scholarly journals The Relationship Between Implicit and Explicit Second-Language Processing: The Role of Cross-Language Similarity

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leida C. Tolentino ◽  
Natasha Tokowicz
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Cross Language ◽  
The Relationship

Construct operationalization, L1 effects, and context in second language processing

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 694-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALAN JUFFS
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
First Language ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Second Language Processing

Cunnings (2016) provides welcome insights into differences between native speaker (NS) sentence processing, adult non-native speaker processing (NNS), and working memory capacity (WMC) limitations. This commentary briefly raises three issues: construct operationalization; the role of first language (L1); and context.

scholarly journals The role of crosslinguistic influence in multilingual processing: Lexicon versus syntax

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sol Lago ◽  
Michela Mosca ◽  
Anna Stutter Garcia
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Online Processing ◽  
Separate Treatment ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence ◽  
Multilingual Research

Multilingual research could offer a unique perspective on how the languages already acquired by a person affect the online processing of a new language. But it is currently difficult to assess this issue because theoretical accounts of multilingualism have focused on acquisition rather than processing and most empirical research to date has gathered untimed (offline) evidence. To help bridge this gap, we formulate hypotheses that can help derive processing predictions from existing accounts of multilingualism. But crucially, and based on previous findings in second language processing, we identify ways in which assumptions about crosslinguistic influence may need to be revised to allow the separate treatment of lexical and syntactic processing, and to consider the role of variables such as language dominance and proficiency. In our view, the question of what’s special about multilingualism is worth studying, but more research is needed before we can begin answering it.

Differential lateralization in first-versus second-language processing: An fMRI study

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thad Polk ◽  
Charles Behensky ◽  
Heather Pond ◽  
Stefan Frisch ◽  
Marilyn Shatz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Fmri Study

Measuring second language proficiency with EEG synchronization: how functional cortical networks and hemispheric involvement differ as a function of proficiency level in second language speakers

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Reiterer ◽  
Ernesto Pereda ◽  
Joydeep Bhattacharya
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
English Language ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Brain Activation ◽  
Frequency Range ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Language Students

This article examines the question of whether university-based high-level foreign language and linguistic training can influence brain activation and whether different L2 proficiency groups have different brain activation in terms of lateralization and hemispheric involvement. The traditional and prevailing theory of hemispheric involvement in bilingual language processing states that bilingual and second language processing is always at least in some form connected to the right hemisphere (RH), when compared to monolingual first language processing, the classical left-hemispheric language-processing domain. A widely held specification of this traditional theory claims that especially bilinguals or second language learners in their initial phases and/or bilinguals with poor fluency and less experience rely more on RH areas when processing their L2. We investigated this neurolinguistic hypothesis with differently proficient Austrian learners of English as a second language. Two groups of L2 speakers (all Austrian German native speakers), differing in their L2 (English) language performance, were recorded on electroencephalography (EEG) during the processing of spoken English language. A short comprehension interview followed each task. The `high proficiency group' consisted of English language students who were about to complete their master's degree for English language and linguistics, while the `low proficiency group' was composed of non-language students who had only school level performance and less training in English. The age of onset of L2 learning was kept constant: 9 years for both groups. To look for cooperative network activity in the brain, EEG coherence and synchronization measures were analysed for a high EEG frequency range (gamma band). Results showed the most significant group differences in synchronization patterns within the lower gamma frequency range, with more RH involvement (extensive right-hemisphere networks) for the low proficiency group, especially when processing their L2. The results can be interpreted in favour of RH theories of second language processing since, once again, we found evidence of more RH involvement in (late) second language learners with less experience and less training in the L2. The study shows that second language training (and resulting proficiency) and/or differences in ability or state of linguistic alertness can be made visible by brain imaging using newly developed EEG-synchronization techniques as a measure.

Meta-analysis of the neural representation of first language and second language

2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 799-819 ◽  
Author(s):  
RAJANI SEBASTIAN ◽  
ANGELA R. LAIRD ◽  
SWATHI KIRAN
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Functional Neuroimaging ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
First Language ◽  
Likelihood Estimation ◽  
Neural Representation ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACTThis study reports an activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of published functional neuroimaging studies of bilingualism. Four parallel meta-analyses were conducted by taking into account the proficiency of participants reported in the studies. The results of the meta-analyses suggest differences in the probabilities of activation patterns between high proficiency and moderate/low proficiency bilinguals. The Talairach coordinates of activation in first language processing were very similar to that of second language processing in the high proficient bilinguals. However, in the low proficient group, the activation clusters were generally smaller and distributed over wider areas in both the hemispheres than the clusters identified in the ALE maps from the high proficient group. These findings draw attention to the importance of language proficiency in bilingual neural representation.

Prediction and integration in native and second-language processing of elliptical structures

2014 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
EDITH KAAN ◽  
JOSEPH KIRKHAM ◽  
FRANK WIJNEN
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Syntactic Analysis ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Frontal Negativity ◽  
Related Potentials

According to recent views of L2-sentence processing, L2-speakers do not predict upcoming information to the same extent as do native speakers. To investigate L2-speakers’ predictive use and integration of syntactic information across clauses, we recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) from advanced L2-learners and native speakers while they read sentences in which the syntactic context did or did not allow noun-ellipsis (Lau, E., Stroud, C., Plesch, S., & Phillips, C. (2006). The role of structural prediction in rapid syntactic analysis. Brain and Language, 98, 74–88.) Both native and L2-speakers were sensitive to the context when integrating words after the potential ellipsis-site. However, native, but not L2-speakers, anticipated the ellipsis, as suggested by an ERP difference between elliptical and non-elliptical contexts preceding the potential ellipsis-site. In addition, L2-learners displayed a late frontal negativity for ungrammaticalities, suggesting differences in repair strategies or resources compared with native speakers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document