Individual differences and retrieval interference in L2 Processing

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 704-705 ◽  
Author(s):  
SILVINA MONTRUL ◽  
DARREN S. TANNER
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Deficit Model ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
On Line ◽  
Bilingual Processing ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Retrieval Interference ◽  
L1 And L2

Cunnings’ keynote article outlines a novel approach to native/non-native differences in on-line language comprehension by proposing that L2 speakers are more susceptible to cue-based retrieval interference than natives. Cue-based, parallel access approaches to processing have been prominent in monolingual studies for around 15 years now, but have barely been applied to L2/bilingual processing. We are particularly excited about the possibilities that this approach offers for understanding L1, L2 and bilingual processing, as well as individual differences. In this commentary, we focus on two issues: 1) whether the existing evidence for cue-based retrial mechanisms in L2 processing support a deficit model, as Cunnings seems to claim, and 2) how individual differences may explain both similarities and differences in L1 and L2 processing.

scholarly journals Interference in Native and Non-Native Sentence Processing

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 712-721 ◽  
Author(s):  
IAN CUNNINGS
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Memory Retrieval ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Different Populations ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
L1 And L2

The primary aim of my target article was to demonstrate how careful consideration of the working memory operations that underlie successful language comprehension is crucial to our understanding of the similarities and differences between native (L1) and non-native (L2) sentence processing. My central claims were that highly proficient L2 speakers construct similarly specified syntactic parses as L1 speakers, and that differences between L1 and L2 processing can be characterised in terms of L2 speakers being more prone to interference during memory retrieval operations. In explaining L1/L2 differences in this way, I argued a primary source of differences between L1 and L2 processing lies in how different populations of speakers weight cues that guide memory retrieval.

scholarly journals Parsing preferences and individual differences in nonnative sentence processing: Evidence from eye movements

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-151
Author(s):  
Yesi Cheng ◽  
Jason Rothman ◽  
Ian Cunnings
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Lexical Processing ◽  
English Studies ◽  
Processing Efficiency ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Attachment Preference ◽  
Ambiguity Advantage ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Processing Mechanisms

AbstractUsing both offline and online measures, the present study investigates attachment resolution in relative clauses in English natives (L1) and nonnatives (L2). We test how relative clause resolution interacts with linguistic factors and participant-level individual differences. Previous L1 English studies have demonstrated a low attachment preference and also an “ambiguity advantage” suggesting that L1ers may not have as strong a low attachment preference as is sometimes claimed. We employ a similar design to examine this effect in L1 and L2 comprehension. Offline results indicate that both groups exhibit a low attachment preference, positively correlated with reading span scores and with proficiency in the L2 group. Online results also suggest a low attachment preference in both groups. However, our data show that individual differences influence online attachment resolution for both native and nonnatives; higher lexical processing efficiency correlates with quicker resolution of linguistic conflicts. We argue that the current findings suggest that attachment resolution during L1 and L2 processing share the same processing mechanisms and are modulated by similar individual differences.

scholarly journals PROSODY FACILITATES MEMORY RECALL IN L1 BUT NOT IN L2 IN HIGHLY PROFICIENT LISTENERS

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 223-238
Author(s):  
Elaine Schmidt ◽  
Ana Pérez ◽  
Luca Cilibrasi ◽  
Ianthi Tsimpli
Keyword(s):  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Memory Recall ◽  
Production Studies ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Prosodic Cues ◽  
Prosodic Boundary ◽  
Major Facilitator ◽  
Prosodic Processing ◽  
L1 And L2

AbstractProsody is crucial for language comprehension because it highlights underlying structures. This study explores whether prosody facilitates memory recall to the same extent in L1 and L2, and whether memory recall is poorer in L2 or whether language-specific differences can mitigate L2 processing difficulties. Nineteen Greek learners of English, and a monolingual English baseline, repeated three-digit chunks with and without prosodic cues in L1 and L2. Prosody was a major facilitator of memory recall only in L1 despite the high proficiency of learners. This indicates that L2 mastery of prosody perception is hard to attain, mirroring production studies. However, when prosodic boundary cues were absent, memory recall in L2 was comparable to L1. This demonstrates that language-specific differences can attenuate more general processing difficulties in L2. This study is the first to demonstrate differences in prosodic processing in L1 and L2 resulting in poorer memory recall in L2.

scholarly journals Similarity-based interference and relative clauses in second language processing

2021 ◽  
pp. 026765832110635
Author(s):  
Ian Cunnings ◽  
Hiroki Fujita
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Interference Effects ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Relative Disadvantage ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Object Relative

Relative clauses have long been examined in research on first (L1) and second (L2) language acquisition and processing, and a large body of research has shown that object relative clauses (e.g. ‘The boy that the girl saw’) are more difficult to process than subject relative clauses (e.g. ‘The boy that saw the girl’). Although there are different accounts of this finding, memory-based factors have been argued to play a role in explaining the object relative disadvantage. Evidence of memory-based factors in relative clause processing comes from studies indicating that representational similarity influences the difficulty associated with object relatives as a result of a phenomenon known as similarity-based interference. Although similarity-based interference has been well studied in L1 processing, less is known about how it influences L2 processing. We report two studies – an eye-tracking experiment and a comprehension task – investigating interference in the comprehension of relative clauses in L1 and L2 readers. Our results indicated similarity-based interference in the processing of object relative clauses in both L1 and L2 readers, with no significant differences in the size of interference effects between the two groups. These results highlight the importance of considering memory-based factors when examining L2 processing.

scholarly journals Traditional Brands vs. On-Line Brands: A Comparative Assessment

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Aderton ◽  
Shiva Nandan
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Assessment ◽  
Font Size ◽  
Technological Environment ◽  
Branding Strategies ◽  
The Future ◽  
On Line ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Compare And Contrast

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">In this paper we compare and contrast the branding strategies of traditional and on-line companies. To illustrate the similarities and differences between the two, we examine four well-established traditional brands and four successful on-line brands.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>We then offer recommendations for successful branding in the ever-evolving business and technological environment of the future.</span></span></p>

Chipless RFID Sensor for High Voltage Condition Monitoring

2012 ◽  
pp. 304-333
Author(s):  
Emran Md Amin ◽  
Nemai Chandra Karmakar
Keyword(s):  
Condition Monitoring ◽  
High Voltage ◽  
Radio Frequency Identification ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Base Station ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Frequency Identification ◽  
On Line ◽  
Passive Rfid ◽  
Passive Circuit

A novel approach for non-invasive radiometric Partial Discharge (PD) detection and localization of faulty power apparatuses in switchyards using Chipless Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) based sensor is presented. The sensor integrates temperature sensing together with PD detection to assist on-line automated condition monitoring of high voltage equipment. The sensor is a multi-resonator based passive circuit with two antennas for reception of PD signal from the source and transmission of the captured PD to the base station. The sensor captures PD signal, processes it with designated spectral signatures as identification data bits, incorporates temperature information, and retransmits the data with PD signals to the base station. Analyzing the PD signal in the base station, both the PD levels and temperature of a particular faulty source can be retrieved. The prototype sensor was designed, fabricated, and tested for performance analysis. Results verify that the sensor is capable of identifying different sources at the events of PD. The proposed low cost passive RFID based PD sensor has a major advantage over existing condition monitoring techniques due to its scalability to large substations for mass deployment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document