<p>Focusing on the word "seamlessly", in the more general case (not just typing)--once you look at cognitive/linguistic activity with a fine enough resolution it becomes clear that language-switching is not usually seamless.  There is typically a cost (lowered performance, either in speed or accuracy) to switching languages in any modality, which is typically greater from second language to first language than from first language to second language (Language Switching &amp; Competition, Second Language Research April 2012 vol. 28 no. 2 131-149, among many others).</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-06-17T14:12:52.533Z
2013-06-17T14:12:52.533Z
Krysta
<p>The question regards the phenomenon where a user can switch context on the same tool seamlessly, and as it seems without thinking. The only practical use of the phenomenon that I know of is the switching of input languages on the same keyboard, but there are probably other real world examples. </p>

<p>Often these users don't type the way I do (looking at the keyboard), still they are very skilled in both Swedish, English and Icelandic keyboard setups. Is this a kind of automated process, such as the use of a piano from a professional concert pianist who does not need to think, only play with what is learned from hours and hours of exercise? I believe it is related. but not the same. </p>

<p>I'm asking of what this mechanism of switching context is and why it works seamlessly for users. </p>

<p>An image of the Icelandic keyboard setup: </p>

<p><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/dMLCf.jpg" alt="Icelandic keyboard"></p>

<p><sup>Image from <a href="http://farm8.staticflickr.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://farm8.staticflickr.com</a></sup></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-04-05T15:46:21.370Z
We have a state machine in our heads. It stores the precise context.
Memming
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-04-06T00:13:06.603Z
How is this NARQ? There's lots of information out there about context switching and about bilingualism.
Zelda
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-04-06T04:46:09.467Z
I voted to close as NARQ because I feel like it shows no [initial research](http://meta.cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/66/29), is extremely broad, and seems to me to be rather vague. I would love to see a more focused and clearly stated version of this question, but I do not have enough background to make suggested edits (although a good build up question might be: "How do humans internalize keyboard layout to type without looking?" or something along those lines). As the question is, I cannot see it being answered by something other than a book-long treatment or a vague comment like @Memming's.
Artem Kaznatcheev
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-04-06T06:09:36.017Z
Sorry for being too wide on the subject. The question was not supposed to be on the language topic, just the part on context switching. I thought it would be interesting to know how human can switch from one context to another using the same tool. And the only example I could think of was the keyboard. Should I revise this question according to your comments, and be more specific?
Benny Skogberg
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-04-06T11:35:07.497Z
@Benny If the keyboard thing is just an example and there is a more specific and formal underlying question that you are curious about, then I definitely think you should edit to ask the more specific question and then give the keyboard thing as an example. I think a more specific question will have a higher chance of being answered, and will also show us your motivation for the question and the initial thoughts you have had. [Here](http://meta.cogsci.stackexchange.com/a/234/29) are my personal guidelines on good questions (note that my views do not necessarily reflect the whole community).
Artem Kaznatcheev
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-04-06T12:31:49.343Z
As a side note, [you really should learn how to touch-type](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/95372/15464). ;p
Steven Jeuris
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-04-06T14:22:42.727Z
@StevenJeuris Tell me about it :) But I'm more of a quality programmer than a quantity programmer...
Benny Skogberg
<learning><communication>
Why can a user seamlessly switch from one language input to another on the same keyboard?
Benny Skogberg
# Why can a user seamlessly switch from one language input to another on the same keyboard?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-04-05)

The question regards the phenomenon where a user can switch context on the same tool seamlessly, and as it seems without thinking. The only practical use of the phenomenon that I know of is the switching of input languages on the same keyboard, but there are probably other real world examples.

Often these users don't type the way I do (looking at the keyboard), still they are very skilled in both Swedish, English and Icelandic keyboard setups. Is this a kind of automated process, such as the use of a piano from a professional concert pianist who does not need to think, only play with what is learned from hours and hours of exercise? I believe it is related. but not the same.

I'm asking of what this mechanism of switching context is and why it works seamlessly for users.

An image of the Icelandic keyboard setup:

![Icelandic keyboard](https://i.sstatic.net/dMLCf.jpg)

Image from <http://farm8.staticflickr.com>

**Tags:** learning, communication

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: We have a state machine in our heads. It stores the precise context.  
> **username_2**: How is this NARQ? There's lots of information out there about context switching and about bilingualism.  
> **username_3**: I voted to close as NARQ because I feel like it shows no [initial research](http://meta.cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/66/29), is extremely broad, and seems to me to be rather vague. I would love to see a more focused and clearly stated version of this question, but I do not have enough background to make suggested edits (although a good build up question might be: "How do humans internalize keyboard layout to type without looking?" or something along those lines). As the question is, I cannot see it being answered by something other than a book-long treatment or a vague comment like @username_1's.  
> **username_0**: Sorry for being too wide on the subject. The question was not supposed to be on the language topic, just the part on context switching. I thought it would be interesting to know how human can switch from one context to another using the same tool. And the only example I could think of was the keyboard. Should I revise this question according to your comments, and be more specific?  
> **username_3**: @Benny If the keyboard thing is just an example and there is a more specific and formal underlying question that you are curious about, then I definitely think you should edit to ask the more specific question and then give the keyboard thing as an example. I think a more specific question will have a higher chance of being answered, and will also show us your motivation for the question and the initial thoughts you have had. [Here](http://meta.cogsci.stackexchange.com/a/234/29) are my personal guidelines on good questions (note that my views do not necessarily reflect the whole community).  
> **username_4**: As a side note, [you really should learn how to touch-type](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/95372/15464). ;p  
> **username_0**: @StevenJeuris Tell me about it :) But I'm more of a quality programmer than a quantity programmer...  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_5 on 2013-06-17. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

Focusing on the word "seamlessly", in the more general case (not just typing)--once you look at cognitive/linguistic activity with a fine enough resolution it becomes clear that language-switching is not usually seamless. There is typically a cost (lowered performance, either in speed or accuracy) to switching languages in any modality, which is typically greater from second language to first language than from first language to second language (Language Switching & Competition, Second Language Research April 2012 vol. 28 no. 2 131-149, among many others).


---

