Studies show cross-linguistic differences in motion event encoding, such that English speakers preferentially encode manner of motion more than Spanish speakers, who preferentially encode path of motion. Focusing on native Spanish speaking children (aged 5;00–9;00) learning L2 English, we studied path and manner verb preferences during descriptions of motion stimuli, and tested the linguistic relativity hypothesis by investigating categorization preferences in a non-verbal similarity judgement task of motion clip triads. Results revealed L2 influence on L1 motion event encoding, such that bilinguals used more manner verbs and fewer path verbs in their L1, under the influence of English. We found no effects of linguistic structure on non-verbal similarity judgements, and demonstrate for the first time effects of L2 on L1 lexicalization in child L2 learners in the domain of motion events. This pattern of verbal behaviour supports theories of bilingual semantic representation that postulate a merged lexico-semantic system in early bilinguals.
AmeelE.StormsG.MaltB. C.SlomanS. A. (2005). How bilinguals solve the naming problem. Journal of Memory and Language53, 60–80.
2.
AskeJ. (1989). Path predicates in English and Spanish: a closer look. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society (pp. 1–14). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
3.
AthanasopoulosP.BylundE. (2013). Does grammatical aspect affect motion event cognition? A cross-linguistic comparison of English and Swedish speakers. Cognitive Science37, 286–309.
4.
AthanasopoulosP. (2006). Effects of the grammatical representation of number on cognition in bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition9, 89–96.
5.
AthanasopoulosP.KasaiC. (2008). Language and thought in bilinguals: The case of grammatical number and nonverbal classification preferences. Applied Psycholinguistics29, 105–123.
6.
BoroditskyL. (2001). Does language shape thought? English and Mandarin speakers`conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology43, 1–22.
7.
BoroditskyL.SchmidtL.PhillipsW. (2003). Sex, syntax, and semantics. In GentnerD.Goldin-MeadowS. (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and cognition (pp. 61–80). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
BrownA.GullbergM. (2010). Changes in encoding of PATH of motion in a first language during acquisition of a second language. Cognitive Linguistics21, 263–286.
9.
BylundE. (2009). Effects of age of L2 acquisition on L1 event conceptualisation patterns. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition12, 305–322.
10.
BylundE.JarvisS. (2011). L2 effects on L1 event conceptualisation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition14, 47–59.
11.
ChoiS.BowermanM. (1991). Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalisation patterns. Cognition41, 83–121.
FieldA. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London, UK: SAGE Publications.
14.
FeistM.RojoA.CifuentesP. (2007). Salience and acceptability in Spanish manner verbs: A preliminary view. International Journal of English Studies7, 137–148.
15.
FilipovicL. (2011). Speaking and remembering in one or two languages: bilingual vs. monolingual lexicalisation and memory for motion events. International Journal of Bilingualism15, 466–485.
16.
GennariS.SlomanS.A.MaltB. C.FitchW. T. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition83, 49–79.
17.
GrosjeanF. (2001). The bilingual’s language modes. In NicolJ. L. (Ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing (pp. 1–22). Oxford: Blackwell.
18.
HohensteinJ. (2005). Language-related motion event similarities in Spanish- and English-speaking children. Journal of Cognition and Development6, 402–425.
19.
HohensteinJ.EisenbergA.NaiglesL. (2006). Is he floating across or crossing a float? Cross-influence of L1 and L2 in Spanish–English bilingual adults. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition9, 249–261.
20.
KerstenA.MeissnerC.LechugaJ.SchwartzB.AlbrechtsenJ.IglesiasA. (2010). English speakers attend more strongly than Spanish speakers to manner of motion when classifying novel objects and events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General139, 638–653.
21.
LucyJ. A. (1997). Linguistic relativity. Annual Review of Anthropology26, 291–312.
22.
LucyJ. A.GaskinsS. (2001). Grammatical categories and the development of classification preferences: A comparative approach. In BowermanM.LevinsonS. (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 257–283). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
23.
MaltB. C.SlomanS. A. (2003). Linguistic diversity and object naming by non-native speakers of English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition6, 47–67.
24.
NagyZ.WesterbergH.KlingbergT. (2004). Maturation of white matter is associated with the development of cognitive functions during childhood. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience16, 1227–1233.
25.
NaiglesL.EisenbergA.KakoE.HighterM.McGrawN. (1998). Speaking of motion: Verb use in English and Spanish. Language and Cognitive Processes13, 521–549.
26.
PapafragouA.MasseyC.GleitmanL. (2002). Shake, rattle, ‘n’ roll: The representation of motion in language and cognition. Cognition84, 189–219.
27.
PapafragouA.SelimisS. (2010). Event categorisation and language: A cross-linguistic study of motion. Language and Cognitive Processes25, 224–260.
28.
RegierT.KayP. (2009). Language, thought, and color: Whorf was half right. Trends in Cognitive Sciences13, 439–446.
29.
SebastiánE.SlobinD. (1994). The development of linguistic forms: Spanish. In BermanR.SlobinD. (Eds.), Relating events in narrative (pp. 239–284). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
SlobinD. (1987).Thinking for speaking. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society (pp. 335–334). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
31.
SlobinD. (1996a). From ‘thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking.’ In GumperzJ. J.LevinsonS. C. (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
32.
SlobinD. (1996b). Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In ShibataniM.ThompsonS. A. (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning (pp. 195–217). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
33.
SlobinD.HoitingN. (1994). Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages: Typological considerations. Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General Session Dedicated to the Contributions of Charles J. Fillmore (pp. 487–505). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
34.
TalmyL. (1985). Lexicalisation patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In ShopenT. (Ed.), Grammatical categories and the lexicon. Language typology and syntactic description (pp. 57–149). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
35.
WhorfB. (1956). Language, thought, and reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36.
WolffP.HolmesK. J. (2010). Linguistic relativity. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science2, 253–265.
