Color Categorization in Bilingual Populations: Korean-English Bilinguals Prutha S. Deshpande Cognitive Sciences Advisors: Kimberly A. Jameson and Louis Narens Institute for Mathematical Behavioral Sciences Cognitive Sciences I would like to acknowledge the assistance of Helen Haan and Jacey Song in the collection of the Korean Language data.
INTRODUCTION
Linguistic Relativity • Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis – Influence of language on cognition • Traditional focus on the domain of color categorization. • Rich history of cross-cultural empirical research. Linguistic Relativity and Bilingualism: • Is the cognitive processing of non-linguistic information impacted by bilingualism?
Gap in the Literature • Previous studies have primarily examined the color cognition of bilinguals in their non- English language modes, in comparison with monolingual speakers of both languages. • The present study addresses this gap by comparing the color categorization and naming behavior of bilinguals in both of their languages.
Rationale for choosing Korean-English Bilinguals • The Korean color lexicon has interesting features that differentiate it from the English color lexicon. • In particular, Korean has two highly salient basic color terms for the region of color space that in English would be described with the single color term “green” (Roberson, Hanley & Pak, 2009). Choloksayk Yentwusayk
METHODS
Participants • Undergraduate students bilingual in Korean and English, with varying proficiency in each of the languages. • The final sample included 25 participants. • Participants scheduled for 2 sessions of 2 hours each. • One of the sessions was conducted in Korean, while the other was conducted in English.
Assessments • Language Assessment • Color Vision Assessment Ishihara Farnsworth- Pseudoisochromatic Munsell 100 Hue Plates Test Test
Experimental Tasks 1. Naming – Asked to name 330 colored chips – Provided confidence judgments 2. Focus Selection Asked to select the best example or ‘focus’ of – the basic color terms elicited in Task 1. 3. Category Mapping – For the same basic color terms as Task 2, asked to indicate every color that could be named with ‘X’ color term.
Task 1: Naming Sample color chips (Lindsey & Brown, 2014) Color chart approximating the samples used in this study (World Color Survey, Munsell chart)
Task 2: Focus Selection Example: Indicate the focus of “Red”. Color chart approximating the samples used in this study (World Color Survey, Munsell chart)
Task 3: Category Mapping Example: Indicate all the colors that can be named “Red”. Color chart approximating the samples used in this study (World Color Survey, Munsell chart)
OBJECTIVES
Objectives 1. Examine color category boundaries across method used, i.e. Naming Method (Task 1) vs. Category Mapping Method (Task 3). Within an individual and language condition – To test for consistency in color categorization – 2. Examine variations in color categorization across language of testing. Special emphasis on the “green” region of color – space.
ANALYSES
OBJECTIVE 1
Consistency in Naming (Task 1) and Mapping (Task 3) English Language Condition 100% 90% Percent Consistency 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 25 Participants (N=25) Korean Language Condition 100% 90% Percent Consistency 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 25 Participants (N=25) (Data sorted in a rank order)
Consistency in Naming (Task 1) and Focus Selection (Task 2) English Language Condition 100% 90% Percent Consistency 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 25 Participants (N=25) Korean Language Condition 100% 90% Percent Consistency 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 25 Participants (N=25) (Data sorted in a rank order)
Consistency in Focus Selection (Task 2) and Mapping (Task 3) English Language Condition 100% 90% Percent Consistency 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 25 Participants (N=25) Korean Language Condition 100% 90% Percent Consistency 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 25 Participants (N=25) (Data sorted in a rank order)
Average Consistency Across all 3 Tasks English Language Condition 100% Percent Consistency 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Participants (N=25) Korean Language Condition 100% 90% Percent Consistency 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Participants (N=25)
OBJECTIVE 2
ENGLISH LANGUAGE CONDITION Monolexemic Color Term Usage (37 terms - used by 2 or more participants) N = 25
English Monolexemic Color Term Usage (Lindsey and Brown, 2014)
KOREAN LANGUAGE CONDITION Monolexemic Color Term Usage (57 terms used by 2 or more participants) N = 25
Aggregate Confidence Levels in Naming 1. English Color Naming A B C D E F G H I J 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Confidence rating for each chip given on a scale of 1 to 5 in Task 1.
Aggregate Confidence Levels in Naming 2. Korean Color Naming A B C D E F G H I J 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Confidence rating for each chip given on a scale of 1 to 5 in Task 1.
Aggregate Confidence Levels in Naming 1. English Color Naming A B C D E F G H I J 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 2. Korean Color Naming A B C D E F G H I J 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Confidence rating for each chip given on a scale of 1 to 5 in Task 1.
Focal Selections of Basic Color Terms 1. English Focal Selections 25 20 A 15 C 10 E Agreement G 5 Level I 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Focal Selections of Basic Color Terms Agreement Level 2. Korean Focal Selections 25 A 20 C 15 E 10 G 5 I 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Focal Selections of Basic Color Terms 1. English Focal Selections 25 20 A 15 C 10 E Agreement G 5 Level I 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 2. Korean Focal Selections 25 A 20 C 15 E 10 G 5 I 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Modal Focal Choices Basic Color English Korean Color Term Language Language Representation Condition Condition Black J0 J0 White A0 A0 Gray F0 F0 Red G3 G3 Orange E5 E5 Yellow C10 C9 Brown H7 H7 Green G17 G17 Blue H29 H29 Purple H35 H34/H35 Pink E39 E39
Modal Focal Choices English Frequency of Korean Frequency Language Modal Language of Modal Condition Choice Condition Choice Black 80% White 84% White 72% Black 76% Yellow 52% Blue 56% Gray 48% Yellow 52% Red 44% Orange 52% Blue 44% Red 48% Orange 40% Gray 40% Green 32% Green 36% Purple 28% Brown 32% Brown 24% Purple 28% Pink 24% Pink 24%
Focal Selections of Non-Basic Color Terms 1. In English (23 terms) 25 A 20 C 15 E 10 G Agreement 5 I Level 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 2. In Korean (30 terms) 25 A 20 C 15 E 10 G 5 I 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Aggregate Frequency of Basic Green By Naming Method (Task 1) English Language Condition (Monolexemic Green) A C E 25 Frequency 20 G 15 10 I 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Aggregate Frequency of Basic Green By Naming Method (Task 1) English Language Condition (Monolexemic Green) A C E 25 Frequency 20 G 15 10 I 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Korean Language Condition (Monolexemic Choloksayk) A C E 25 20 G 15 10 I 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Aggregate Frequency of Basic Green By Mapping Method (Task 3) English Language Condition (Monolexemic Green) A C E 25 Frequency 20 G 15 10 I 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Recommend
More recommend
