Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions:

We investigate semantic interaction in bilinguals’ topological relations descriptions in a small-scale, non-standardized, egalitarian, long-term multilingual setting in Malaysia.

Design/methodology/approach:

Two groups of bilingual speakers of Jedek and Jahai (8 Jedek-identifying, 6 Jahai-identifying bilinguals) and two groups of monolingual Jedek and Jahai speakers (15 Jedek, 3 Jahai speakers) described the Topological Relations Picture Series in a director-matcher task, the bilinguals completing the task in both Jedek and Jahai.

Data and analysis:

We compare the semantic boundaries of Jedek and Jahai topological relation markers (TRMs) as used by the monolingual and bilingual groups in extension maps and congruence analyses. The analyses focus on the TRM klɛŋ, which is identical in form but semantically different in the two varieties.

Findings/conclusions:

We find evidence for asymmetric interaction in the expression of topological relations in Jedek and Jahai, with bidirectional influences in the Jahai-identifying bilinguals and a unidirectional influence of Jedek on Jahai in the Jedek-identifying bilinguals. This is commensurate with predictions based on Muysken’s framework of bilingual optimization strategies.

Originality:

The analyses shed new light on the nature of semantic interaction in bilingual systems by providing evidence from hitherto understudied bilingual language production in small-scale, non-standardized, egalitarian settings.

Significance/implications:

The results suggest that Muysken’s model is useful for understanding different bilingual outcomes, and highlight the complexity and connectedness of bilingual semantic systems. They also stress the need for more work in a variety of bilingual settings if we are to more fully understand the nature of bilingual systems.

Keywords

Egalitarian bilingualism topological relations Jahai Jedek semantic interaction crosslinguistic influence

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alferink

(2015). Dimensions of Convergence in Bilingual Speech and Gesture (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, Nijmegen. Utrecht: LOT (nr 391).

Alferink

Gullberg

(2014). French–Dutch bilinguals do not maintain obligatory semantic distinctions: Evidence from placement verbs. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(1), 22–37.

Ameel

Malt

B. C.

Storms

Van Assche

(2009). Semantic convergence in the bilingual lexicon. Journal of Memory and Language, 60(2), 270–290.

Ameel

Storms

Malt

B. C.

Sloman

S. A.

(2005). How bilinguals solve the naming problem. Journal of Memory and Language, 53(1), 60–80.

Athanasopoulos

Damjanovic

Burnand

Bylund

(2015). Learning to think in a second Language: Effects of proficiency and length of exposure in English learners of German [Supplemental material]. Modern Language Journal, 99, 138–153.

Bassetti

Cook

(2011). Relating language and cognition: The second language user. In Cook

Bassetti

(Eds.), Language and bilingual cognition (pp. 143–190). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

Berthele

(2015). Convergence in the domains of static spatial relations and events of putting and taking. Evidence from bilingual speakers of Romansh and German. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(5), 624–642.

Bowerman

(1996). Learning how to structure space for language: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Bloom

Peterson

Nadel

Garrett

(Eds.), Language and space (pp. 385–436). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Bowerman

Pederson

(1992). Topological relations picture series. In Levinson

S. C.

(Ed.), Space stimuli kit 1.2: November 1992 (p. 51). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. Retrieved from http://fieldmanuals.mpi.nl/volumes/1992/bowped/.

10.

Brown

Gullberg

(2008). Bidirectional crosslinguistic influence in L1-L2 encoding of manner in speech and gesture: A study of Japanese speakers of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(2), 225–251.

11.

Burenhult

(2005). A grammar of Jahai (Pacific Linguistics 566). Canberra: Australian National University.

12.

Choi

(2006). Influence of language-specific input on spatial cognition: Categories of containment. First Language, 26(2), 207–232.

13.

Ervin

S. M.

(1961). Semantic shift in bilingualism. The American Journal of Psychology, 74(2), 233–241.

14.

Evans

(2017). Did language evolve in multilingual settings? Biology and Philosophy, 32, 905–933.

15.

Ferguson

C. A.

(1975). Toward a characterization of English foreigner talk. Anthropological Linguistics, 17(1), 1–14.

16.

François

(2012). The dynamics of linguistic diversity: Egalitarian multilingualism and power imbalance among northern Vanuatu languages. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 214, 85–110.

17.

Gathercole

V. C. M.

Moawad

R. A.

(2010). Semantic interaction in early and late bilinguals: All words are not created equally. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(4), 385–408.

18.

Gathercole

V. C. M.

Stadthagen-González

Pérez-Tattam

Yavaș

(2017). Semantic and conceptual factors in Spanish-English bilinguals’ processing of lexical categories in their two languages. Second Language Research, 32(4), 537–562.

19.

Gentner

Bowerman

(2009). Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The typological prevalence hypothesis. In Guo

Lieven

Budwig

Ervin-Tripp

Nakamura

Ozcaliskan

(Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 465–480). Psychology Press.

20.

Gomes

A. G.

(2007). Modernity and Malaysia: Settling the Menraq forest nomads. London: Routledge.

21.

Grosjean

(1998). Transfer and language mode. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1(3), 175–176.

22.

Gullberg

(2012). Bilingual multimodality in language documentation data. Language Documentation & Conservation, Special Publication, (3), 46–53.

23.

Indefrey

Şahin

Gullberg

(2017). The expression of spatial relationships in Turkish/Dutch bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(3), 473–493. doi:10.1017/S1366728915000875

24.

Jarvis

Pavlenko

(2008). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York: Routledge.

25.

Levinson

S. C.

(2003). Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity (Vol. 5). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

26.

Levinson

S. C.

Meira

(2003). ‘Natural concepts’ in the spatial topological domain—Adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: An exercise in semantic typology. Language, 79(3), 485–516.

27.

Levinson

S. C.

Wilkins

D. P.

(Eds.). (2006). Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity (Vol. 6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

28.

Malt

B. C.

Lebkuecher

A. L.

(2017). Representation and process in bilingual lexical interaction. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(5), 867–885. doi:10.1017/S1366728916000584.

29.

Malt

B. C.

Pavlenko

Zhu

Ameel

(2015). Bidirectional lexical interaction in late immersed Mandarin-English bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 82, 86–104.

30.

Malt

B. C.

Majid

(2013). How thought is mapped into words. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4(6), 583–597.

31.

Muysken

(2013). Language contact outcomes as the result of bilingual optimization strategies. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 709–730.

32.

Pavlenko

(2011). Thinking and speaking in two languages: Overview of the field. In Pavlenko

(Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp. 237–257). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

33.

Treffers-Daller

Tidball

(2015). Can L2 learners learn new ways to conceptualise events? Evidence from motion event construal among English-speaking learners of French. In Guijarro-Fuentes

Schmitz

Müller

(Eds.) The acquisition of French in multilingual contexts (pp. 145–184). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

34.

White

Malt

B. C.

Storms

(2017). Convergence in the bilingual lexicon: A pre-registered replication of previous studies. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 2081.

35.

Yager

Burenhult

(2017). Jedek: A newly discovered Aslian variety of Malaysia. Linguistic Typology 21(3), 493–545.

36.

Zinszer

B. D.

Malt

Ameel

(2014). Nativelikeness in second language lexical categorization reflects individual language history and linguistic community norms. Frontiers in Psychology: Language Sciences, 5, 1–16.

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.

0.00 MB

0.94 MB

Asymmetric semantic interaction in Jedek-Jahai bilinguals: Spatial language in a small-scale,non-standardized,egalitarian,long-term multilingual setting in Malaysia

Abstract

Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions:

Design/methodology/approach:

Data and analysis:

Findings/conclusions:

Originality:

Significance/implications:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material