Abstract
Brysbaert and Duyck (this issue) suggest that it is time to abandon the Revised Hierarchical Model (Kroll and Stewart, 1994) in favor of connectionist models such as BIA+ (Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002) that more accurately account for the recent evidence on non-selective access in bilingual word recognition. In this brief response, we first review the history of the Revised Hierarchical Model (RHM), consider the set of issues that it was proposed to address and then evaluate the evidence that supports and fails to support the initial claims of the model. Although fifteen years of new research findings require a number of revisions to the RHM, we argue that the central issues to which the model was addressed, the way in which new lexical forms are mapped to meaning and the consequence of language learning history for lexical processing, cannot be accounted for solely within models of word recognition.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 373-381 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Bilingualism |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 1 2010 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Education
- Language and Linguistics
- Linguistics and Language
Cite this
}
The Revised Hierarchical Model : A critical review and assessment. / Kroll, Judith F.; Van Hell, Adriana; Tokowicz, Natasha; Green, David W.
In: Bilingualism, Vol. 13, No. 3, 01.07.2010, p. 373-381.Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article
TY - JOUR
T1 - The Revised Hierarchical Model
T2 - A critical review and assessment
AU - Kroll, Judith F.
AU - Van Hell, Adriana
AU - Tokowicz, Natasha
AU - Green, David W.
PY - 2010/7/1
Y1 - 2010/7/1
N2 - Brysbaert and Duyck (this issue) suggest that it is time to abandon the Revised Hierarchical Model (Kroll and Stewart, 1994) in favor of connectionist models such as BIA+ (Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002) that more accurately account for the recent evidence on non-selective access in bilingual word recognition. In this brief response, we first review the history of the Revised Hierarchical Model (RHM), consider the set of issues that it was proposed to address and then evaluate the evidence that supports and fails to support the initial claims of the model. Although fifteen years of new research findings require a number of revisions to the RHM, we argue that the central issues to which the model was addressed, the way in which new lexical forms are mapped to meaning and the consequence of language learning history for lexical processing, cannot be accounted for solely within models of word recognition.
AB - Brysbaert and Duyck (this issue) suggest that it is time to abandon the Revised Hierarchical Model (Kroll and Stewart, 1994) in favor of connectionist models such as BIA+ (Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002) that more accurately account for the recent evidence on non-selective access in bilingual word recognition. In this brief response, we first review the history of the Revised Hierarchical Model (RHM), consider the set of issues that it was proposed to address and then evaluate the evidence that supports and fails to support the initial claims of the model. Although fifteen years of new research findings require a number of revisions to the RHM, we argue that the central issues to which the model was addressed, the way in which new lexical forms are mapped to meaning and the consequence of language learning history for lexical processing, cannot be accounted for solely within models of word recognition.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957993935&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957993935&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/S136672891000009X
DO - 10.1017/S136672891000009X
M3 - Review article
VL - 13
SP - 373
EP - 381
JO - Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
JF - Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
SN - 1366-7289
IS - 3
ER -