Task effects in masked cross-script translation and phonological priming

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

139 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study examined cross-language masked priming with Korean-English unbalanced bilinguals. The aim was to determine if the type of prime and target relationship and the type of response task would modulate across-language priming effects. The nature of the relationship between prime (Korean: L1) and target (English: L2) pairs was manipulated so that they shared semantics and phonology (cognate translations), semantics only (noncognate translations), phonology only (homophones), or neither phonology nor semantics (baseline). These prime types were tested in three different response tasks, i.e., lexical decision, naming, and semantic categorization. In the lexical decision task (Experiment 1), significant priming from cognate and noncognate translation primes was observed. Homophone primes did not produce a significant priming effect. In the naming task (Experiment 2), both cognate and homophone primes produced significant priming effects but the noncognate translation primes did not. Experiment 3 replicated the homophone priming effect and showed that it was unlikely to be due to the shared initial phonemes of primes and targets. Finally, the semantic categorization task (Experiment 4) showed cognate and noncognate translation priming but not homophone priming. The results indicated that priming was affected both by prime-target relationship and by task type; this outcome was discussed in terms of the regulation of lexical information by a task-decision system.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)484-499
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Memory and Language
Volume49
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2003

Keywords

  • bilingual processing
  • cross-script
  • masked priming
  • task effects

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Task effects in masked cross-script translation and phonological priming'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this