Abstract
When it comes to lexical access in L2 speech production, working memory (WM) seems to play a central role as for less automatized procedures require more WM capacity to be executed (Prebianca, 2007). With that in mind, this paper aims at claiming that bilingual lexical access qualifies as a controlled serial strategic search task susceptible to individual differences in WM capacity. Evidence in support of such claim is provided by the results of AUTHOR's (2010) study conducted so as to investigate the relationship between L2 lexical access, WMC and L2 proficiency. AUTHOR's (2010) findings indicate that bilingual lexical access entails underlying processes such as cue generation, set delimitation, serial search and monitoring, which to be carried out, require the allocation of attention. Attention is limited and, as a result, only higher spans were able to perform these underlying processes automatically.
Highlights
Blumenau, BR Abstract When it comes to lexical access in L2 speech production, working memory (WM) seems to play a central role, as less automatized procedures require more WM capacity to be executed (Prebianca, 2007)
Word selection or lexical access,2 as is usually referred to in the literature on speech production, is said to occur under competition. hat is, when a concept speciied in the conceptual message, activates a word in the mental lexical, this activation spreads along the lexico-semantic network, and several related words become activated, competing for selection. he extent to which such competition interferes with the selection of the appropriate word is said to be related to how strong the connections between words are
The experiments conducted by Conway and Engle support the idea that when retrieval from primary active memory involves handling response competition, individual diferences in the ability to suppress misleading information will account for better task performance
Summary
BR Abstract When it comes to lexical access in L2 speech production, working memory (WM) seems to play a central role, as less automatized procedures require more WM capacity to be executed (Prebianca, 2007). Because the L2 lacks automatization, speech production in the second language runs serially, causing L2 speech to be more hesitant, disluent and open to L1 inluence (Poulisse, 1997; Fortkamp, 2000; Kormos, 2006) Word retrieval, in this scenario, besides sufering from lack of automaticity, is afected by lexical representations that lack strong connections with the L2 conceptual system, forming a less integrated lexicon in relation to L1(Kormos, 2006; de Groot, 1995), and by competition from other L2 and L1 related items. Serial processing of explicitly stored retrieval procedures, weaker lexical representations, and lexical competition render L2 lexical access an attention-demanding task
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Ilha do Desterro A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English and Cultural Studies
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
