Cerebral asymmetries in the processing of opaque compounds in L1 Polish and L2 English

References

Anaki, David, Miriam Faust & Shlomo Kravetz. 1998. Cerebral hemispheric asymmetries in processing lexical metaphors. Neuropsychologia 36. 691–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0028-3932(97)00110-3.Search in Google Scholar

Beaumont, Jennifer G. 1983. Methods for studying cerebral hemispheric function. In Andrew W. Young (ed.), Functions of the right cerebral hemisphere, 114–146. London: Academic Press.10.1016/B978-0-12-773250-3.50009-7Search in Google Scholar

Beeman, Mark J., Edward M. Bowden & Morton A. Gernsbacher. 2000. Right and left hemisphere cooperation for drawing predictive and coherence inferences during normal story comprehension. Brain and Language 71. 310–336. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2268.Search in Google Scholar

Beeman, Mark, Rhonda B. Friedman, Jordan Grafman, Enrique Perez & Miriam B. Lindsay. 1994. Summation priming and coarse semantic coding in the right hemisphere. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 6. 26–45. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1994.6.1.26.Search in Google Scholar

Binder, Jeffrey R., Rutvik H. Desai, William W. Graves & Lisa L. Conant. 2009. Where is the semantic system? A critical review and meta-analysis of 120 functional neuroimaging studies. Cerebral Cortex 19. 2767–2796. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhp055.Search in Google Scholar

Boers, Frank. 2000. Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics 21. 553–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.4.553.Search in Google Scholar

Bottini, Gabriella, Rhiannon Corcoran, Roberto Sterzi, Eraldo Paulesu, Pietro Schenone, Pina Scarpa, Richard Frackowiak & Chris D. Frith. 1994. The role of the right hemisphere in the interpretation of figurative aspects of language: A positron emission tomography activation study. Brain 117. 1241–1253. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/117.6.1241.Search in Google Scholar

Bourne, Victoria J. 2006. The divided visual field paradigm: Methodological considerations. Laterality 11. 373–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/13576500600633982.Search in Google Scholar

British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML edition). 2007. Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium. Available at: http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk.Search in Google Scholar

Bunt, Ann H., Don S. Minckler & Gene W. Johanson. 1977. Demonstration of bilateral projection of the central retina of the monkey with horseradish peroxidase neuronography. Journal of Comparative Neurology 17. 619–630. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.901710412.Search in Google Scholar

Burgess, Curt & Christine Chiarello. 1996. Neurocognitive mechanisms underlying metaphor comprehension and other figurative language. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 11. 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1101_4.Search in Google Scholar

Calvo, Noelia, Sofía Abrevaya, Macarena M. Cuitiño, Brenda Steeb, Dolores Zamora, Lucas Sedeño, Agustín Ibáñez & Adolfo M. García. 2019. Rethinking the neural basis of prosody and non-literal language: Spared pragmatics and cognitive compensation in a bilingual with extensive right-hemisphere damage. Frontiers in Psychology 10. 570. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00570.Search in Google Scholar

Carpenter, Roger H. S. 1988. Movements of the eyes. London: Pion.Search in Google Scholar

Cieślicka, Anna B. 2006. Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by second language learners. Second Language Research 22(2). 115–144. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr263oa.Search in Google Scholar

Cieślicka, Anna B. & Roberto R. Heredia. 2010. Hemispheric asymmetries in processing L1 and L2 idioms: Effects of salience and context. Brain and Language 116. 136–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2010.09.007.Search in Google Scholar

Cieślicka, Anna B., Roberto R. Heredia & Tanya García. 2017. Task effects in bilingual idiom comprehension. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 53. 95–117. https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2017-0005.Search in Google Scholar

Coulson, Seana & Cyma Van Petten. 2007. A special role for the right hemisphere in metaphor comprehension? ERP evidence from hemifield presentation. Brain Research 1146. 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2007.03.008.Search in Google Scholar

Dehaene, Stanislas, Emmanuel Dupoux, Jacques Mehler, Laurent Cohen, Eraldo Paulesu, Daniela Perani, Pierre-Francois van de Moortele, Stéphane Lehéricy & Denis Le Bihan. 1997. Anatomical variability in the cortical representation of first and second language. NeuroReport 8(17). 3809–3815. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-199712010-00030.Search in Google Scholar

Diaz, Michele T. & Anna Eppes. 2018. Factors influencing right hemisphere engagement during metaphor comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology 9. 414. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00414.Search in Google Scholar

Dijkgraaf, Aster, Robert J. Hartsuiker & Wouter Duyck. 2019. Prediction and integration of semantics during L2 and L1 listening. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 34(7). 881–900. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1591469.Search in Google Scholar

El-Bialy, Rowan, Christina L. Gagné & Thomas L. Spalding. 2013. Processing of English compounds is sensitive to the constituents’ semantic transparency. The Mental Lexicon 8. 75–95. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.8.1.04elb.Search in Google Scholar

Faust, Miriam & Nira Mashal. 2007. The role of the right cerebral hemisphere in processing novel metaphoric expressions taken from poetry: A divided visual field study. Neuropsychologia 45. 860–870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.08.010.Search in Google Scholar

Fernandez, Laura G. 2013. Hemispheric differences in preparatory attention: A divided visual field study. Paris: Université René Descartes Doctoral thesis. https://theses.hal.science/tel-00875182 (accessed 2 June 2023).Search in Google Scholar

Ferrand, Ludovic & Boris New. 2003. Syllabic length effects in visual word recognition and naming. Acta Psychologica 113. 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0001-6918(03)00031-3.Search in Google Scholar

Fiorentino, Robert & David Poeppel. 2007. Compound words and structure in the lexicon. Language Cognitive Processes 22. 953–1000. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960701190215.Search in Google Scholar

Fogliata, Arianna, Silvia Rizzo, Fabiola Reati, Carlo Miniussi, Massimiliano Oliveri & Costanza Papagno. 2007. The time course of idiom processing. Neuropsychologia 45. 3215–3222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.06.009.Search in Google Scholar

Forgács, Bálint, Ágnes Lukács & Csaba Pléh. 2014. Lateralized processing of novel metaphors: Disentangling figurativeness and novelty. Neuropsychologia 56. 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.01.003.Search in Google Scholar

Friederici, Angela D., Shirley-Ann Rüschemeyer, Anja Hahne & Christian J. Fiebach. 2003. The role of left inferior frontal and superior temporal cortex in sentence comprehension: Localizing syntactic and semantic processes. Cerebral Cortex 13. 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/13.2.170.Search in Google Scholar

Giora, Rachel. 1997. Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics 8. 183–206. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1997.8.3.183.Search in Google Scholar

Giora, Rachel. 1999. On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 919–929. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(98)00100-3.Search in Google Scholar

Giora, Rachel, Eran Zaidel, Nachum Soroker, Gila Batori & Asa Kasher. 2000. Differential effects of right- and left-hemisphere damage on understanding sarcasm and metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol 15. 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms151&2_5.10.1080/10926488.2000.9678865Search in Google Scholar

Hickok, Gregory & David Poeppel. 2007. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 8. 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2113.Search in Google Scholar

Huang, Min, Shen Lexian, Xu Shuyuan, Huang Yanhong, Huang Shaojuan & Tang Xuemei. 2022. Hemispheric processing of Chinese scientific metaphors: Evidence via hemifield presentation. Frontiers in Psychology 13. 894715. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.894715.Search in Google Scholar

Janus, Daniel & Adam Przepiórkowski. 2007. Poliqarp 1.0: Some technical aspects of a linguistic search engine for large corpora. In Jacek Waliński, Krzysztof Kredens & Stanisław Góźdź-Roszkowski (eds.), The proceedings of practical applications in language and computers PALC 2005, 227–253. Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Jarema, Gonia, Céline Busson, Rossitza Nikolova, Kyrana Tsapkini & Gary Libben. 1999. Processing compounds: A crosslinguistic study. Brain and Language 68. 362–369. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2088.Search in Google Scholar

Ji, Hongbo, Christina L. Gagné & Thomas L. Spalding. 2011. Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds. Journal of Memory and Language 65. 406–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.07.003.Search in Google Scholar

Jończyk, Rafał. 2014. Hemispheric asymmetry of emotion words in a non-native mind: A divided visual field study. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition 20(3). 326–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357650x.2014.966108.Search in Google Scholar

Juhasz, Barbara J. 2007. The influence of semantic transparency on eye movements during English compound word recognition. In Roger P. G. van Gompel, Martin H. Fischer, Wayne S. Murray & Robin L. Hill (eds.), Eye movements: A window on mind and brain, 373–390. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1016/B978-008044980-7/50018-5Search in Google Scholar

Juhasz, Barbara J. 2008. The processing of compound words in English: Effects of word length on eye movements during reading. Language and Cognitive Processes 23(7–8). 1057–1088. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802144434.Search in Google Scholar

Kacinik, Natalie A. & Christine Chiarello. 2007. Understanding metaphors: Is the right hemisphere uniquely involved? Brain and Language 100. 188–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.10.010.Search in Google Scholar

Kecskés, Istvan. 2000. A cognitive-pragmatic approach to situation-bound utterances. Journal of Pragmatics 32. 605–625. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(99)00063-6.Search in Google Scholar

Kecskés, Istvan & Tunde Papp. 2000. Metaphorical competence in trilingual language production. In Jasone Cenoz & Ulrike Jessner (eds.), English in Europe: The acquisition of a third language, 99–120. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781800417991-007Search in Google Scholar

Kempler, Daniel, Diana Van Lancker, Virginia Marchman & Elizabeth Bates. 1999. Idiom comprehension in children and adults with unilateral brain damage. Developmental Neuropsychology 15. 327–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565649909540753.Search in Google Scholar

Klepousniotou, Ekaterini, Bruce G. Pike, Karsten Steinhauer & Vincent Gracco. 2012. Not all ambiguous words are created equal: An EEG investigation of homonymy and polysemy. Brain and Language 123(1). 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2012.06.007.Search in Google Scholar

Klepousniotou, Ekaterini, Debra A. Titone & Carolina Romero. 2008. Making sense of word senses: The comprehension of polysemy depends on sense overlap. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 34(6). 1534–1543. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013012.Search in Google Scholar

Klepousniotou, Ekaterini & Shari R. Baum. 2007. Disambiguating the ambiguity advantage effect in word recognition: An advantage for polysemous but not homonymous words. Journal of Neurolinguistics 20(1). 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2006.02.001.Search in Google Scholar

Kuperman, Victor. 2013. Accentuate the positive: Semantic access in English compounds. Frontiers in Psychology 4. 203. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00203.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Susan S. & Mirella Dapretto. 2006. Metaphorical versus literal word meanings: fMRI evidence against a selective role of the right hemisphere. NeuroImage 29. 536–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.08.003.Search in Google Scholar

Leow, Ronald P. 2015. Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: A student-centered approach. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315887074Search in Google Scholar

Libben, Gary. 1998. Semantic transparency and processing of compounds: Consequences for representation, processing and impairment. Brain and Language 61. 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1876.Search in Google Scholar

Libben, Gary. 2006. Why study compound processing? An overview of the issues. In Gary Libben & Gonia Jarema (eds.), The representation and processing of compound words, 1–22. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199228911.003.0001Search in Google Scholar

Liontas, John I. 2002. Context and idiom understanding in second languages. In Susan H. Foster-Cohen, Tanja Ruthenberg & Marlie L. Poschen (eds.), EUROSLA yearbook: Annual conference of the European Second Language Association, vol. 2, 155–185. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/eurosla.2.11lioSearch in Google Scholar

Liu, Hengshuang & Fan Cao. 2016. L1 and L2 processing in the bilingual brain: A meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Brain and Language 159. 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2016.05.013.Search in Google Scholar

Longtin, Catherine-Marie & Fanny Meunier. 2005. Morphological decomposition in early visual word processing. Journal Memory and Language 53. 26–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.02.008.Search in Google Scholar

Lundgren, Kristine & Hiram Brownell. 2016. Figurative language deficits associated with right hemisphere disorder. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups 1. 66–81. https://doi.org/10.1044/persp1.sig2.66.Search in Google Scholar

Marelli, Marco & Claudio Luzzatti. 2012. Frequency effects in the processing of Italian nominal compounds: Modulation of headedness and semantic transparency. Journal of Memory and Language 66. 644–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.01.003.Search in Google Scholar

Mashal, Nira & Miriam Faust. 2009. Conventionalisation of novel metaphors: A shift in hemispheric asymmetry. Laterality 14. 573–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/13576500902734645.Search in Google Scholar

Mashal, Nira, Miriam Faust, Talma Hendler & Mark Jung-Beeman. 2007. An fMRI investigation of the neural correlates underlying the processing of novel metaphoric expressions. Brain and Language 100. 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.10.005.Search in Google Scholar

Mirman, Daniel, Qi Chen, Yongsheng Zhang, Ze Wang, Olufunsho K. Faseyitan, H. Branch Coslett & Myrna F. Schwartz. 2015. Neural organization of spoken language revealed by lesion-symptom mapping. Nature Communications 6. 6762. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms7762.Search in Google Scholar

Oliveri, Massimiliano, Leonor Romero & Costanza Papagno. 2004. Left but not right temporal involvement in opaque idiom comprehension: A repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16. 848–855. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892904970717.Search in Google Scholar

O’Regan, Louise & Deborah J. Serrien. 2018. Individual differences and hemispheric asymmetries for language and spatial attention. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 12. 380. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00380.Search in Google Scholar

Patterson, Karalyn, Michael D. Kopelman, Anna M. Woollams, Sonia L. Brownsett, Fatemeh Geranmayeh & Richard J. S. Wise. 2014. Semantic memory: Which side are you on? Neuropsychologia 76. 182–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.11.024.Search in Google Scholar

Pęzik, Piotr. 2012. Wyszukiwarka PELCRA dla danych NKJP. In Adam Przepiórkowski, Mirosław Bańko, Rafał Górski & Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds.), Narodowy korpus języka polskiego, 253–227. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Search in Google Scholar

Pinheiro, José, Bates Douglas, Saikat DebRoy, Deepayan Sarkar, EISPACK, Siem Heisterkamp, Bertan Willigen & R-Core. 2017. Package nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models, version 3.1-131 [R package]. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nlme/index.html.Search in Google Scholar

Pobric, Gorana, Elizabeth Jefferies & Matthew A. Lambon Ralph. 2010. Category-specific versus category-general semantic impairment induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Current Biology 20. 964–968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2010.03.070.Search in Google Scholar

Pollatsek, Alexander & Jukka Hyönä. 2005. The role of semantic transparency in the processing of Finnish compound words. Language and Cognitive Processes 20. 261–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960444000098.Search in Google Scholar

Rapp, Alexander M., Dirk T. Leube, Michael Erb, Wolfgang Grodd & Tilo T. Kircher. 2004. Neural correlates of metaphor processing. Cognitive Brain Research 20. 395–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.03.017.Search in Google Scholar

Rastle, Keith & Matt H. Davis. 2008. Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language and Cognitive Processes 23. 942–971. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802069730.Search in Google Scholar

R Core Team. 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Search in Google Scholar

Rebuschat, Patrick. 2015. Implicit and explicit learning of languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sibil.48Search in Google Scholar

Rinaldi, Maria C., Paola Marangolo & Francesca Baldassarri. 2004. Metaphor comprehension in right brain-damaged patients with visuo-verbal and verbal material: A dissociation (re)considered. Cortex 40. 479–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70141-2.Search in Google Scholar

Romero, Lauro Leonor J., Marco Tettamanti, Stefano F. Cappa & Costanza Papagno. 2008. Idiom comprehension: A prefrontal task? Cerebral Cortex 18. 162–170. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhm042.Search in Google Scholar

Schoonbaert, Sofie, Wouter Duyck, Marc Brysbaert & Robert J. Hartsuiker. 2009. Semantic and translation priming from a first language to a second and back: Making sense of the findings. Memory and Cognition 37(5). 569–586. https://doi.org/10.3758/mc.37.5.569.Search in Google Scholar

Shields, Jane. 1991. Semantic-pragmatic disorder: A right hemisphere syndrome? British Journal of Disorders of Communication 26. 383–392. https://doi.org/10.3109/13682829109012023.Search in Google Scholar

Soroker, Nachum, Asa Kasher, Rachel Giora, Gila Batori, Cecilia Corn, Mali Gil & Eran Zaidel. 2005. Processing of basic speech acts following localized brain damage: A new light on the neuroanatomy of language. Brain and Cognition 57. 214–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2004.08.047.Search in Google Scholar

Springer, Sally & Georg Deutsch. 1985. Left brain, right brain. New York: Freeman.Search in Google Scholar

Štekauer, Pavol, Salvador Valera & Lívia Kőrtvélyessy. 2012. Word-formation in the world’s languages: A typological survey. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511895005Search in Google Scholar

Taft, Marcus. 2004. Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 57A. 745–765. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000477.Search in Google Scholar

Uchiyama, Hitoshi T., Daisuke N. Saito, Hiroki C. Tanabe, Tokiko Harada, Ayumi Seki, Kousaku Ohno, Tatsuya Koeda & Nirihiro Sadato. 2012. Distinction between the literal and intended meanings of sentences: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of metaphor and sarcasm. Cortex 48. 563–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2011.01.004.Search in Google Scholar

Van Lancker-Sidtis, Diana. 2006. Where in the brain is nonliteral language? Metaphor and Symbol 21. 213–244. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2104_2.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Hsueh-Cheng, Li-Chuan Hsu, Ti-Min Tien & Marc Pomplun. 2014. Predicting raters’ transparency judgments of English and Chinese morphological constituents using latent semantic analysis. Behavioural and Research Methods 46. 284–306. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0360-z.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, Fanpei G., Jennifer Edens, Claire Simpson & Daniel C. Krawczyk. 2009. Differences in task demands influence the hemispheric lateralization and neural correlates of metaphor. Brain and Language 111. 114–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2009.08.006.Search in Google Scholar

Young, Andrew W. 1982. Methodological theoretical bases. In Graham J. Beaumont (ed.), Divided visual field studies of cerebral organization, 11–27. London: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar