Bilingual Memory, to the Extreme: Lexical Processing in Simultaneous
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 22 (2), 2019, 331–348 C Cambridge University Press 2018 doi:10.1017/S1366728918000378 MICAELA SANTILLI Bilingual memory, to the Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience extreme: Lexical processing in (INCYT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos simultaneous interpreters∗ Aires, Argentina MARTINA G. VILAS Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCYT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Aires, Argentina National Scientific and Technical Research Council (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina EZEQUIEL MIKULAN Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCYT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Aires, Argentina (Received: April 06, 2017; final revision received: February 06, 2018; National Scientific and Technical Research Council accepted: February 27, 2018; first published online 16 April 2018) (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina MIGUEL MARTORELL CARO This study assessed whether bilingual memory is susceptible to Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience the extreme processing demands of professional simultaneous (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience interpreters (PSIs). Seventeen PSIs and 17 non-interpreter (INCYT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos bilinguals completed word production, lexical retrieval, and Aires, Argentina verbal fluency tasks. PSIs exhibited enhanced fluency in their EDINSON MUÑOZ two languages, and they were faster to translate words in both Departamento de Lingüística y Literatura, Facultad de directions. However, no significant differences emerged in Humanidades, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago, picture naming or word reading. This suggests that lexical Chile enhancements in PSIs are confined to their specifically trained LUCAS SEDEÑO abilities (vocabulary search, interlingual reformulation), with Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience no concomitant changes in other word-processing mechanisms. (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience Importantly, these differences seem to reflect specifically (INCYT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Aires, Argentina linguistic effects, as both samples were matched for relevant National Scientific and Technical Research Council executive skills. Moreover, only word translation performance (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina correlated with the PSIs’ years of interpreting experience. AGUSTÍN IBÁÑEZ Therefore, despite their tight cooperation, different Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience subcomponents within bilingual memory seem characterized by (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience independent, usage-driven flexibility. (INCYT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Aires, Argentina Keywords: bilingual memory, lexical processing, simultaneous National Scientific and Technical Research Council interpreters, expertise (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina Universidad Autónoma del Caribe, Barranquilla, Colombia ∗ This work was partially supported by grants from CONICET; Center for Social and Cognitive Neuroscience (CSCN), School CONICYT/FONDECYT Regular (1170010); Programa Interdisci- of Psychology, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Santiago de Chile, plinario de Investigación Experimental en Comunicación y Cognición Chile (PIIECC), Facultad de Humanidades, USACH; Proyecto Basal Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Australian USACH USA1398_ME112214; FONDAP 15150012; and the INECO Research Council (ACR), Sydney, Australia Foundation. ADOLFO M. GARCÍA Micaela Santilli and Martina G. Vilas are both lead authors of this Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience work, with equal contribution. (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCYT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Address for correspondence: Aires, Argentina Adolfo M. García, Ph. D., Institute of Cognitive and Translational National Scientific and Technical Research Council Neuroscience & CONICET, Pacheco de Melo 1860, C1126AAB, (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina Buenos Aires, Argentina Faculty of Education, National University of Cuyo (UNCuyo), [email protected] Mendoza, Argentina Supplementary Material can be found online at https://doi.org/ 10.1017/S1366728918000378 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics, on 23 Jul 2020 at 19:42:20, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918000378 332 Micaela Santilli et al. Introduction Teichmann, Turc, Nogues, Ferrieux & Dubois, 2012). Moreover, at least some of the neural circuits engaged Cognitive domains are highly flexible and adaptive, during interlingual processes (e.g., word translation) are especially if subjected to continuous demanding different from those involved in single-language processes conditions. This is clearly shown by expertise studies. For (e.g., word reading) (Borius, Giussani, Draper & Roux, example, visual selective attention is enhanced in habitual 2012; García, 2015b). videogame players (Green & Bavelier, 2003), whereas Beyond strictly linguistic mechanisms, speech problem-solving and motor error detection mechanisms production and comprehension in L1 and L2 also rely are boosted in chess masters (Bilalic,´ McLeod & Gobet, on cognitive control processes, which are activated 2008) and professional tango dancers (Amoruso, Ibáñez, depending on the interactional context and the bilingual Fonseca, Gadea, Sedeno, Sigman, García, Fraiman status of the interlocutor (Green & Weib, 2014). As & Fraiman, 2016; Amoruso, Sedeno, Huepe, Tomio, proposed by several models, control mechanisms regulate Kamienkowski, Hurtado, Cardona, Alvarez Gonzalez, lexical competition processes in bilingual memory. In Rieznik, Sigman, Manes & Ibáñez, 2014), respectively. single- or dual-language contexts, bilinguals must select However, little is known about the impact of sustained a specific language schema and suppress non-target extreme demands on another well-characterized cognitive language items (Green & Abutalebi, 2013), a requisite domain: bilingual memory – namely, the lexico-semantic that renders lexical processing more costly but seems system of individuals who speak both a native and a non- to enhance executive functioning at large (Bialystok, native language (L1 and L2, respectively). A key model to 2009; Bialystok, Craik, Grady, Chau, Ishii, Gunji & examine this issue is afforded by experts in simultaneous Pantev, 2005; Bialystok, Craik, Klein & Viswanathan, interpretation, a most exacting form of bilingual activity 2004; Calvo, Ibáñez & García, 2016). Indeed, executive characterized by cumulative, dynamic, and concurrent functions play a key role in the inhibition of words in processing of oral input and output under strict time the non-target language, be it L1 or L2 (Rodriguez- constraints (Chernov, 2004). Building on these premises, Fornells, De Diego Balaguer & Munte, 2006), but control we assessed the susceptibility of bilingual memory to demands are not always equivalent for both languages. expertise-related changes by comparing the lexical skills In low- or mid-proficiency NIBs, switching from the of professional simultaneous interpreters (PSIs) and non- dominant language (typically, L1) to the less dominant one interpreter bilinguals (NIBs). (typically, L2) proves more effortful than doing so in the Bilingual memory is cross-theoretically conceived as opposite direction (Costa & Santesteban, 2004). However, a complex of interfacing components (Dijkstra & van this asymmetrical switching cost is sensitive to the level Heuven, 2002; Dong, Gui & Macwhinney, 2005; French and type of bilingual proficiency, as it can be neutralized & Jacquet, 2004; Kroll & Stewart, 1994; Kroll, van in highly proficient NIBs (Costa & Santesteban, 2004) and Hell, Tokowicz & Green, 2010; Paradis, 2004;VanHell even reversed in PSIs (Proverbio, Leoni & Zani, 2004). & De Groot, 1998; van Heuven, Dijkstra & Grainger, Despite its integrity as a functional system, then, 1998). Macroanatomically, lexical processes for both L1 bilingual memory is an amalgam of specialized and L2 in high-proficiency bilinguals are subserved by mechanisms that can be subjected to differential use- overlapping regions (Perani, Paulesu, Galles, Dupoux, related demands, adaptations, and enhancements. Many Dehaene, Bettinardi, Cappa, Fazio & Mehler, 1998), of the connections holding these subsystems together irrespective of the age of L2 acquisition (Abutalebi, Cappa are extremely taxed in PSIs, who must continually & Perani, 2005; Perani et al., 1998). However, different reformulate diverse forms of oral discourse from components of this overall system possess specific, one language into another, sometimes for several partly dissociable functions. For example, although the hours. Typically, in professional settings, simultaneous L1 and the L2 lexico-semantic systems continuously interpreting occurs at a speed which largely exceeds coactivate and exchange information (for a review, the ideal rate of 95–120 words per minute (Chernov, see Kroll, Dussias, Bice & Perrotti, 2015), they are 2004;Gerver,1975), with a delay between input and subserved by relatively independent neural substrates