L2 Semantic Representation: Homograph Norms of Word Association

The purpose of this study is to investigate the characteristics of nonnative semantic representation. Homograph norms of word association were compared between native speakers of English and Japanese EFL learners. All participants were told to write down any word in the order that came to mind when they read each homograph. The study consisted of two parts: Analysis 1 compared the first three associations produced by Japanese EFL learners, classified into responses written either in their first language (L1) or second language (L2). A large proportion of first associations was written in Japanese, but in the second and third associations, the responses written in English increased in number. Analysis 2 compared the first associations of native speakers and Japanese EFL learners, categorized as dominant and subordinate meanings of homographs. Some dominant meanings for native speakers were considered subordinate meanings by Japanese EFL learners (e.g., for “passage”, many Japanese EFL learners first wrote “book” instead of “way”). The results showed that: 1) most L2 stimulus words were first associated with L1; and 2) the dominant and subordinate meanings were, in some cases, different for L1 and L2 semantic representations. 1. Background 1.1 Homograph Norms of Word Association in L1 Research Homographs have one orthography and more than one distinct meaning. For example, the word “bank” has two unrelated meanings: a business that keeps and lends money, and the land alongside a river. Homograph processing has long received a great deal of attention in L1 psycholinguistic research. When using homographs for psycholinguistic research, it is crucial to clarify the relative meaning dominance of the multiple meanings. Most previous studies used a word association test to examine the meaning dominance of homographs (e.g., Nelson, McEvoy, Walling, & Wheeler, 1980). A main concern in the word association of homographs is to define the dominant meaning that most commonly comes to mind, and the subordinate meaning that comes to mind less frequently. A number of studies in L1 psychological research have reported the dominant and subordinate meanings LET 中部支部研究紀要第 26 号(2014) 14 of homographs (e.g., Wollen, Cox, Coahran, Shea, & Kirby, 1980; Gorfein, Viviani, & Leddo, 1982). Twilley, Dixon, Taylor, and Clark (1994) compared nine previous studies of homograph association tests, and concluded that their categorizations and proportions of relative meaning dominance of homographs were generally stable, even though the region and time of data collection might vary. The study shows that the semantic representation of homographs in L1 mental lexicon is predictable and stable. 1.2 Word Associations in L2 Research When it comes to exploring semantic representation in the L2 mental lexicon, several research studies into L2 word association have been conducted, though they do not use homographs as the stimulus word (e.g., Meara, 1984; Wolter, 2001). Antón-Méndez and Gollan (2010) supported a notion proposing that knowledge of two languages affects the nature of semantic representation. Their bilingual participants in the word association produced different responses to the monolinguals. It is assumed that semantic representations are different between L1 and L2 mental lexicons. If true, there should be some homographs whose semantic representations differ between native speakers and EFL learners. In spite of that, L2 psycholinguistic studies concerning homographs do not take L2 leaners’ word associations and meaning dominances into account but employ the stimulus items based on native speakers’ word association for homographs (e.g., Elston-Güttler & Friederici, 2005). The purpose of this study is to obtain the characteristics of nonnative semantic representation and prove the evidence of the different word associations between two groups. Although a number of important theories have been proposed regarding the structure of the L2 mental lexicon (e.g., Kroll & Stewart, 1994; Jiang, 2000), there is no complete model that explains L2 network and representation. Past L2 research studies, however, have pointed out that L1 has a significant influence on L2 acquisition, and that the L1 lexicon is assumed to be larger than that of the L2. A revised hierarchical model proposed by Kroll and Stewart (1994) assumes lexical and conceptual links in bilingual memory. They suggested that the L1 lexicon normally represents more words than the L2 lexicon, which means that the L1 lexicon is larger than the L2 lexicon. They also assumed that the lexical associations from L2 to L1 are stronger than those from L1 to L2. On the other hand, the conceptual links from L2 to a concept are assumed to be weaker than from L1. This is because new L2 words are first understood through L1 translation in the foreign/second language learning and are linked with the translation equivalent of new L2 words. Therefore, it can be difficult to directly associate them with concepts. Ishida: L2 Semantic Representation: Homograph Norms of Word Association 15 2. Research Questions Although word associations have been used as a tool for exploring L2 mental lexicon, norms for homograph meanings—which demonstrate a distinguishing feature between L1 and L2 mental lexicons, showing the strength of semantic mapping of lexical forms with multiple meanings—have not had sufficient attention paid. This study investigates homograph norms of a word association test and compares learners’ responses against those of native speakers, thereby attempting to delineate the characteristics of the L2 mental lexicon. Specifically, the following two points are considered: 1) To what extent are L2 stimulus words first associated with L1? (Analysis 1) 2) Is there any difference of meaning dominance in L1 and L2 semantic representation? (Analysis 2)