Abstract
Based on evidence that Chinese yields more interference than English, Biederman and Tsao (1979) have suggested that the processes involved in reading Chinese are more similar to those involved in colour naming than are the processes involved in reading English. In three experiments conducted to evaluate the empirical foundation for this hypothesis it was found that: (1) Chinese yielded less interference than English (and French) in between-subjects comparisons involving Chinese-English bilinguals and English monolinguals or English-French bilinguals; (2) Chinese print did not yield more interference than English print in within-subjects comparisons involving the orthogonal combination of print language (Chinese or English) and naming language (Chinese or English) among Chinese–English bilinguals; and (3) compared with syntactic category, both language and orthography were relatively impotent variables in the object naming version of the Stroop task.
