Abstract

Previous research suggests that native (L1) speakers employ “mental simulations” for language comprehension. Empirical work shows that intrinsic object properties (shape, size and color) are indeed simulated, but the evidence for extrinsic properties (orientation) is less convincing. There is little work on simulation in second language (L2) learners, but since they have similar perceptual experiences as L1 speakers there is good reason to think that L2 learners too use simulation to comprehend L2 sentences. This paper aims to conceptually replicate previous simulation studies into object size and orientation with L2 learners (N = 223) and two L1 speaker control groups (N = 64). An important difference with previous work is that we use language-specific forms indicating size (Spanish augmentative suffixes) and orientation (German placement verbs). We expected that language-specific forms would cause simulation for both the intrinsic and extrinsic property under investigation. We employed a sentence-picture verification task and analyzed Yes/No responses and reaction times (RTs). RT results on mis/match trials reveal no orientation effect, but a size match effect. Findings support previous research with null results for orientation and add support for size simulation. We suggest that future studies examine whether L2 learners make simulations for both implied and explicit sentences, whether they simulate with or without prior language instruction and whether they also simulate shape and color.

Highlights

  • Successful second language (L2) learners can comprehend written text in their L2

  • The aim of this study is to examine whether L2 learners simulate object orientation and size, by conceptually replicating previous studies with L1 speakers

  • Where we found that trial type was a significant factor in the linear mixed models (LMMs) model that we defined, and that reaction times (RTs) to match trials were faster than those to mismatch trials, this could be interpreted as support for mental simulation

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Successful second language (L2) learners can comprehend written text in their L2 Up until fifteen years ago, the mainstream view was that the human mind handles language as a computer does This means it combines abstract, amodal and arbitrary symbols (i.e., words) with syntactic rules (e.g., Burgess & Lund, 1997; Chomsky, 1980; Fodor, 2000; Kintsch, 1988, Pinker, 1994). The traveler will become stuck in an endless loop of abstract symbols, as every definition in the dictionary refers to other symbols. This has been referred to as the “symbol grounding problem” (cf Harnad, 1990).

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call