Search

Aims and Objectives: English allows inanimate objects to be sentence subjects (e.g., "The knife cut the bread") but Korean and Japanese restrict subjects of causal sentences on the basis of animacy. In previous work, we found that Korean speakers relaxed their native grammatical animacy constraint when immersed in English (e.g., found knives to be acceptable sentence subjects in Korean). We suggested this L2 influence occurred because the Korean animacy constraint does not map cleanly onto the semantic representation of animacy—some inanimate objects (e.g., "fire") can be subjects of causal sentences. In the current study, we further test this idea by examining the case of Japanese–English bilinguals. We predict that because the Japanese animacy constraint aligns well with the semantic representation of animacy, it will be less susceptible to L2 influence. Methodology: We first independently assessed the semantic representation of animacy by comparing animacy ratings from native speakers of Korean, Japanese, and English for 60 objects. We then asked Japanese–English bilinguals and Japanese monolinguals to provide grammaticality judgments for sentences that varied in subject animacy. Data and Analysis: We analyzed participants' animacy ratings and grammaticality judgments using mixed-effects models. Findings: Animacy ratings supported a closer correspondence between semantic representation of animacy and the grammatical animacy constraint for Japanese grammar than for Korean grammar. In contrast to previous results for Korean speakers, Japanese–English bilinguals' grammaticality judgments did not significantly differ from those of Japanese monolinguals. Originality: The current study is unique in that it suggests the vulnerability of structures at the syntax–semantics interface to L2 influence varies across different language groups based on the alignment between syntactic and semantic features. Implications: The current findings support the possibility that representations at the syntax–semantics interface may only be vulnerable to influence when syntax is incongruent with semantic features. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Internal representations guide our navigation of the world, while language allows us to share some of what is encoded internally with others. I have been interested in the content of thought, the nature of word meanings and what they reveal about thought, and how thoughts are expressed in words. My work has combined evidence from laboratory experimentation with observation of word use in natural settings, including from people who speak different languages. Some of the ideas guiding the work are these: understanding entities in the world non‐linguistically engages different representations and processes than talking about them; patterns of word use in a language reflect cultural and linguistic history, not only conceptual representations of current speakers; linguistic and non‐linguistic knowledge is therefore at least partially independent, and so language and thought will not always closely parallel one another; the beliefs people express about their concepts and word meanings may not accurately reflect the implicit knowledge they draw on in interacting with and talking about the world; and only by carefully observing actual word use can we understand how word meanings come about and how linguistic knowledge is used to select words for communication. I have been interested in thought, word meanings, and how thoughts are expressed in words. My work has used laboratory experiments and observations in natural settings and includes evidence from children and people who speak different languages. This paper provides an overview of my program of research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Threats to the health of our environment are numerous. Much research in science and engineering is devoted to documenting, understanding, and attempting to mitigate the harm itself. The root challenge for sustainability, however, is human behavior. As such, changes to human behaviors and the internal processes that drive them are also essential. Critical to understanding sustainability‐related behaviors is the individual's conceptualization of the natural world and its components and processes. The papers in this topiCS issue address these conceptualizations by drawing from anthropological, linguistic, educational, philosophical, and social cognitive perspectives as well as traditional psychological approaches to the study of concepts and their development in children. They engage with many domains bearing on environmental sustainability including climate change, biodiversity, land and water conservation, resource use, and design of the built environment. They coalesce around four broad themes: (a) What people know (or believe) about nature broadly and about specific aspects of nature, and how they acquire and use this knowledge; (b) how knowledge is expressed and shared via language; (c) how knowledge and beliefs interact with affective, social, and motivational influences to yield attitudes and behaviors; and (d) how members of different cultures and speakers of different languages differ in these ways. The papers also point to lessons for advancing sustainability via public policy and public messaging, education, conservation and nature management, and design of the built environment. The root challenge for environmental sustainability is human behavior. Critical to understanding sustainability‐related behaviors is the individual's conceptualization of the natural world and its components and processes. The papers in this issue address these conceptualizations by drawing from anthropological, linguistic, educational, philosophical, and social cognitive perspectives as well as traditional psychological approaches to the study of concepts and their development in children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Domain knowledge is often considered a minor contributor to environmental attitudes, with social and motivational factors dominating. Yet, domains may differ. Declining insect populations are a critical conservation concern but are not prominent in public discourse, potentially reducing the impact of social and motivational variables. We present data on the relations of insect knowledge (both propositional and causal), associated emotional valences, and political orientation to concern for insect conservation, for samples of American college students and U.S. and U.K. Prolific workers. We asked whether concern for insect conservation is more associated with knowledge than emotional valence or political orientation, and whether this is especially so for U.K. residents, who have a reputation for a love of nature that is not linked to political identity. We found that U.K. participants did show greater overall concern, consistent with the national reputation. Causal knowledge mattered, but political orientation was the strongest predictor of concern for insect conservation for both U.S. and U.K. participants. Valence contributed for U.S. participants but not for U.K. participants. Our results suggest that politicized public discourse penetrates attitudes toward insects even when it does not explicitly concern insects, and knowledge variation has less impact. However, the emotional reaction has a reduced influence where relevant discourse is less polarized. Insects may often evoke negative emotions and motivations, but it is not impossible to love a bug. We studied psychological barriers to insect conservation, a pressing environmental issue. Despite absence of politicized public discourse about insects, political orientation was a major driver of conservation concern, as was the emotional valence of people's insect knowledge. Knowledge of insects' roles in ecosystems showed more limited influence, but improving causal knowledge may yield more positive emotions and moderate the impact of political orientation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge of the world is fundamental to human thought and ability to navigate the world, and a large literature has accumulated on the neuroscience of semantic memory. Because language serves as one of the most important interfaces between the private world of thought and other people, researchers often tap into semantic memory through word-based tasks. But this approach fails to acknowledge crucial distinctions between word meaning and general-purpose, non-linguistic knowledge. This article will discuss the relation between words and non-linguistic representations, drawing in part on evidence about cross-linguistic lexical diversity. It will argue that a more nuanced consideration of the language-thought interface is needed in the neuroscience of concepts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: This study contributes to understanding L2 word learning and why "semantic accent" persists. It examines the impact of L1–L2 semantic relations, input conditions, and L1–L2 dissimilarity on learning outcomes. Methodology: Mandarin-speaking learners of English labeled actions in 26 brief videos, typically called carrying or holding by native speakers. The labeling pattern is simpler in English than in Mandarin but requires a shift to different semantic dimensions. Further, hold is a higher frequency term than carry. The learners were resident in either China (N = 34) or the United States (N = 25), with somewhat higher proficiency in the US sample. Twenty native English speakers in the United States also responded. Data and analysis: Learner groups' name choices were compared to each other and those of native speakers. Findings/conclusions: The dissimilarity between Mandarin and English did not block importing L1 meanings to L2, but progress was seen across sub-groups. Input variables did impact progress: immersion (mediated by proficiency) was better than classroom learning, and use of the higher frequency term was greater than of the lower. Notably, however, many learners narrowed to domain-relevant vocabulary without using the words in native-like ways despite the simplicity of the target L2 system. They appeared to update knowledge at the level of word form-to-domain mappings without updating word form-to-meaning associations. Originality: Semantic accent has been documented previously, but the L2 word learning trajectory and factors that contribute to semantic accent have not been well understood. This study advances that understanding. Significance/implications: Imported meanings are difficult to reshape even for dissimilar languages and even with immersion. Enhanced learning may require sensitizing learners to L2 semantic content via either explicit instruction or intensive exposure to discrepancies between L1 and L2 meanings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Storms, Ameel, and Malt [2015. "Development of Cross-language Lexical Influence." International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 18: 529–547] compared the development of naming patterns in monolingual and bilingual children. They concluded that bilinguals' naming patterns in their two languages become increasingly similar with age and are thus converging. In this commentary, we argue that taking into account younger participants' smaller vocabulary and greater variability in names for individual objects changes the paper's conclusions: bilingual naming patterns are found to diverge with age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bilinguals show word use patterns in each of their languages that differ from those of monolinguals. One interpretation is that, for bilinguals, the word meanings of one language are influenced by those of the other. Another is that the cross-language influence lies in on-line processes - word retrieval probabilities or word form activation levels. To discriminate between interpretations, we asked Mandarin-English bilinguals to name household objects in their L1 and L2 via forced choice instead of free production. The options given were the monolingual-preferred choices, eliminating memory retrieval demands and keeping those words at a high level of activation. For comparison, monolinguals of each language performed the same task in their native language. Differences from monolinguals in word choice were substantially reduced, especially in L1, but bilingual patterns still showed some cross-language influence in both L1 and L2. This outcome implicates cross-language influences on both bilingual processing and meaning representations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One way that languages are able to communicate a potentially infinite set of ideas through a finite lexicon is by compressing emerging meanings into words, such that over time, individual words come to express multiple, related senses of meaning. We propose that overarching communicative and cognitive pressures have created systematic directionality in how new metaphorical senses have developed from existing word senses over the history of English. Given a large set of pairs of semantic domains, we used computational models to test which domains have been more commonly the starting points (source domains) and which the ending points (target domains) of metaphorical mappings over the past millennium. We found that a compact set of variables, including externality , embodiment , and valence , explain directionality in the majority of about 5000 metaphorical mappings recorded over the past 1100 years. These results provide the first large-scale historical evidence that metaphorical mapping is systematic, and driven by measurable communicative and cognitive principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: We examined the bi-directional interaction of first language (L1) and second language (L2) word use patterns by asking whether L2 patterns of word use can be acquired with intensive exposure in a laboratory setting, and whether this early stage of L2 learning would impact L1 performance. Methodology: In two experiments, native speakers of English first labeled drinking vessels in English, then received intensive training on L2 Russian naming patterns for the objects, and, lastly, labeled the objects in English again. Data and analysis: Data were collected from eight different training groups with 14–15 participants each plus a control group with 14 participants who did not learn L2 Russian. Findings/conclusions: Trained participants successfully acquired L2 Russian patterns of word use regardless of specific training condition. However, they showed significantly less consistency in L1 English post-test labeling than the control group. Originality: Neither full acquisition of L2 patterns nor their simultaneous impact on L1 choices has been previously demonstrated. Significance/implications: These outcomes suggest that acquisition of target-like L2 word use can be facilitated by intensive exposure to word-referent mappings. However, even in the early stages of L2 learning, a L2 influence may be manifested in the L1 as a destabilization of word-to-referent mappings, suggesting continuous dynamic interaction between the two languages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We compared naming patterns for common household objects by monolingual speakers of English and Mandarin and Mandarin-English bilinguals in both their L1 and L2. These bilinguals arrived in the U.S. no earlier than age 15, thus having a well-entrenched L1 and relatively late L2 immersion, and their two languages are dissimilar on many dimensions. Results showed changes to both L1 and L2 word use that increased with greater L2 usage, implying that the lexical network remains plastic over an extended time period. The influence of each language on the other can be understood in the context of specific L1–L2 lexical category differences and other semantic variables. The bilingual outcomes are not consistent with perspectives in which the network stabilizes once an L1 is well-entrenched, nor in which speaking dissimilar languages or continuing to use L1 protects L1 from change. Instead, it supports a more dynamic view of lexical representation in which L1 and L2 representations can be modified at any time and interconnections between them cause each to impact the other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] Name choices in four languages were examined for 36 instances of human locomotion. [•] Naming patterns reflected salient physical similarities among the instances. [•] Physical similarities mattered even in naming less common gaits. [•] The languages differed most notably in how many named distinctions they made. [•] There are recurring principles of lexical constraint and variation across domains. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

To English speakers, the distinctions between blue and green, cup and glass, or cut and break seem self-evident. The intuition is that these words label categories that have an existence independent of language, and language merely captures the pre-existing categories. But cross-linguistic work shows that the named distinctions are not nearly as self-evident as they may feel. There is diversity in how languages divide up domains including color, number, plants and animals, drinking vessels and household containers, body parts, spatial relations, locomotion, acts of cutting and breaking, acts of carrying and holding, and more. Still, studies documenting variability across languages also uncover striking commonalities. Such commonalities indicate that there are sources of constraint on the variation. Both the commonalities and divergences carry important lessons for Cognitive Science. They speak to the causal relations among language, thought, and culture; the possibility of cross-culturally shared aspects of perception and cognition; the methods needed for studying general-purpose, nonlinguistic concepts; and how languages are learned. WIREs Cogn Sci 2013, 4:583-597. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1251 Conflict of interest: The authors have declared no conflicts of interest for this article. For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined first language (L1) naming of common household objects in three groups of Russian–English bilinguals: early, childhood and late bilinguals. Their naming patterns were compared with those of native speakers of Russian and English, in order to detect possible second language (L2) English influence on L1 Russian naming patterns. We investigated whether such influence is modulated by the speaker's linguistic trajectory, specifically, their age of arrival in the L2 environment, which in turn influences their relative proficiency and dominance in the two languages. We also examined whether the potential for L2 shifts can be linked to specific characteristics of the categories in the L1 or L2. L2 influence was evident in the data, increasing with earlier age of arrival but most pronounced with lowest L1 proficiency. The changes entailed both narrowing and broadening of linguistic categories. These findings indicate that L1 word use is susceptible to L2 influence even for concrete nouns referring to familiar objects, and the nature of the shift for a given word appears to be driven by several factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Machery (2009) has proposed that the notion of 'concept' ought to be eliminated from the theoretical vocabulary of psychology. I raise three questions about his argument: (1) Is there a meaningful distinction between concepts and background knowledge? (2) Do we need to discard the hybrid view? (3) Are there really categories of things in the world that are the basis for concepts? Although I argue that the answer to all three is 'no', I agree with Machery's conclusion that seeking a single characterization of concepts will not be fruitful for understanding cognitive representations and processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Classifier languages are spoken by a large portion of the world's population, but psychologists have only recently begun to investigate the psychological reality of classifier categories and their potential for influencing non-linguistic thought. The current work evaluates both the mental representation of classifiers and potential cognitive consequences for speakers of Mandarin Chinese. We first provide a taxonomy of 126 common classifiers and a large sample of the objects classified by each as a tool for this and future research. We then present four studies investigating potential variation in the mental representation of the classifier categories. The data provide evidence that at least three forms of mental representation need to be distinguished. Finally, we present a fifth study investigating the impact of this variation on the cognitive consequences of classifier knowledge. This study suggests that the differences identified in Experiments 1-4 have important implications for the likelihood of finding cognitive consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Bilinguals’ lexical mappings for their two languages have been found to converge toward a common naming pattern. The present paper investigates in more detail how semantic convergence is manifested in bilingual lexical knowledge. We examined how semantic convergence affects the centers and boundaries of lexical categories for common household objects for Dutch–French bilinguals. We found evidence for converging category centers for bilinguals: (1) correlations were higher between their typicality ratings for roughly corresponding categories in the two languages than between typicality ratings of monolinguals in each language, and (2) in a geometrical representation, category centers derived from their naming data in the two languages were situated closer to each other than were the corresponding monolingual category centers. We also found evidence for less complex category boundaries for bilinguals: (1) bilinguals needed fewer dimensions than monolinguals to separate their categories linearly and (2) fewer violations of similarity-based naming were observed for bilinguals than for monolinguals. Implications for theories of the bilingual lexicon are discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

What drives humans around the world to converge in certain ways in their naming while diverging dramatically in others? We studied how naming patterns are constrained by investigating whether labeling of human locomotion reflects the biomechanical discontinuity between walking and running gaits. Similarity judgments of a student locomoting on a treadmill at different slopes and speeds revealed perception of this discontinuity. Naming judgments of the same clips by speakers of English, Japanese, Spanish, and Dutch showed lexical distinctions between walking and running consistent with the perceived discontinuity. Typicality judgments showed that major gait terms of the four languages share goodness-of-example gradients. These data demonstrate that naming reflects the biomechanical discontinuity between walking and running and that shared elements of naming can arise from correlations among stimulus properties that are dynamic and fleeting. The results support the proposal that converging naming patterns reflect structure in the world, not only acts of construction by observers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Daily experience is filled with objects that have been created by humans to serve specific purposes. For such objects, the very act of creation may be a key element of how people understand them. But exactly how does creator’s intention matter? We evaluated its contribution to two forms of categorization: the name selected for an artifact, and intuitions about what an artifact “really” is. To contrast the possibility that intention serves as an essence (Bloom, P. (1996). Intention, history, and artifact concepts. Cognition, 60, 1–29; Bloom, P. (1998). Theories of artifact categorization. Cognition, 66, 87–93.) determining an artifact’s name with the possibility that it matters through its relevance to discourse goals, participants in three experiments read scenarios about people interacting with an artifact and then judged the suitability of different names for it. The intention of the creator was of differing degrees of relevance to the communication, and the relevance of other aspects of the entity varied in a complementary fashion. We found that name selection was altered by the communicative goals of a situation, and name choice was most consistent with creator’s intention when the situation made intention relevant to achieving those goals. In a fourth experiment, we used the same scenarios to test the possibility that intention serves as an essence determining intuitions about what an object “really” is. The impact of creator’s intention was modulated by the discourse context. These findings suggest that creator’s intention influences both name choice and intuitions about what something “really” is by virtue of its impact on how communicative goals are best realized. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The name chosen for an object is influenced by both short-term history (e.g., speaker-addressee pacts) and long-term history (e.g., the language's naming pattern for the domain). But these influences must somehow be linked. We propose that names adopted through speaker-addressee collaboration have influences that carry beyond the original context. lb test this hypothesis, we adapted the standard referential communication task. The first director of each matching session was a confederate who introduced one of two possible names for each object. The director role then rotated to naive participants. The participants later rated name preference for the introduced and alternative names for each object. They also rated object typicality or similarity to each named category. The name that was initially introduced influenced later name use and preference, even for participants who had not heard the name from the original director. Typicality and similarity showed lesser effects from the names originally introduced. Name associations built in one context appear to influence retrieval and use of names in other contexts, but they have reduced impact on nonhinguistic object knowledge. These results support the notion that stable conventions for object names within a linguistic community may arise from local interactions, and they demonstrate how different populations of speakers may come to have a shared understanding of objects' nonlinguistic properties but different naming patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Native speakers of English use idioms such as put your foot down and spill the beans to label events that are not described literally by the words that compose the idioms. For many such expressions, the idiomatic meanings are transparent; that is, the connection between the literal expression and its figurative meaning makes sense to native speakers. We tested Keysar and Bly's (1995) hypothesis that this sense of transparency for the meaning of everyday idioms does not necessarily obtain because the idiomatic meanings are derived from motivating literal meanings or conceptual metaphors, but rather (at least in part) because language users construct explanations after the fact for whatever meaning is conventionally assigned to the expression. Non-native speakers of English were exposed to common English idioms and taught either the conventional idiomatic meaning or an alternative meaning. In agreement with Keysar and Bly's suggestion, their subsequent sense of transparency was greater for the meaning that the speakers had learned and used, regardless of which one it was. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We evaluate three theories of categorisation in the domain of artifacts. Two theories are versions of psychological essentialism; they posit that artifact categorisation is a matter of judging membership in a kind by appealing to a belief about the true, underlying nature of the object. The first version holds that the essence can be identified with the intended function of objects. The second holds that the essence can be identified with the creator's intended kind membership. The third theory is called "minimalism". It states that judgements of kind membership are based on beliefs about causal laws, not beliefs about essences. We conclude that each theory makes unnecessary assumptions in explaining how people make everyday classifications and inductions with artifacts. Essentialist theories go wrong in assuming that the belief that artifacts have essences is critical to categorisation. All theories go wrong in assuming that artifacts are treated as if they belong to stable, fixed kinds. Theories of artifact categorisation must contend with the fact that artifact categories are not stable, but rather depend on the categorisation task at hand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rather than having universal linguistic categories for sets of common objects, languages develop their own, idiosyncratic naming patterns for them. Accounting for these patterns requires reference not only to the understanding of stimulus properties by individual speakers of a language, but also to the linguistic and cultural histories of the language they speak. To better understand how these two sources of influence work together to produce linguistic categories, we examined the relations among linguistic categories for 60 common containers for speakers of English, Spanish, and Chinese. We discriminated among several possibilities that imply different relative contributions of the two sources of influence. No single type of relation dominated; the contributions of the two influences varied across different parts of the container domain. We suggest that perception of stimulus properties by individuals interacts with linguistic and cultural histories, but their interaction is constrained by structure in the stimulus space. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Argues the importance of objection recognition and naming of objects. Contention that people who speak different languages may have different patterns of naming an object while seeing the similarities among the objects; Suggestions about how complexity in naming may arise; Implications for theories of categorization, Whorfian Hypothesis and related views.

Discusses the major proposals that psychologists have made about how humans segment their world into categories. Review of anthropological literature that bears on the same issues; Extent of influence that findings from folk biological categories generalize to other sorts of categories; Sorts of categories that people name and use besides biological and artifact categories.

Tests `psychological essentialism' in the prediction that people use the presence or absence of H2O as the primary determinant of what liquids they call water. Beliefs about water; Typicality; Dimensions of water; General sense of `water' in liquids containing mixtures of H2O and other ingredients.

Suggests that in feature prediction people consider all the categories an object could belong to when they judge the likelihood that the object has a feature. Consideration of the most likely category; Evidence on alternative categories with feature probabilities for familiar objects in meaningful concepts; People considering alternative categories in limited situations.

Human language relies on a finite lexicon to express a potentially infinite set of ideas. A key result of this tension is that words acquire novel senses over time. However, the cognitive processes that underlie the historical emergence of new word senses are poorly understood. Here, we present a computational framework that formalizes competing views of how new senses of a word might emerge by attaching to existing senses of the word. We test the ability of the models to predict the temporal order in which the senses of individual words have emerged, using an historical lexicon of English spanning the past millennium. Our findings suggest that word senses emerge in predictable ways, following an historical path that reflects cognitive efficiency, predominantly through a process of nearest-neighbor chaining. Our work contributes a formal account of the generative processes that underlie lexical evolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considerable stability of the meanings associated with concrete nouns is arguably important for their effective use. On the other hand, variability is observed across time, individuals, and communicative contexts. This study examined the balance between stability and flexibility in meanings of common, basic level artifact nouns by evaluating speaker differences in their use as a function of age, education, and gender. Diverse samples of monolingual Dutch- (N ≈ 400) and French-speaking (N ≈ 300) Belgian adults made lexical category judgments for pictures of storage containers. Mixture IRT-analyses revealed the presence of latent groups of categorizers related to age but not gender or education in each language. In both languages, older adults relied more on traditional materials such as glass or cardboard in their judgments, whereas younger adults emphasized relatively new materials such as plastics. This generational difference demonstrates how elements of word meaning can shift over the short-term, linking individual to larger scale variation and providing the foundation for meaning evolution over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Semantic categories in the world's languages often reflect a historical process of chaining: A name for one referent is extended to a conceptually related referent, and from there on to other referents, producing a chain of exemplars that all bear the same name. The beginning and end points of such a chain might in principle be rather dissimilar. There is also evidence supporting a contrasting picture: Languages tend to support efficient, informative communication, often through semantic categories in which all exemplars are similar. Here, we explore this tension through computational analyses of existing cross-language naming and sorting data from the domain of household containers. We find (a) formal evidence for historical semantic chaining, and (b) evidence that systems of categories in this domain nonetheless support near-optimally efficient communication. Our results demonstrate that semantic chaining is compatible with efficient communication, and they suggest that chaining may be constrained by the functional need for efficient communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bilinguals are often not fully monolingual-like in either language. With respect to the lexicon, recent research demonstrates that their naming patterns for common household objects tend to converge on a common pattern for the two languages. The present study investigates the developmental trajectory of naming of common household objects in Dutch/French bilingual and monolingual children. First, we investigated whether bilingual word diversity for a set of household objects is limited by the demands of learning two languages. We found that children lag behind monolingual controls in terms of vocabulary at young ages, but that they catch up later, ending with as diverse a set of names in each language as the monolinguals. Second, we investigated how the convergence in the adult bilingual lexicon manifests itself over the course of development. We found that naming patterns converge with age following a similarity-driven strategy, a pattern also seen for the monolinguals. However, language-specific exceptions to the similarity principle are acknowledged from age 10 onward by monolinguals, but only from age 14 onward in bilinguals. At all ages, bilinguals show more convergence than monolinguals, and the difference is largest for adults. Together our results indicate that acquisition of naming patterns by bilinguals starts off more or less following the early stages of monolinguals, with separate naming patterns in the two languages, but convergence dominates the later developmental path to a larger extent for bilinguals than for monolinguals. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

if different languages map words onto referents in different ways, bilinguals must either (a) learn and maintain separate mappings for their two languages or (b) merge them and not be fully native-like in either. We replicated and extended past findings of cross-linguistic differences in word-to-referent mappings for common household objects using Belgian monolingual speakers of Dutch and French. We then examined word-to-referent mappings in Dutch-French bilinguals by comparing the way they named in their two languages. We found that the French and Dutch bilingual naming patterns converged on a common naming pattern, with only minor deviations. Through the mutual influence of the two languages, the category boundaries in each language move towards one another and hence diverge from the boundaries used by the native speakers of either language. Implications for the organization of the bilingual lexicon are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Investigates the hypothesis that immediate prior exposure to familiar objects and their names affect how an ambiguous target object is named. Exposure to the typical instance of one name category versus exposure to one two instances from a contrasting category; Variation of the exposure set to include conditions in which either the neighbor of a prototypical instance was paired with an instance dissimilar to the target.

This study investigated whether different lexicalization patterns of motion events in English and Spanish predict how speakers of these languages perform in non-linguistic tasks. Using 36 motion events, we compared English and Spanish speakers'' linguistic descriptions to their performance on two non-linguistic tasks: recognition memory and similarity judgments. We investigated the effect of language processing on non-linguistic performance by varying the nature of the encoding before testing for recognition and similarity. Participants encoded the events while describing them verbally or not. No effect of language was obtained in the recognition memory task after either linguistic or non-linguistic encoding and in the similarity task after non-linguistic encoding. We did find a linguistic effect in the similarity task after verbal encoding, an effect that conformed to language-specific patterns. Linguistic descriptions directed attention to certain aspects of the events later used to make a non-linguistic judgment. This suggests that linguistic and non-linguistic performance are dissociable, but language-specific regularities made available in the experimental context may mediate the speaker''s performance in specific tasks. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In natural language, multiple meanings often share a single word form, a phenomenon known as colexification. Some sets of meanings are more frequently colexified across languages than others, but the source of this variation is not well understood. We propose that cross-linguistic variation in colexification frequency is non-arbitrary and reflects a general principle of cognitive economy: More commonly colexified meanings across languages are those that require less cognitive effort to relate. To evaluate our proposal, we examine patterns of colexification of varying frequency from about 250 languages. We predict these colexification data based on independent measures of conceptual relatedness drawn from large-scale psychological and linguistic resources. Our results show that meanings that are more frequently colexified across these languages tend to be more strongly associated by speakers of English, suggesting that conceptual associativity provides an important constraint on the development of the lexicon. Our work extends research on polysemy and the evolution of word meanings by grounding cross-linguistic regularities in colexification in basic principles of human cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]