Presenting GECO: An eyetracking corpus of monolingual and bilingual sentence reading.

This article introduces GECO, the Ghent Eye-Tracking Corpus, a monolingual and bilingual corpus of the eyetracking data of participants reading a complete novel. English monolinguals and Dutch-English bilinguals read an entire novel, which was presented in paragraphs on the screen. The bilinguals read half of the novel in their first language, and the other half in their second language. In this article, we describe the distributions and descriptive statistics of the most important reading time measures for the two groups of participants. This large eyetracking corpus is perfectly suited for both exploratory purposes and more directed hypothesis testing, and it can guide the formulation of ideas and theories about naturalistic reading processes in a meaningful context. Most importantly, this corpus has the potential to evaluate the generalizability of monolingual and bilingual language theories and models to the reading of long texts and narratives. The corpus is freely available at http://expsy.ugent.be/downloads/geco .

Cross-lingual neighborhood effects in generalized lexical decision and natural reading.

The present study assessed intra- and cross-lingual neighborhood effects, using both a generalized lexical decision task and an analysis of a large-scale bilingual eye-tracking corpus (Cop, Dirix, Drieghe, & Duyck, 2016). Using new neighborhood density and frequency measures, the general lexical decision task yielded an inhibitory cross-lingual neighborhood density effect on reading times of second language words, replicating van Heuven, Dijkstra, and Grainger (1998). Reaction times for native language words were not influenced by neighborhood density or frequency but error rates showed cross-lingual neighborhood effects depending on target word frequency. The large-scale eye movement corpus confirmed effects of cross-lingual neighborhood on natural reading, even though participants were reading a novel in a unilingual context. Especially second language reading and to a lesser extent native language reading were influenced by lexical candidates from the nontarget language, although these effects in natural reading were largely facilitatory. These results offer strong and direct support for bilingual word recognition models that assume language-independent lexical access. (PsycINFO Database Record

Eye Movement Patterns in Natural Reading: A Comparison of Monolingual and Bilingual Reading of a Novel.

INTRODUCTION AND METHOD: This paper presents a corpus of sentence level eye movement parameters for unbalanced bilingual first language (L1) and second-language (L2) reading and monolingual reading of a complete novel (56 000 words). We present important sentence-level basic eye movement parameters of both bilingual and monolingual natural reading extracted from this large data corpus. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Bilingual L2 reading patterns show longer sentence reading times (20%), more fixations (21%), shorter saccades (12%) and less word skipping (4.6%), than L1 reading patterns. Regression rates are the same for L1 and L2 reading. These results could indicate, analogous to a previous simulation with the E-Z reader model in the literature, that it is primarily the speeding up of lexical access that drives both L1 and L2 reading development. Bilingual L1 reading does not differ in any major way from monolingual reading. This contrasts with predictions made by the weaker links account, which predicts a bilingual disadvantage in language processing caused by divided exposure between languages.

Frequency effects in monolingual and bilingual natural reading.

This paper presents the first systematic examination of the monolingual and bilingual frequency effect (FE) during natural reading. We analyzed single fixation durations on content words for participants reading an entire novel. Unbalanced bilinguals and monolinguals show a similarly sized FE in their mother tongue (L1), but for bilinguals the FE is considerably larger in their second language (L2) than in their L1. The FE in both L1 and L2 reading decreased with increasing L1 proficiency, but it was not affected by L2 proficiency. Our results are consistent with an account of bilingual language processing that assumes an integrated mental lexicon with exposure as the main determiner for lexical entrenchment. This means that no qualitative difference in language processing between monolingual, bilingual L1, or bilingual L2 is necessary to explain reading behavior. We present this account and argue that not all groups of bilinguals necessarily have lower L1 exposure than monolinguals do and, in line with Kuperman and Van Dyke (Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39 (3), 802-823, 2013), that individual vocabulary size and language exposure change the accuracy of the relative corpus word frequencies and thereby determine the size of the FEs in the same way for all participants.

How do speakers coordinate? Evidence for prediction in a joint word-replacement task.

We investigated whether speakers represent their partners' task in a joint naming paradigm. Two participants took turns in naming pictures; occasionally the (initial) picture was replaced by a different picture (target), signaling that they had to stop naming the initial picture. When the same participant had to name the target picture, he or she completed the name of the initial picture more often than when neither participant had to name the target picture. Crucially, when the other participant had to name the target picture, the first participant also completed the name of the initial picture more often than when neither participant named the target picture. However, the tendency to complete the initial name was weaker when the other participant had to name the target than when the same participant went on to name the target. We argue that speakers predict that their partner is about to respond using some, but not all, of the mechanisms they use when they prepare to speak.