Korean L2 learners’ lexical access; Cross-linguistic Activation at a Phonological Level Hyun-Jeong Nam

Lexical processing

Discrete serial models (e.g. Levelt 1989) Semantic node o o o o Lexical node o o o o Sublexical node o o o o

Connectionist view (e.g. Dell 1989, 2000; Costa, Caramazza & Sebasti´an-Gall´es 2000) Semantic node o o o o Lexical node o o o o Sublexical node o o o o

Can activation depart from the L2 phonological system to the non-target language (Korean)?

 Subjects Group A- 40 Low-proficient Korean-dominant L2 learners Group B- 40 Proficient Korean-dominant bilinguals Group C- 20 English-dominant Korean-Americans  Data collection and analysis “521OE3”

GroupNMeanStd error 95% Confidence interval Min score Max score lower limitupper limit sound recognition task A B C Total [ The full scores were rendered into scores out of 100 and then divided by the number of the subjects in the respective groups for the sake of comparison. Results

 The activation of non-target language Group A:.10 Group B:.18 Group C:.00.  Recognition of the target L2 sounds Group A: 71.25% Group B: % Group C: 100%

L1 phonological system may not be totally de- activated in L2 sound recognition even in the case of proficient bilinguals (De Bot 1992). Non-selective language process :initial activation involves both the bilingual’s languages (Dijkstra & Van Heuven, 2002). The activation of non-target language in the absence of orthographical similarity (Hoshino & Kroll, 2008).

Further discussions How does the phonological aspect of L1 activation affect L2 production and L2 reception differently?

Semantic nodes o o o o Lexical nodes coffee 커피 Phonemic nodes k ɒ f p ɪ Semantic nodes o o o o o Lexical nodes 깁스 cast Phonemic nodes g i b s k æ s t L2 production speaker’s intention

Phonemic nodes k ɒ f ɪ Lexical nodes coffee 커피 Semantic nodes o o o o o Phonemic nodes m iː t ɪ ŋ Lexical nodes 미팅 meeting Semantic nodes o o o o o L2 reception phonological resemblance

Thank you.