title: Cross-language influences: translation status affects intraword sense relatedness.
abstract: Many words have more than one meaning, and these meanings vary in their degree of relatedness. In the present experiment, we examined whether this degree of relatedness is influenced by whether or not the two meanings share a translation in a bilingual's other language. Native English speakers with Spanish as a second language (i.e., English-Spanish bilinguals) and native Spanish speakers with English as a second language (i.e., Spanish-English bilinguals) were presented with pairs of phrases instantiating different senses of ambiguous English words (e.g., dinner date-expiration date) and were asked to decide whether the two senses were related in meaning. Critically, for some pairs of phrases, a single Spanish translation encompassed both meanings of the ambiguous word (joint-translation condition; e.g., mercado in Spanish refers to both a flea market and the housing market), but for others, each sense corresponded to a different Spanish translation (split-translation condition; e.g., cita in Spanish refers to a dinner date, but fecha refers to an expiration date). The proportions of "yes" (related) responses revealed that, relative to monolingual English speakers, Spanish-English bilinguals consider joint-translation senses to be less related than split-translation senses. These findings exemplify semantic cross-language influences from a first to a second language and reveal the semantic structure of the bilingual lexicon.
authors: Institute of Information Processing and Decision Making, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel 31905, tdegani@research.haifa.ac.il.
authors: Tamar
authors: T
authors: Degani
authors: Natasha
authors: N
authors: Tokowicz
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D019303:Multilingualism; D012660:Semantics; D055815:Young Adult
references: J Neurosci. 2010 Jun 2;30(22):7646-51
references: 20519539
references: J Cogn Neurosci. 2005 Oct;17(10):1593-610
references: 16269099
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002 Jul;28(4):686-713
references: 12109762
references: Psychol Sci. 2011 Oct;22(10):1237-42
references: 21881059
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Nov;34(6):1534-43
references: 18980412
references: Brain Lang. 2003 Aug;86(2):167-92
references: 12921763
references: Mem Cognit. 1994 Jan;22(1):111-26
references: 8035680
references: J Cogn Neurosci. 2006 Jan;18(1):97-109
references: 16417686
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 2005 Oct;12(5):769-86
references: 16523997
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1988 Nov;14(4):601-9
references: 2974871
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1996 Jul;22(4):827-45
references: 8708602
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Jul 24;104(30):12530-5
references: 17630288
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 2002 Dec;9(4):780-9
references: 12613683
references: Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005 Jun;24(1):57-65
references: 15922158
references: Mem Cognit. 2012 Oct;40(7):1095-108
references: 22614728
references: Cognition. 2011 Feb;118(2):286-92
references: 21145047