Cross-language activation and semantic judgements of translation ambiguous words among Chinese–English bilinguals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims and Objectives: Translation ambiguous words are lexical items with one-to-many equivalents in another language. Some of these equivalents are more dominant (i.e., more frequently used) than others. The aim of the present study is to explore non-target language activation of translation ambiguous words among Chinese–English bilinguals. Methodology: The implicit priming paradigm was used in three experiments to explore the activation of primary and secondary first language (L1) translations when bilinguals process second language (L2) translation ambiguous words (Experiment 1); the effect of L1 translation repetition on the processing of semantically related words in an L2 (Experiment 2); and whether such patterns are observed in the reverse direction, that is, whether L2 primary translations are activated when processing L1 translation ambiguous words (Experiment 3). Data and Analysis: We use repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs) to analyse the data. Findings/conclusions: Experiment 1 showed that when processing pairs of semantically unrelated (SU) L2 words, primary L1 translation equivalents are activated, but not secondary L1 translation equivalents. Experiment 2 found that when the target L2 words were semantically related, performance was facilitated when their translation equivalents were the same L1 word (i.e., implicitly repeated). Similarly, Experiment 3 showed that when processing L1 words, the L2 translation equivalents are automatically activated. Moreover, under semantically related conditions, implicit repetition of the non-target L2 translation facilitated L1 judgements, while under SU conditions, L2 implicit repetition hampered L1 judgements. Originality: Most research on cross-language activation has examined L1 activation during L2 processing. However, few have investigated the reverse and findings from these few studies are inconsistent. Moreover, research on cross-language activation has mainly investigated the activation of primary translation equivalents, with very little focus on secondary translations. The present study uses the implicit priming paradigm to address these gaps in the literature. Significance: The findings support interactive theories of bilingual processing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".