Prior Anat, Katz Michal, Mahajna Islam, Rubinsten Orly
Front Psychol. 2015 Mar 17;6:266. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00266. eCollection 2015.
Languages differ in how they represent numerical information, and specifically whether the verbal notation of numbers follows the same order as the symbolic notation (in non-inverted languages, e.g., Hebrew, "25, twenty-five") or whether the two notations diverge (in inverted languages, e.g., Arabic, "25, five-and-twenty"). We examined how the structure of number-words affects how arithmetic operations are processed by bilingual speakers of an inverted and a non-inverted language. We examined Arabic-Hebrew bilinguals' performance in the first language, L1 (inverted) and in the second language, L2 (non-inverted). Their performance was compared to that of Hebrew L1 speakers, who do not speak an inverted language. Participants judged the accuracy of addition problems presented aurally in L1, aurally in L2 or in visual symbolic notation. Problems were presented such that they matched or did not match the structure of number words in the language. Arabic-Hebrew bilinguals demonstrated both flexibility in processing and adaptation to the language of aural-verbal presentation - they were more accurate for the inverted order of presentation in Arabic, but more accurate for non-inverted order of presentation in Hebrew, thus exhibiting the same pattern found for native Hebrew speakers. In addition, whereas native Hebrew speakers preferred the non-inverted order in visual symbolic presentation as well, the Arabic-Hebrew bilinguals showed enhanced flexibility, without a significant preference for one order over the other, in either speed or accuracy. These findings suggest that arithmetic processing is sensitive to the linguistic representations of number words. Moreover, bilinguals exposed to inverted and non-inverted languages showed influence of both systems, and enhanced flexibility in processing. Thus, the L1 does not seem to have exclusive power in shaping numerical mental representations, but rather the system remains open to influences from a later learned L2.
不同语言在表示数字信息的方式上存在差异，具体而言，数字的语言表示法是否与符号表示法遵循相同的顺序（在非倒置语言中，例如希伯来语，“25，二十五”），或者这两种表示法是否不同（在倒置语言中，例如阿拉伯语，“25，五和二十”）。我们研究了数字词的结构如何影响使用倒置语言和非倒置语言的双语者处理算术运算的方式。我们考察了阿拉伯语-希伯来语双语者在第一语言L1（倒置语言）和第二语言L2（非倒置语言）中的表现。将他们的表现与不会说倒置语言的希伯来语L1使用者的表现进行了比较。参与者判断以L1听觉呈现、L2听觉呈现或视觉符号表示呈现的加法问题的准确性。呈现的问题与语言中数字词的结构相匹配或不匹配。阿拉伯语-希伯来语双语者在处理过程中表现出灵活性，并能适应听觉-语言呈现的语言——他们在阿拉伯语中对倒置呈现顺序的回答更准确，但在希伯来语中对非倒置呈现顺序的回答更准确，因此呈现出与以希伯来语为母语者相同的模式。此外，虽然以希伯来语为母语者在视觉符号呈现中也更喜欢非倒置顺序，但阿拉伯语-希伯来语双语者在速度或准确性方面表现出更高的灵活性，对两种顺序没有明显的偏好。这些发现表明，算术处理对数字词的语言表示很敏感。此外，接触倒置和非倒置语言的双语者表现出两种系统的影响，并在处理过程中具有更高的灵活性。因此，L1似乎没有塑造数字心理表征的排他性力量，而是该系统仍然对后来学习的L2的影响开放。
