Korean Journal of Cognitive Science (인지과학)

The Korean Society for Cognitive Science (한국인지과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Parafoveal Semantic Preview Effect in Reading of Chinese-Korean Bilinguals

글 읽기에서 나타난 중심와주변 의미 미리보기 효과 : 중국어-한국어 이중언어자 대상으로

  • Wang, Shang (Interdisciplinary Program in Cognitive Science, Seoul National University) ;
  • Choo, Hyeree (Dept. of English Language and Literature, Konkuk University) ;
  • Koh, Sungryoung (Dept. of Psychology, Seoul National University)
  • 왕상 (서울학교 인지과학협동과정) ;
  • 주혜리 (건국대학교 영어영문학과) ;
  • 고성룡 (서울대학교 심리학과)
  • Received : 2023.12.13
  • Accepted : 2023.12.15
  • Published : 2023.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the semantic preview effect in the parafoveal processing of words that are presented in advance in the parafoveal area ahead of the fixation point, benefiting word processing in the fovea. Using the boundary technique in eye-tracking experiments, 25 Chinese-Korean bilinguals, whose native language is Chinese, were presented with 96 sentences that contained a mix of Chinese and Korean, where Korean words were associated with Chinese characters semantically. The study aimed to determine whether a semantic preview effect could be extracted in reading. The experimental sentences were divided into four conditions: the same Korean native word condition (e.g., "나라" meaning "country"), the same Korean word with semantic equivalent in Chinese condition (e.g., "국가" meaning "country"), the same Chinese condition with semantic equivalent in Korean (e.g., "国家" meaning "country"), and the unrelated Chinese condition to the target word (e.g., "围裙" meaning "apron"). The results showed a preview effect in both the Korean word and Chinese word conditions, with a larger preview effect observed in the Chinese word condition compared to the Korean word condition.

이 연구는 시선 추적의 경계선 기법을 사용하여, 자연스러운 읽기 과정에서 중심와주변에 제시된 단어의 표기체계와 의미 정보가 표적 단어의 읽기에 미치는 영향을 알아보았다. 참가자는 중국어와 한국어 이중언어자였고, 읽기 문장은 한국어 단어와 중국어 단어가 혼용된 문장이었다. 참가자들의 읽기 과정은 안구 운동 추적 도구 EyelinkII를 통해 모니터링되었다. 화면에는 전체 문장이 제시되었고, 시선이 표적 위치로 이동하기 직전에 미리 제시되어 있던 미리보기 단어가 표적단어로 대체되었다. 표적단어는 언제나 한글 단어였고, 미리보기 단어는 (1) 표적단어와 동일 단어(예: 나라), (2) 동일 의미의 한자어 단어(예: 국가) (3) 동일 의미의 중국어 단어(예: 国家), (4) 무관련 중국어 단어(예: 围裙)였다. 2)와 3) 조건은 같은 단어로 표기 체계만 한글과 한자로 달랐다. 주요 측정치는 표적 단어에 시선이 고정되는 시간이었고, 동일 단어, 동일 의미 한자어 단어 그리고 동일 의미 중국어 단어 조건의 고정시간은 무관련 중국어 조건에서보다 짧았으며 주시시간은 동일한 의미 중국어 단어 조건에서 동일 단어 조건보다 짧게 관찰되었다. 이 결과는 중국어-한국어 이중 언어 사용자들이 중심와주변에서 의미 정보를 추출할 수 있음을 시사하고 중심와주변에 제시된 단어의 표기법과 의미 정보가 모두 읽기에 영향을 주었음을 보여준다.

Keywords

References

  1. 배성봉, 이광오 (2016). 한자 점화가 한글 표기 한자어 재인에 미치는 효과. 언어과학연구, 79, 139-156
  2. 왕 상 (2013). Parafoveal semantic preview effect in reading of Chinese-Korean bilinguals. 서울대학교 석사학위논문.
  3. 이상은, 주혜리, 고성룡 (2020). 우리글 읽기에서 형태소정보의 미리보기 효과. 인지과학 31(2), 23-54.
  4. 이주혜 (2015). 우리글 읽기에서 나타나는 중심와주변부 의미 미리보기 효과. 서울대학교 석사학위논문.
  5. 코마츠요시타카 (2017). 시선 추적을 통한 일본어 읽기에서 보이는 중심와주변의 의미처리 연구. 서울대학교 박사학위논문.
  6. Abbott, M. J., Angele, B., Ahn, Y. D., & Rayner, K. (2015). Skipping syntactically illegal the previews: The role of predictability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(6), 1703-1714. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000142
  7. Altarriba, G., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2001). Semantic codes are not used in integrating information across eye fixations in reading: Evidence from fluent Spanish&English bilinguals. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 875-890. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194444
  8. Angele, B., Laishley, A. E., Rayner, K., & Liversedge, S. P. (2014). The effect of high- and low-frequency previews and sentential fit on word skipping during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(4), 1181-1203. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036396
  9. Antunez, M., Mancini, S., Hernandez-Cabrera, J., Hoversten, L., Barber, H., & Carreiras, M. (2021). Cross-linguistic semantic preview benefit in Basque-Spanish bilingual readers: Evidence from fixation-related potentials. Brain and Language, 214, 104905.
  10. Baayen, R., Davidson, D., & Bates, D. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
  11. Balota, D., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints and parafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17(3), 364-390. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(85)90013-1
  12. Bobb, S. C., Von Holzen, K., Mayor, J., Mani, N., & Carreiras, M. (2020). Co-activation of the l2 during l1 auditory processing: An erp cross-modal priming study. Brain and Language, 203, 104739.
  13. Dimitropoulou, M., Dunabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). Two words, one meaning: Evidence of automatic co-activation of translation equivalents. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 188.
  14. Dodge, R. (1907). An Experimental Study of Visual Fixation. The Psychological Review: Monograph Supplements, 8(4), i-95.
  15. Dunabeitia, J., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2010). Masked Translation Priming Effects With Highly Proficient Simultaneous Bilinguals. Experimental Psychology, 57(2), 98-107. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000013
  16. Duyck, W., & Warlop, N. (2009). Translation priming between the native language and a second language: New evidence from Dutch-French bilinguals. Experimental Psychology, 56(3), 173-179. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.56.3.173
  17. Engbert, R., Nuthmann, A., Richter, E., & Kliegl, R. (2005). SWIFT. Psychological Review, 112(4), 777-813. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.777
  18. Frost, R., Katz, L., & Bentin, S. (1987). Strategies for Visual Word Recognition and Orthographical Depth. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 13(1), 104-115. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.13.1.104
  19. Gerard, L., & Scarborough, D. (1989). Language-Specific Lexical Access of Homographs by Bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(2), 305-315. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.15.2.305
  20. Hohenstein, S., & Kliegl, R. (2014). Semantic Preview Benefit During Reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(1), 166-190. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033670
  21. Hutzler, F., Schuster, S., Marx, C., & Hawelka, S. (2019). An investigation of parafoveal masks with the incremental boundary paradigm. PloS one, 14(2), Article e0203013.
  22. Inhoff, A. (1989). Parafoveal Processing of Words and Saccade Computation During Eye Fixations in Reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 15(3), 544-555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.15.3.544
  23. Inhoff, W. (1990). Integrating information across eye fixations in reading: The role of letter and word units. Acta Psychologica, 73, 281-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(90)90027-D
  24. Kroll, J., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections Between Bilingual Memory Representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(2), 149-174. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1994.1008
  25. Laubrock, J., & Hohenstein, S. (2012). Orthographic consistency and parafoveal preview benefit: A resource-sharing account of language differences in processing of phonological and semantic codes. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(5), 292-293. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12000209
  26. Li, S., Liu, P., & Rayner, K. (2011). Eye movement guidance in Chinese reading: Is there a preferred viewing location? Vision Research, 51, 1146-1156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2011.03.004
  27. Macizo, P., Bajo, T., & Martin, M. C. (2010). Inhibitory processes in bilingual language comprehension: Evidence from spanish-english interlexical homographs. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(2), 232-244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.04.002
  28. Matin, E. (1974). Saccadic suppression: A review and an analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 899-917. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037368
  29. McConkie, G. W., & Rayner, K. (1975). The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 17, 578-586. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203972
  30. Meuter, R., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual Language Switching in Naming: Asymmetrical Costs of Language Selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40(1), 25-40. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.2602
  31. Pollatsek, A., Lesch, M., Morris, K., & Rayner, K. (1992). Phonological codes are used in integrating information across saccades in word identification and reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 148-162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.18.1.148
  32. Rayner, K. (1975a). Parafoveal identification during a fixation in reading. Acta Psychologica, 39, 271-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(75)90011-6
  33. Rayner, K. (1975). The perceptual span and peripheral cues in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 65-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90005-5
  34. Rayner, K. (1986). Eye movements and the perceptual span in beginning and skilled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 41, 211-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(86)90037-8
  35. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
  36. Rayner, K., Balota, D. A., & Pollatsek, A. (1986). Against parafoveal semantic preprocessing during eye fixations in reading. Canadian Journal of Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie, 40(4), 473-483. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0080111
  37. Rayner, K., & Juhasz, B. (2004). Eye movements in reading: Old questions and new directions. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1-2), 340-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440340000385
  38. Rayner, K., McConkie, G., & Zola, D. (1980). Integrating information across eye movements. Cognitive Psychology, 12(2), 206-226.
  39. Rayner, K. (2009). The thirty fifth Sir Frederick Bartlett lecture: Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457-1506. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902816461
  40. Rayner, K., Schotter, E., & Drieghe, D. (2014). Lack of semantic parafoveal preview benefit in reading revisited. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1067-1072. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0582-9
  41. Rayner, K., Slattery, T. J., Drieghe. D., & Liversedge, S.P. (2011). Eye Movements and Word Skipping During Reading: Effects of Word Length and Predictability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 37(2), 514.
  42. Reichle, E., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26(4), 445-476. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X03000104
  43. Schotter, E. (2013). Synonyms provide semantic preview benefit in English. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(4), 619-633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.002
  44. Schotter, E. R., Angele, B., & Rayner, K., (2012). Parafoveal processing in reading. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 74(1), 5-35. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0219-2
  45. Sohn, M. (1999). The Korean Language, Cambridge University Press
  46. Yan, M., Richter, E. M., Shu, H., & Kliegl, R. (2009). Readers of Chinese extract semantic information from parafoveal words. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16(3), 561-566. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.3.561
  47. Yang, J., Wang, S., Chen, H., Rayner, K. (2009). The Time Course of Semantic and Syntactic Processing in Chinese Sentence Comprehension: Evidence from Eye Movements. Memory & Cognition, 37, 1164-176. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.8.1164
  48. Yang, J., Wang, S., Xu, Y., Rayner, K.(2009) .Do Chinese readers obtain preview benefit from character n + 2? Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 35, 1192-1204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013554
  49. Yang, J. (2013). Preview effects of plausibility and character order in reading Chinese transposed words: evidence from eye movements. Journal of Research in Reading, 36, 18-34 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2013.01553.x
  50. Zhou, X., & Marslen, W. (1999). Phonology, orthography, and semantic activation in reading Chinese. Journal of Memory & Language, 41, 579-606. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2663