Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …


An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences

Editor-in-Chief: van der Auwera, Johan

6 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 0.378
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.897

CiteScore 2016: 0.50

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.309
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 1.158

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 54, Issue 6 (Nov 2016)


Attraction between words as a function of frequency and representational distance: Words in the bilingual brain

Arjen P. Versloot
  • German and Scandinavian Languages and Cultures, University of Amsterdam, Spuistraat 134, NL 1012 VB Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Fryske Akademy
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Eric Hoekstra
  • Corresponding author
  • Fryske Akademy, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Doelestrjitte 8, NL 8911 DX Ljouwert/Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2016-11-08 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2016-0028


Bilingual speakers store cognates from related languages close together in their mental lexicon. In the case of minority languages, words from the dominant language often exert influence on their cognates in the minority language. In this article, we present a model describing that influence or force of attraction as a function of frequency and of (dis)similarity (representational distance). More specifically, it is claimed that the strength of the force of attraction of one word upon another is (among others) a function of their frequencies divided by their formal dissimilarity. The model is applied to the distribution of nouns derived from adjectives in Frisian, where the suffix -ens competes with -heid. Of these two suffixes, Frisian -heid is similar to Dutch -heid, whereas Frisian -ens does not have a similar counterpart in Dutch. The model predicts that Frisian derived nouns of which the adjectival bases are similar in form and meaning to Dutch will occur more often with -heid and less often with -ens. It also predicts that this effect will be stronger as the words involved are more frequent. Our findings make it possible to verify the model’s quantification of the influence of Dutch words on their cognates.

Keywords: bilingualism; representational convergence; language modeling; word storage; analogy; blocking


  • Agresti, Alan. 1992. A survey of exact inference for contingency tables. Statistical Science 7. 131–153.Google Scholar

  • Arndt-Lappe, Sabine. 2014. Analogy in suffix rivalry: The case of English -ity and -ness. English Language and Linguistics 18(3). 497–548.Google Scholar

  • Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word formation in generative grammar (Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Barbiers, Sjef, Hans Bennis, Gunther De Vogelaer, Magda Devos & Margreet van der Ham. 2005. Syntactic atlas of the Dutch dialects, vol. I. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar

  • Barbiers, Sjef, Johan van der Auwera, Hans Bennis, Eefje Boef, Gunther De Vogelaer & Margreet van der Ham. 2008. Syntactic atlas of the Dutch dialects, vol. II. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar

  • Breuker, Pieter. 2001a. The development of standard West Frisian. In Horst Haider Munske in collaboration with Nils Århammar, Volkert Faltings, Jarich Hoekstra, Oebele Vries, Alastair Walker & Ommo Wilts (eds.), Handbook of Frisian studies, 711–721. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar

  • Breuker, Pieter. 2001b. West Frisian in language contact. In Horst Haider Munske in collaboration with Nils Århammar, Volkert Faltings, Jarich Hoekstra, Oebele Vries, Alastair Walker & Ommo Wilts (eds.), Handbook of Frisian studies, 121–129. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar

  • Bybee, Joan. 1995. Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10(5). 425–455.Google Scholar

  • Coetsem, Frans van. 1988. Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

  • Dehaene, Stanislas. 2003. The neural basis of the Weber–Fechner law: A logarithmic mental number line. Update Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(4). 145–147.Google Scholar

  • Diessel, Holger. 2007. Frequency effects in language acquisition, language use, and diachronic change. New Ideas in Psychology 25(2). 104–123.Google Scholar

  • Dijkstra, Anton. 2003. Lexical storage and retrieval in bilinguals. In Roeland van Hout, Aafke Hulk, Folkert Kuiken & Richard Towell (eds.), The interface between syntax and the lexicon in second language acquisition, 129–150. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Dijkstra, Anton. 2008. Met andere woorden: over taal en meertaligheid [In other words: on language and multilingualism]. Inaugural address. Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit.Google Scholar

  • Di Sciullo, Anna Maria & Edwin Williams. 1987. On the definition of word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Gorter, Durk & Reitze Jonkman. 1995. Taal yn Fryslân op ‘e nij besjoen [Language in Fryslân revisited]. Ljouwert: Fryske Akademy.Google Scholar

  • Haan, Germen de. 1997. Contact-induced changes in modern West Frisian. Us Wurk 46. 61–89.Google Scholar

  • de Haas, Wim & Mieke Trommelen. 1993. Morfologisch handboek van het Nederlands: Een overzicht van de woordvorming [Handbook of Dutch morphology: An overview of word formation]. ‘s Gravenhage: SDU Uitgeverij.Google Scholar

  • Heeringa, Wilbert. 2004. Measuring dialect pronunciation differences using Levenshtein distance. Groningen: University of Groningen dissertation.Google Scholar

  • van Heuven, Walter, Emily Coderre, Taomei Guo & Ton Dijkstra. 2011. The influence of cross-language similarity on within- and between-language Stroop effects in trilinguals. Frontiers in Cognition 2. 374. doi: (accessed 26 March 2012).CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hoekstra, Jarich. 1990. Adjectiefnominalisatie in het Fries [Adjective nominalization in Frisian]. Interdisciplinair Tijdschrift voor Taal- and Tekstwetenschap 9(4). 273–285.Google Scholar

  • Hoekstra, Jarich. 1998. Fryske Wurdfoarming [The morphology of Frisian]. Ljouwert: Fryske Akademy.Google Scholar

  • Hoekstra, Eric & Arjan Hut. 2003. Ta de nominalisearjende efterheaksels -ENS en –HEID [On the nominalizing suffixes -ENS and -HEID]. It Beaken 65. 19–39.Google Scholar

  • Hofstadter, Douglas & Emmanuel Sander. 2013. Surfaces and essences: Analogy as the fuel and fire of thinking. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

  • Hosmer, David & Stanley Lemeshow. 1989. Applied logistic regression. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

  • Hulk, Aafke & Natascha Müller. 2000. Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3(3). 227–244.Google Scholar

  • King, Ruth. 2000. The lexical basis of grammatical borrowing: A Prince Edward Island case study. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Krott, Andrea, Harald Baayen & Robert Schreuder. 2001. Analogy in morphology: modeling the choice of linking morphemes in Dutch. Linguistics 39. 51–93.Google Scholar

  • van der Meer, Geert. 1986. De achterheaksels ENS en HEID yn it Frysk [The suffixes ENS and HEID in Frisian]. Us Wurk 35. 108–130.Google Scholar

  • van der Meer, Geert. 1987. Friese afleidingen op ENS en HEID. Een geval van morfologische rivaliteit? [Frisian derivations in ENS and HEID: A case of morphological rivalry?] Spektator 17. 360–367.Google Scholar

  • van der Meer, Geert. 1988. Nominaliseringen op ENS (<NIS) en HEID (in het Fries en elders) [Nominalisations in ENS (<NIS) and HEID (in Frisian and elsewhere)]. Taal en Tongval 39. 22–36.Google Scholar

  • Rainer, Franz. 1988. Towards a theory of blocking: The case of Italian and German quality nouns. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1988, 155–185. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

  • Sjölin, Bo. 1976. “Min Frysk”: Een onderzoek naar het ontstaan van transfer en “code-switching” in het gesproken Fries [“Bad Frisian”: An investigation of the question how transfer and “code-switching” come into existence in spoken Frisian]. Bijdragen en mededelingen der dialectencommissie van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen te Amsterdam 50. Amsterdam: Noord-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij.Google Scholar

  • Skousen, Royal. 1989. Analogical modeling of language. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

  • Slofstra, Bouke, Eric Hoekstra & Arjen Versloot. 2009. Een voorbeeld van gecamoufleerde taalbeïnvloeding: samenstellingsvormen van sjwasubstantieven in het Fries [An example of camouflaged interference: Compounds with nouns in schwa in Frisian]. Taal en Tongval 61. 21–44.Google Scholar

  • Smits, Erica, Heike Martensen, Ton Dijkstra & Dominiek Sandra. 2006. Naming interlingual homographs: Variable competition and the role of the decision system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9. 281–297.Google Scholar

  • Smits, Erica, Dominiek Sandra, Heike Martensen & Ton Dijkstra. 2009. Phonological inconsistency in word naming: Determinants of the interference effect between languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12. 23–39.Google Scholar

  • Thomason, Sarah & Terrence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, creolization and genetic linguistics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

  • Wieling, Martijn, Eliza Margaretha & John Nerbonne. 2012. Inducing a measure of phonetic similarity from pronunciation variation. Journal of Phonetics 40(2). 307–314.Google Scholar

  • Wieling, Martijn, John Nerbonne & Harald Baayen. 2011. Quantitative social dialectology: Explaining linguistic variation geographically and socially. PLoS ONE 6(9). e23613. doi:.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-11-08

Published in Print: 2016-11-01

Citation Information: Linguistics, ISSN (Online) 1613-396X, ISSN (Print) 0024-3949, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2016-0028.

Export Citation

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton. Copyright Clearance Center

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in