149–74.
26.
KrollJFVan HellJGTokowiczN, et al. (2010) The Revised Hierarchical Model: A critical review and assessment. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition13: 373–81.
27.
KuznetsovaABrockhoffPBChristensenRHB (2015) LmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. journal of statistical software82: 1–26.
28.
LauroJSchwartzAI (2017) Bilingual non-selective lexical access in sentence contexts: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Memory and Language92: 217–33.
29.
LemhöferKDijkstraTMichelMC (2004) Three languages, one ECHO: Cognate effects in trilingual word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes19: 585–611.
30.
LemhöferKHuesteggeLMulderK (2018) Another cup of TEE? The processing of second language near-cognates in first language reading. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience33: 968–91.
31.
LiPZhangFTsaiE, et al. (2014) Language history questionnaire (LHQ 2.0): A new dynamic web-based research tool. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition17: 673–80.
32.
LibbenMRTitoneDA (2009) Bilingual lexical access in context: Evidence from eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition35: 381–90.
33.
LijewskaA (2020) Cognate processing effects in bilingual lexical access. In: HerediaRRCieślickaAB (eds) Bilingual lexical ambiguity resolution. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 71–95.
34.
LijewskaABłaszkowskaH (2021) Non-identical cognates yield facilitation in translation: Does the way foreign vocabulary is learned affect its processing?Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics57: 329–58.
35.
LijewskaAChmielA (2015) Cognate facilitation in sentence context: Translation production by interpreting trainees and non-interpreting trilinguals. International Journal of Multilingualism12: 358–75.
36.
LiversedgeSPPatersonKBPickeringMJ (1998) Eye movements and measures of reading time. In UnderwoodG (Ed.) Eye guidance in reading and scene perception. Elsevier, pp. 55–75.
37.
MarianVBartolottiJChabalS, et al. (2012) CLEARPOND: Cross-Linguistic Easy-Access Resource for Phonological and Orthographic Neighborhood Densities. PLoS ONE7: e43230.
38.
MatuschekHKlieglRVasishthS, et al. (2017) Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language94: 305–315.
39.
NakagawaS (2004) A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behavioral Ecology15: 1044–45.
40.
NakayamaMIdaKLupkerSJ (2015) Cross-script L2–L1 noncognate translation priming in lexical decision depends on L2 proficiency: Evidence from Japanese–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition19: 1001–22.
41.
NelsonDLMcEvoyCLSchreiberTA (1998) The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Available at: http://w3.usf.edu/FreeAssociation (accessed September 2022).
42.
OtwinowskaA (2015) Cognate vocabulary in language acquisition and use. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
43.
PalmaPTitoneD (2020) Bilingual lexical access and reading. In: HerediaRRCieślickaAB (eds) Bilingual lexical ambiguity resolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 159–83.
44.
PalmaPWhitfordVTitoneD (2020) Cross-language activation and executive control modulate within-language ambiguity resolution: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition46: 507–28.
45.
PivnevaIMercierJTitoneD (2014) Executive control modulates cross-language lexical activation during L2 reading: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition40: 787–96.
46.
PoarchGJVan HellJG (2012) Cross-language activation in children’s speech production: Evidence from second language learners, bilinguals, and trilinguals. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology111: 419–38.
47.
PoarchGJVan HellJG (2014) Cross-language activation in same-script and different-script trilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism18: 693–716.
48.
PoortEDRoddJM (2017) The cognate facilitation effect in bilingual lexical decision is influenced by stimulus list composition. Acta Psychologica180: 52–63.
49.
PurezaRSoaresAPComesañaM (2016) Cognate status, syllable position and word length on bilingual Tip-Of-the-Tongue states induction and resolution. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition19: 533–49.
50.
RaynerKSerenoSCMorrisRK, et al. (1989) Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes. Language and Cognitive Processes4: SI21–49.
51.
R Core Team (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: http://www.R-project.org (accessed September 2022).
52.
ReichleEDLiversedgeSPPollatsekA, et al. (2009) Encoding multiple words simultaneously in reading is implausible. Trends in Cognitive Sciences13: 115–119
53.
RosselliMArdilaAJuradoMB, et al. (2012) Cognate facilitation effect in balanced and non-balanced Spanish–English bilinguals using the Boston Naming Test. International Journal of Bilingualism18: 24–29.
54.
SchepensJDijkstraTGrootjenF (2012) Distributions of cognates in Europe as based on Levenshtein distance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition15: 157–66.
55.
SchwartzAIKrollJF (2006) Bilingual lexical activation in sentence context. Journal of Memory and Language55: 197–212.
56.
SoaresAPOliveiraHFerreiraM, et al. (2019) Lexico-syntactic interactions during the processing of temporally ambiguous L2 relative clauses: An eye-tracking study with intermediate and advanced Portuguese–English bilinguals. PLoS ONE14: e0216779.
57.
StaubAWhiteSJDriegheD, et al. (2010) Distributional effects of word frequency on eye fixation durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance36: 1280–93.
58.
Szubko-SitarekW (2011) Cognate facilitation effects in trilingual word recognition. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching1: 189–208.
59.
Szubko-SitarekW (2015) Multilingual lexical recognition in the mental lexicon of third language users. Series: Second Language Learning and Teaching. Berlin / Heidelberg: Springer.
60.
TokowiczNKrollJFde GrootAMB, et al. (2002) Number-of-translation norms for Dutch–English translation pairs: A new tool for examining language production. Behavior Research Methods34: 435–51.
61.
Van AsscheEDriegheDDuyckW, et al. (2011) The influence of semantic constraints on bilingual word recognition during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language64: 88–107.
62.
Van AsscheEDuyckWHartsuikerRJ (2012) Bilingual word recognition in a sentence context. Frontiers in Psychology3: 174.
63.
Van AsscheEDuyckWBrysbaertM (2013) Verb processing by bilinguals in sentence contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition35: 237–59.
64.
Van AsscheEDuyckWHartsuikerRJ (2016) Context effects in bilingual sentence processing: Task specificity. In: HerediaRRAltarribaJCieślickaAB (eds) Methods in bilingual reading comprehension research. New York: Springer New York, pp. 11–31.
65.
van HeuvenWJBManderaPKeuleersE, et al. (2014) Subtlex-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology67: 1176–1190.
66.
VanlangendonckFPeetersDRueschemeyerS-A, et al. (2020) Mixing the stimulus list in bilingual lexical decision turns cognate facilitation effects into mirrored inhibition effects. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition23: 836–44.
67.
Van OrdenGC (1987) A ROWS is a ROSE: Spelling, sound, and reading. Memory and Cognition15: 181–198.
68.
von der MalsburgTVasishthS (2011) What is the scanpath signature of syntactic reanalysis?Journal of Memory and Language65: 109–27.
69.
WhitfordVPivnevaITitoneD (2016) Eye movement methods to investigate bilingual reading. In: HerediaRRAltarribaJCieślickaAB (eds) Methods in bilingual reading comprehension research. The Bilingual Mind and Brain Book Series 1. New York: Springer, pp. 183–211.
70.
ZhuYMokPPK (2020) Visual recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs in two non-native languages: Evidence from Asian adult trilinguals. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism10: 441–70.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
