Second Language Word Association: Processes, Methodologies, and Models
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Second Language Word Association: Processes, Methodologies, and Models John Paul Racine A thesis submitted to Cardiff University in fulfilment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2018 DECLARATION This work has not been submitted in substance for any other degree or award at this or any other university or place of learning, nor is being submitted concurrently in candidature for any degree or other award. Signed …………………………………………………… Date: September 28, 2018 STATEMENT 1 This thesis is being submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Ph.D. Signed ………………………………………….………… Date: September 28, 2018 STATEMENT 2 This thesis is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise stated, and the thesis has not been edited by a third party beyond what is permitted by Cardiff University’s Policy on the Use of Third Party Editors by Research Degree Students. Other sources are acknowledged by explicit references. The views expressed are my own. Signed ……………………………………….……….…… Date: September 28, 2018 STATEMENT 3 I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available online in the University’s Open Access repository and for inter-library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations. Signed ……………………………………………..…..….. Date: September 28, 2018 For Moka May you dream big and always believe in yourself Acknowledgements I wish to express my deepest thanks to my supervisors, Professors Alison Wray and Tess Fitzpatrick, and Dr. Michelle Aldridge-Waddon. Without their wisdom and guidance, this dissertation would not have been possible. My research has also benefitted greatly from discussions with many other distinguished academics over the years. Among others, these include Irina Elgort, Todd Bailey, Ian Munby, George Higginbotham, Dale Brown, Brent Wolter, Henrik Gyllstad, John Read, and my friends and colleagues in VARG and the JALT Vocabulary SIG. All of you have helped to shape my approach to lexical research. Special thanks to the staff and students at Cardiff, Swansea, and Dokkyo Universities for your support, generosity, and warmth. I also wish to acknowledge four remarkable contributors to applied linguistics: Paul Meara, Norbert Schmitt, Paul Nation, and Batia Laufer. Their unparalleled contributions to our understanding of second language vocabulary have inspired me and will continue to resonate with generations of researchers to come. Finally, I wish to thank Yuko and Moka. Thank you always for your love and patience. 1 Abstract This thesis examines processing in the bilingual mental lexicon by way of word association (WA) studies. The research reported here was designed to address three sets of key issues. Firstly, these studies attempt to establish whether or not WA methodology is a viable means of exploring the bilingual mental lexicon. Research questions to be addressed here concern the validity of current categorization schemes (i.e., whether they comprehensively account for all WA response data) and whether post-task interviews are necessary or useful in disambiguating responses. The second set of issues to be addressed here arise from the focus on cognitive processes in the lexicon. Research questions here are designed to address gaps in the literature concerning whether researchers are justified in conceptualizing subjects’ responses as evidence of underlying cognitive styles. These questions will be addressed by implementing underused and never before utilized methods. Methods employed include restricted association tasks and an unconventional priming manipulation intended to alter response types (as opposed to altering speed of response, the conventional measure for inferring that priming has occurred). The final set of issues to be addressed here concerns the identification of the determinants of WA behaviour. Based on the results of the current studies, I will present a “dynamic” model of the WA process. The model attempts to account for the interplay among respondents’ cognitive styles, features of the presented cues, and the influences of the experimental methodologies within which they meet. 3 In general, results of the studies showed that WA research is a viable means of investigating processes in the mental lexicon and that aspects of current WA methodologies (e.g. response categorization schemes) were up to the task. The findings also showed that, in some instances, subjects respond in accordance with what appears to be an underlying response preference, or cognitive style. In other cases, however, preferred response types can be altered by experimental manipulation. This suggested that WA responses are determined by interaction between types of cues, response preferences, and the methods employed. In the final chapter, a dynamic model of the word association process (DMWA) is introduced. Based on the conclusions described above, the DMWA describes and predicts WA behaviour in terms of the interaction of cue properties, characteristics of the respondents, and WA methodology. 4 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... 1 Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 3 Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... 5 List of Tables and Figures ................................................................................................ 9 List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 11 CHapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................ 13 1.1 Vocabulary researcH: From “neglected” to “vital” ................................................... 13 1.2 Investigating tHe mental lexicon via word association metHodologies ............. 15 1.3 Scrutinizing and innovating WA metHodology ......................................................... 20 1.4 Focus on categorization .................................................................................................. 22 1.5 Beyond categorization: Response profiles and cognitive styles .......................... 26 1.6 Validation tHrougH replication...................................................................................... 29 1.7 Revealing tHe processes: Adopting and adapting priming metHodologies ....... 32 1.8 Modelling tHe determinants of WA data ..................................................................... 34 1.9 Organization of this dissertation .................................................................................. 35 CHapter 2. Second Language Word Association and tHe Mental Lexicon: Applications and MetHods ............................................................................................ 37 2.1 A framework for second language WA researcH ...................................................... 37 2.2 Modelling bilingual processes and tHe mental lexicon .......................................... 39 2.2.1 The Revised Hierarchical Model (RHM) .................................................................................. 41 2.2.2 The bilingual interactive activation model (BIA) ............................................................... 44 2.3 Applications: WHat L2 word associations can tell us .............................................. 46 2.3.1 WA as a measure of L2 vocabulary development ............................................................... 48 2.3.2 L2 associations as an indicator of language proficiency ................................................. 54 2.3.3 Revealing connections and processes in the bilingual mental lexicon .................... 59 2.4 MetHodology: Adopting and adapting WA metHods ................................................ 65 2.4.1 Associations, reaction times, and lexical decision tasks ................................................. 66 2.4.2 Restricted word associations ........................................................................................................ 74 2.5 The researcH process: To be continued ...................................................................... 79 CHapter 3. Replicating Rabbits: Toward a CompreHensive Categorization of Word Association Responses ...................................................................................... 81 3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 81 3.2 Reviewing rabbits: The original study (Fitzpatrick, 2006) ................................... 85 3.2.1 New questions ....................................................................................................................................... 93 3.3 THe replication .................................................................................................................. 93 3.3.1 Method ...................................................................................................................................................... 93 3.3.2 Results and discussion ...................................................................................................................... 96 3.3.2.1 NS vs. NNS and the generalizability of the original findings ............................... 96 3.3.2.2 Subcategories ............................................................................................................................