Lecture: Psycholinguistics Professor Dr' Neal R' Norrick _____________________________________

1
Lecture Psycholinguistics Professor Dr. Neal R.
Norrick_____________________________________

• Psycholinguistics

• Universität des Saarlandes
• Dept. 4.3 English Linguistics
• SS 2009

2

• 7.4.4 Language processing in the bilingual brain
• Depending how they're acquired, L1 L2 may even
• be lateralized differently in brain
• L2 lateralized in right hemisphere
• L2 less lateralized than L1
• L1 L2 both less lateralized than in
  monolinguals
• evidence from aphasia indicates that languages
  are
• separately organized in brain, but not
  necessarily
• lateralized separately

3

• As Paradis (1979, 1985) shows, bilinguals comes
  in
• many types
• Bilinguals may differ with regard to
• manner of acquisition (formal, informal)
• mode of acquisition (oral, written)
• method of acquisition
• (deductive, inductive, analytic, global)
• age of acquisition (during or after critical
  period)
• stage of acquisition
• degree of proficiency

4

• frequency and modes of use
• language-specific features of L1 L2
• sharing features and rules at various levels
• on every linguistic level, structures might be
• shared or separate
• e.g. if L1 speaker produces L2 perfectly, except
  for
• phonetics, i.e. has lots of interference from L1
  to L2
• at the level of phonetics, we could model the
• situation as follows

5

• L1 L2
• conceptual level single system
• semantics x -- y
• syntax x -- y
• morphology x -- y
• lexis x -- y
• phonology x -- y

6

• and if L1 speaker produces phonetically correct
  L2,
• but makes lots of interference errors in grammar
• and word choice, we could model the situation as
• follows
• L1 L2
• conceptual level single system
• semantics x -- y
• syntax x -- y
• morphology x -- y
• lexis x -- y
• phonology x -- y

7
Of course, some languages may naturally
share structures at certain levels English-Germa
n bilinguals probably have a single set of stop
consonants for both languages, but German
speakers need to add the fricatives in then and
thin, and English speakers need to add the
fricatives in ich and ach and so on
8

• In the simplest model, the concepts of experience
  run through a set of pipes and come out as either
  L1 or L2
• (in the model Spanish and English)

9
The next model ignores the concepts and begins
with separate tanks for the words of L1 L2
again pipes run down, and one language spills
out. (This second model corresponds to
Weinreichs coordinate bilingual)
10
In third model, the concepts of experience run
through pipes representing L1 L2, they are
assigned appropriate words from either L1 or L2,
and they flow into another set of pipes,
representing the grammar and phonology, and
finally flow out as either L1 or L2.
11

• But, as in Weinreich, theres no way in these
  models
• to account for interference
• Since there's interference between the systems,
• some pipes may be playing a role in both L1 L2
• systems, and the pipes must be leaky since we
  can
• code-switch and translate, there must be leakage
  in
• both directions
• Its probably necessary to complicate the third
  
• model

12

• The tanks of words from L1 or L2, need valves to
  turn
• them on or shut them off, representing the
  decision to
• speak either L1 or L2 and block out the other
• As we saw above, the words must flow into
  separate
• sets of pipes, representing the grammar,
  morphology
• and phonology of either L1 or L2 as well but
  some
• pipes serve both L1 L2 systems to some extent,
• to account for interference
• At all levels, we must allow leakage to explain
  how
• we can code-switch from L1 to L2

13

• also possible
• comprehension is a single system for L1 L2,
• while production of L1 L2 remains separate,
  because
• comprehension precedes production in acquisition
• comprehension more advanced than production at
• all stages
• though we can choose not to speak L1 or L2,
• we can't choose not to comprehend
• production is lost before comprehension in
  aphasia
• comprehension returns before production in
  aphasia

14

• again according to Paradis, we can envision
• single coherent underlying conceptual system
• two cognitively separate systems - with some
• shared areas in semantics, syntax, phonology
• one system is suppressed due to context,
  frequency
• of contact etc
• but word/phrase from suppressed system may
  intrude,
• especially during word search
• there may be differences in processing due to
• acquisition history, strategies etc

15

• 8. Language comprehension
• ? means understanding what we hear and read
• comprehension as active search for coherence and
• sense based on expectations arising from context,
• not a passive item-by-item recording and analysis
  of
• words in a linear sequence.

16

• meaning and real-world expectations play a more
• important role than grammar
• top-down versus bottom-up processing
• Until the age of four, kids interpret a-d the
  same way
• even adults require longer to respond to c, d
• a. The cat chased the mouse.
• b. The mouse was chased by the cat.
• c. The mouse chased the cat.
• d. The cat was chased by the mouse.

17
Asked to paraphrase e-g in their own words,
subjects normalized the sentences 60 of the
time e. John dressed and had a bath.f. John
finished and wrote the article on the
weekend.g. Don't print that or I won't sue you.
18

• Asked if they saw any difference between g and
  their
• incorrect paraphrase h, 53 still said no
• h. If you print that, I'll sue you.
• clearly, the Reality Principle guides our
• comprehension of linguistic structures

19

• 8.1 Comprehension of words
• Parallel Distributed Processing (PDP)
• separate, simultaneous and parallel processes
  work
• to identify words

20

• by pronunciation to recognize homophones
• leadN and ledV pst
• by spelling to recognize homographs
• windN and windV
• by grammar to recognize smell as noun or verb
• while hear can only function as verb
• by semantics synonyms like little and small
• antonyms like little and big
• hyponyms like car versus vehicle etc

21

• PDP can link word meanings to perceptual and
• functional paradigms
• (how a thing looks, sounds etc, what it's used
  for)
• consider Tip-of-the-tongue (TOT) phenomena
• you're trying to recall the word for the belief
  that life's
• events are preordained by a deity
• you remember that the word begins with p, then
  that
• word begins with pre-, and that it ends with -tion

22

• Bathtub Effect
• recall is best for beginnings and ends of words,
  like
• the head and feet of a person which are visible
• though the middle remains submerged in the tub
• you recall associated words like
• predilection pretension
• Presbyterian preordained
• you finally come up with predestination

23

• Spreading activation networks
• as the search progresses, more words and concepts
• are accessed related in various ways,
• including schematic knowledge
• e.g. the association of Presbyterian
• and predestination via 'religion

24

• 8.2 Comprehension of sentences
• Chomsky proposed Generative Transformational
• Grammar (TG) as a model of Competence,
• suggesting that psycholinguists should figure out
  how
• Performance could be related to his model
• Psycholinguists began to test for
  transformational
• complexity

25

• Sentences involving more transformations like
• PASSIVE, NEGATION, QUESTION FORMATION etc
• should be harder to comprehend than sentences
• involving fewer transformations
• processing time should increase for sentences
  a-e
• a. Judy called the boy.
• b. Judy didn't call the boy.
• c. The boy was called by Judy.
• d. The boy was not called by Judy.
• e. Wasn't the boy called by Judy?

26
They found that negatives were harder to process
than either passives or questions, even though
negation seemed like a simpler transformation Sub
jects seemed to have difficulty processing
negatives generally. Consider the difficulty
of It's not true that Wednesday never comes
after a day that isn't Tuesday.
27

• Subjects also processed passives more easily than
  
• actives, if the passives made more sense, e.g.
• The struggling swimmer rescued the lifeguard.
• The struggling swimmer was rescued
• by the lifeguard.
• Apparently, semantics was more important than
• derivational complexity as predicted by TG
  analysis

28
Garden Pathing is most obvious when we have to
backtrack after an unexpected switch, as in
sentence a the addition of this in sentence b,
or a comma, as in sentence c, eliminates the
problem a. Since Jay always jogs a mile
seems like a short distance to him b. Since Jay
always jogs a mile this seems like a short
distance to him c. Since Jay always jogs,
a mile seems like a short distance to him
29
Garden pathing works both syntactically and
semantically. We follow expectations about
constructions and meaning. Garden pathing makes
it so difficult to understand sentences which
seem complete and semantically simple,
e.g. The horse raced past the barn
fell. Compare The horse that was raced past
the barn fell.
30
Tests revealed other syntactic processing
differences. Right-branching constructions are
easy to process This is the cat that chased
the rat that stole the cheese that lay in the
cupboard. Here each construction is closed
before the next is added.
31

• But left-branching constructions are difficult.
• The rat the cat chased stole the cheese.
• Left-branching requires that the listener keep
  the first
• construction open (in short-term memory) while
• processing the second. Adding a third makes
• processing impossible because of the demands it
• places on short-term memory.
• The cheese the rat the cat chased stole lay
• in the cupboard.

32

• 8.3 Comprehension of metaphor
• metaphors consist of three parts
• tenor, vehicle, ground
• tenor vehicle
• billboards are warts on the landscape
• ground (tertium comparationis)
• 'ugly protrusions on some surface'

33

• Ortony (1975) argues that we comprehend metaphors
• in the same way we comprehend explicit
  comparisons
• or similes like
• billboards are like warts on the landscape
• in both cases, we must find the appropriate
  ground

34
even in literal comparisons such as dogs are
like cats we must discover a common semantic
property like 'pet' as the ground of the
comparison we need only certain aspects of the
word meanings In the metaphors below, different
semantic aspects of butcher are dominant the
pianist is a butcher the surgeon is a butcher
35

• This suggests that we always access just as much
• semantic content from the mental lexicon as we
• need to comprehend the sentence at hand, not
• complete encyclopedic information
• Given a metaphoric statement like
• skyscrapers are the giraffes of a city
• we identify a ground like 'tall compared to
• surroundings' as part of comprehension process.
• And though the ground is unstated, tests show
  that it
• provides as good a cue for recall as the tenor or
  
• vehicle.

36
Metaphors organize our understanding of the
tenor reversing tenor and vehicle usually
confuses the relation, as in warts are
billboards on the body tests show that metaphors
require longer to comprehend only in isolation
in appropriate contexts, metaphors require no
longer than literal statements, as in
Billboards are really offensive to look
at. They mess up the surrounding area. Billboards
are like warts on the landscape
37
Within a single sentence, prior context (as in A
below) is more effective than subsequent context
(as in B) in triggering metaphoric
interpretation A. The night was filled with
drops of molten silver B. Drops of molten silver
filled the night. Apparently, understanding
metaphors in context is no different from
regular comprehension processes
38
Familiarity is also a factor in metaphor
comprehension Test subjects respond fastest to
familiar metaphors, e.g. Joe's the top cat
around here Telecommunications are further
shrinking the globe
39

• If the vehicle of the metaphor is unfamiliar or
  has no
• single salient property, comparison is difficult
  and
• comprehension will be slow,
• e.g. Judy's a real platypus at work
• Bob's a regular isotope for politics

40

• Metaphor may even be necessary and go unnoticed
• when language lacks any other word, e.g.
• dead metaphor face of a clock
• moribund metaphor cut into line
• cf. knife through the line
• Poetic metaphor involves anomaly, and requires
• extra processing time
• I have measured out my life with coffee spoons

41
but many metaphors aren't anomalous, e.g.
metaphoric proverbs may be both literally true
and consistent The early bird catches the
worm Like other metaphors, metaphorical proverbs
seem to require no special processing in
appropriate discourse contexts
42

• 8.5 Comprehending sentences
• Given-New Contract (Clark Clark 1977)
• Listeners expect information in a regular
  pattern.
• Coherent texts generally exhibit a characteristic
  information flow
• begin each utterance with given information
• then move on to new information

43
e.g. The ballerina captivated a musician
during her performance. The one who the
ballerina captivated was the trombonist. (with
the ballerina as given and the rest of the first
sentence as new) In the second sentence, all
the information is given, except the fact that
the musician was a trombonist. Hearing the first
sentence reduces processing time for the second.
44

• If the second sentence is altered as below,
  listeners
• are confused and processing times increase.
• The ballerina captivated a musician during her
• performance.
• The one who captivated the trombonist was the
  ballerina.