Abstract
The romanization of non-alphabetic scripts, particularly in digital contexts, is a widespread phenomenon across many languages. However, the effect of script romanization on English reading by bilinguals with English as a second language is underexamined. Guided by the premises of the script relativity hypothesis and the Bilingual Interactive Activation (BIA+) model, we examined differences in phonological activation during visual English word recognition by Hindi-English bilinguals after they were primed with interlingual homophones in Devanagari (traditional Hindi script) and Romanagari (romanized Hindi script). We also explored the specific roles played by diacritic markers and individual language proficiencies. Linear mixed-effects and regression modeling showed that participants were faster at English word recognition when primed by interlingual homophones in Romanagari than in Devanagari. Further, words with diacritics led to faster English word recognition than words without diacritics with both scripts. This was unexpected since Romanagari does not mark diacritics. Finally, lexical proficiency in English and Devanagari explained variance in phonological priming effects. The findings provide evidence that adopting an additional L1 script might reconfigure the architecture of the bilingual lexicon. Our results support the view that script differences play a critical role in language processing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1996). The CELEX lexical database (CD-ROM). Linguistic Data Consortium.
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
Brysbaert, M., Van Dyck, G., & Van de Poel, M. (1999). Visual word recognition in bilinguals: Evidence from masked phonological priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(1), 137. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.25.1.137
Chauncey, K., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2008). Code-switching effects in bilingual word recognition: A masked priming study with event–related potentials. Brain and Language, 105(3), 161–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2007.11.006
Chauncey, K., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2011). The role of subjective frequency in language switching: An ERP investigation using masked priming. Memory & Cognition, 39(2), 291–303. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-010-0006-7.
Daniels, P. T., & Bright, W. (1996). The world’s writing systems. Oxford University Press.
Dehaene, S. (2005). Evolution of human cortical circuits for reading and arithmetic: The neuronal recycling hypothesis. In S. Dehaene, J. R. Duhamel, M. D. Hauser, & G. Rizzolatti (Eds.), From monkey brain to human brain (pp. 133–157). MIT Press.
Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & van Heuven, W. J. (1999). Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and Language, 41(4), 496–518.
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5(03), 175–197. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728902003012
Dimitropoulou, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). Phonology by itself: Masked phonological priming effects with and without orthographic overlap. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2011.477811
Dimitropoulou, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011b). Transliteration and transcription effects in biscriptal readers: The case of Greeklish. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(4), 729–735. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0095-8.
Dubey, N., Witzel, N., & Witzel, J. (2018). Script differences and masked translation priming: Evidence from Hindi-English bilinguals. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(11), 2421–2438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021817743241
Duyck, W., Diependaele, K., Drieghe, D., & Brysbaert, M. (2004). The size of the cross-lingual masked phonological priming effect does not depend on second language proficiency. Experimental Psychology, 51(2), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.51.2.116
Forster, K. I. (1998). The pros and cons of masked priming. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27(2), 203–233. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023202116609
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 35(1), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195503.
Goldhahn, D., Eckart, T., & Quasthoff, U. (2012). Building large monolingual dictionaries at the leipzig corpora collection: From 100 to 200 Languages. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Turkey, 29, 31–43.
Gollan, T. H., Forster, K. I., & Frost, R. (1997). Translation priming with different scripts: Masked priming with cognates and noncognates in Hebrew-English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(5), 1122–1139. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.23.5.1122
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language & Cognition, 1, 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728998000133.
Gupta, A. (2004). Reading difficulties of Hindi–speaking children with developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing, 17(1–2), 79–99. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:READ.0000013823.56357.8b
Jiang, N. (1999). Testing processing explanations for the asymmetry in masked cross-language priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728999000152
Keatley, C. W., Spinks, J. A., & De Gelder, B. (1994). Asymmetrical cross-language priming effects. Memory & Cognition, 22(1), 70–84. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03202763.
Kim, J., & Davis, C. (2003). Task effects in masked cross–script translation and phonological priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(4), 484–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00093-7
Koda, K. (2005). Learning to read across writing systems: Transfer, metalinguistic awareness, and second language reading development. In V. Cook & B. Bassetti (Eds.), Second language writing systems (pp. 311–334). Multilingual Matters.
Kroll, J. F., & Tokowicz, N. (2005). Models of bilingual representation and processing: Looking back and to the future. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 531–553). Oxford University Press.
Lam, K. J., & Dijkstra, T. (2010). Word repetition, masked orthographic priming, and language switching: Bilingual studies and BIA+ simulations. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13(5), 487–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2010.488283
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 325–343. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0
Lewis, M. P., Simons, G. F., & Fennig, C. D. (Eds.). (2016). Ethnologue: Languages of Asia. SIL International.
Lin, C. Y., Wang, M., & Ko, I. Y. (2018). The time course of activation of semantic and orthographic information in morphological decomposition by Korean adults and developing readers. Frontiers in Communication, 3, 51. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2018.00051.
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2007). The language experience and proficiency questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50(4), 940–967. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/067)
Nag, S. (2017). Learning to read alphasyllabaries. In K. Cain, D. L. Compton, & R. K. Parrila (Eds.), Theories of reading development (pp. 75–98). John Benjamin Publishing.
Nag, S., & Snowling, M. J. (2012). Reading in an alphasyllabary: Implications for a language universal theory of learning to read. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(5), 404–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2011.576352
Nakada, T., Fujii, Y., & Kwee, I. L. (2001). Brain strategies for reading in the second language are determined by the first language. Neuroscience Research, 40(4), 351–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-0102(01)00247-4
Nakamura, P. R., Joshi, R. M., & Ji, X. R. (2018). Investigating the asymmetrical roles of syllabic and phonemic awareness in akshara processing. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(5), 499–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219417718201
Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (2012). Cross–script phonological priming for Japanese-English bilinguals: Evidence for integrated phonological representations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(10), 1563–1583. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2011.606669
Pae, H. K. (2020). Script effects as the hidden drive of the mind, cognition, and culture. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55152-0
Perfetti, C. A., & Bell, L. (1991). Phonemic activation during the first 40 ms of word identification: Evidence from backward masking and priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(4), 473–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90017-E
Perfetti, C. A., Liu, Y., Fiez, J., Nelson, J., Bolger, D. J., & Tan, L. H. (2007). Reading in two writing systems: Accommodation and assimilation of the brain’s reading network. Bilingualism, 10(2), 131. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728907002891
R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
Rao, C., Mathur, A., & Singh, N. C. (2013). ‘Cost in transliteration’: The neurocognitive processing of Romanized writing. Brain and Language, 124(3), 205–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2012.12.004
Rastle, K., Harrington, J., & Coltheart, M. (2002). 358,534 nonwords: The ARC nonword database. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A(4), 1339–1362. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980244000099
Sapir, E. (1929). The study of language as a science. Language, 5, 207–214. https://doi.org/10.2307/409588
Schwartz, A. I., Kroll, J. F., & Diaz, M. (2007). Reading words in Spanish and English: Mapping orthography to phonology in two languages. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(1), 106–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960500463920
Shafiullah, M., & Monsell, S. (1999). The cost of switching between Kanji and Kana while reading Japanese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14(5–6), 567–607. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909699386194
Simons, G. F., & Fennig, C. (Eds.). (2017). Ethnologue: Languages of the world (20th ed.). SIL International.
Vaid, J., & Padakannaya, P. (2004). Reading and writing in semi-syllabic scripts: An introduction. Reading and Writing, 17(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:READ.0000013861.42512.b0
van Hell, J. G., & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 780–789. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196335
van Orden, G. C. (1987). A ROWS is a ROSE: Spelling, sound, and reading. Memory & Cognition, 15(3), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197716
Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. John Wiley.
Wilson, L. B., Tregellas, J. R., Slason, E., Pasko, B. E., & Rojas, D. C. (2011). Implicit phonological priming during visual word recognition. NeuroImage, 55(2), 724–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.12.019
Zhou, H., Chen, B., Yang, M., & Dunlap, S. (2010). Language nonselective access to phonological representations: Evidence from Chinese-English bilinguals. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(10), 2051–2066. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470211003718705
Funding
The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
We have no known conflicts of interest to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Singh, A., Wang, M. & Faroqi-Shah, Y. The influence of romanizing a non-alphabetic L1 on L2 reading: the case of Hindi-English visual word recognition. Read Writ 35, 1475–1496 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10241-7
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10241-7