Semantic ambiguity within and across languages: An integrative review

被引:43
作者
Degani, Tamar [1 ]
Tokowicz, Natasha [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Pittsburgh, Ctr Learning Res & Dev, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA
关键词
Semantic ambiguity; Interlingual homographs; BILINGUAL LEXICAL ACCESS; INTERLINGUAL HOMOGRAPHS; NATIVE-LANGUAGE; INTERLEXICAL HOMOGRAPHS; TRANSLATION NORMS; WORD RECOGNITION; WORKING-MEMORY; 2ND-LANGUAGE; ACTIVATION; CONTEXT;
D O I
10.1080/17470210903377372
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Semantic ambiguity often occurs within a language (e.g., the word oorgano in English means both a body part and a musical instrument), but it can also cross a language boundary, such that a given word form is shared in two languages, but its meanings are different (e.g., the word oangelo means ostingo in Dutch). Bilingual individuals are therefore faced not only with ambiguity in each of their languages, but also with ambiguity across languages. The current review focuses on studies that explored such cross-language ambiguity and examines how the results from these studies can be integrated with what we have learned about within-language ambiguity resolution. In particular, this review examines how interactions of frequency and context manifest themselves in ambiguity that crosses a language boundary and call for the inclusion of language context as a contributing factor. An extension of the monolingual reordered access model (Duffy, Morris, Rayner, 1988) is outlined to discuss the interactions between these factors. Furthermore, the effects of the similarity between the two meanings, task differences, and individual differences are explored. This review highlights the need for studies that test within- and cross-language ambiguity in the same individuals before strong conclusions can be made about the nature of interactions between frequency, semantic context, and language context.
引用
收藏
页码:1266 / 1303
页数:38
相关论文
共 109 条
[1]   Lexical ambiguity resolution across languages: A Theoretical and empirical review [J].
Altarriba, J ;
Gianico, JL .
EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2003, 50 (03) :159-170
[2]  
ALTARRIBA J, 1992, 5 ANN CUNY C HUM SEN
[3]  
ANDERSON JR, 1983, SCIENCE, V220, P25, DOI 10.1126/science.6828877
[4]   RETRIEVAL OF PROPOSITIONAL INFORMATION FROM LONG-TERM MEMORY [J].
ANDERSON, JR .
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 1974, 6 (04) :451-474
[5]   Lexical expertise and reading skill: bottom-up and top-down processing of lexical ambiguity [J].
Andrews, Sally ;
Bond, Rachel .
READING AND WRITING, 2009, 22 (06) :687-711
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1993, The CELEX lexical data base on CD-ROM
[7]  
ARMSTRONG BC, 2008, 30 ANN M COGN SCI SO
[8]   ACCESSING INTERLEXICAL HOMOGRAPHS - SOME LIMITATIONS OF A LANGUAGE-SELECTIVE ACCESS [J].
BEAUVILLAIN, C ;
GRAINGER, J .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 1987, 26 (06) :658-672
[9]   Sentential and discourse topic effects on lexical ambiguity processing: An eye movement examination [J].
Binder, KS .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 2003, 31 (05) :690-702
[10]   Semantic ambiguity effects in word identification [J].
Borowsky, R ;
Masson, MEJ .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 1996, 22 (01) :63-85