When the days are(n’t) numbered: Calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systems

Calendar calculations, the process of computing the target day or month, exhibit peculiar differences across languages. In systems like English, calendar labels are largely opaque (Tuesday, August), which invites calculations to rely more heavily on verbal listing. In transparent systems, like Chine...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ziyi Zhuang, Norbert Vanek
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Cambridge University Press 2025-01-01
Series:Language and Cognition
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1866980824000759/type/journal_article
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1841526448301539328
author Ziyi Zhuang
Norbert Vanek
author_facet Ziyi Zhuang
Norbert Vanek
author_sort Ziyi Zhuang
collection DOAJ
description Calendar calculations, the process of computing the target day or month, exhibit peculiar differences across languages. In systems like English, calendar labels are largely opaque (Tuesday, August), which invites calculations to rely more heavily on verbal listing. In transparent systems, like Chinese, habitual labeling of calendar terms numerically (Tuesday = Day 2, August = Month 8) facilitates fast numerical operations instead of verbal listing. This study examines the effects that different levels of transparency of the calendar naming system may have on calculations in the speakers’ first and second language. Chinese–English bilinguals were tested alongside English and Chinese controls. Forced-choice calendar calculations (day, month, hour and year) and self-reported strategies were used as tasks to tap into participants’ calculation speed, accuracy and temporal reasoning. In the calculation questions, we manipulated Distance (short/long), Direction (forward/backward), Input (linguistic/numerical) and Boundary (within/across). More complex Month calculations significantly differed across groups while easier day calculations did not. The English group reported reliance on verbal listing while the Chinese and the Bilingual groups preferred numerical reasoning. These findings bring new evidence for linguistic relativity in the form of modulations of calendar processing speed changing as a function of linguistic transparency, input type and task demand.
format Article
id doaj-art-ac14c30a6ab94a6b8c6ee3e757ae1f1b
institution Kabale University
issn 1866-9808
1866-9859
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format Article
series Language and Cognition
spelling doaj-art-ac14c30a6ab94a6b8c6ee3e757ae1f1b2025-01-16T21:53:15ZengCambridge University PressLanguage and Cognition1866-98081866-98592025-01-011710.1017/langcog.2024.75When the days are(n’t) numbered: Calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systemsZiyi Zhuang0Norbert Vanek1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7805-184XSchool of Cultures, Languages and Linguistics, University of Auckland, Auckland, New ZealandSchool of Cultures, Languages and Linguistics, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand Experimental Research on Central European Languages Lab, Charles University, Prague, CzechiaCalendar calculations, the process of computing the target day or month, exhibit peculiar differences across languages. In systems like English, calendar labels are largely opaque (Tuesday, August), which invites calculations to rely more heavily on verbal listing. In transparent systems, like Chinese, habitual labeling of calendar terms numerically (Tuesday = Day 2, August = Month 8) facilitates fast numerical operations instead of verbal listing. This study examines the effects that different levels of transparency of the calendar naming system may have on calculations in the speakers’ first and second language. Chinese–English bilinguals were tested alongside English and Chinese controls. Forced-choice calendar calculations (day, month, hour and year) and self-reported strategies were used as tasks to tap into participants’ calculation speed, accuracy and temporal reasoning. In the calculation questions, we manipulated Distance (short/long), Direction (forward/backward), Input (linguistic/numerical) and Boundary (within/across). More complex Month calculations significantly differed across groups while easier day calculations did not. The English group reported reliance on verbal listing while the Chinese and the Bilingual groups preferred numerical reasoning. These findings bring new evidence for linguistic relativity in the form of modulations of calendar processing speed changing as a function of linguistic transparency, input type and task demand.https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1866980824000759/type/journal_articlebilingual cognitioncalendar processinglinguistic relativity
spellingShingle Ziyi Zhuang
Norbert Vanek
When the days are(n’t) numbered: Calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systems
Language and Cognition
bilingual cognition
calendar processing
linguistic relativity
title When the days are(n’t) numbered: Calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systems
title_full When the days are(n’t) numbered: Calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systems
title_fullStr When the days are(n’t) numbered: Calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systems
title_full_unstemmed When the days are(n’t) numbered: Calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systems
title_short When the days are(n’t) numbered: Calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systems
title_sort when the days are n t numbered calendar calculations in transparent and opaque systems
topic bilingual cognition
calendar processing
linguistic relativity
url https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1866980824000759/type/journal_article
work_keys_str_mv AT ziyizhuang whenthedaysarentnumberedcalendarcalculationsintransparentandopaquesystems
AT norbertvanek whenthedaysarentnumberedcalendarcalculationsintransparentandopaquesystems