scholarly journals Going Native? Yes, If Allowed by Cross-Linguistic Similarity

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillen Martínez de la Hidalga ◽  
Adam Zawiszewski ◽  
Itziar Laka
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Order Type ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Degree Of Similarity

Can native competence be achieved in a second language? Here, we focus on the Language Distance Hypothesis that claims that early and proficient bilinguals can achieve native competence for grammatical properties shared by their two languages, whereas unshared grammatical properties pose a challenge for native-like syntactic processing. We present a novel behavioral and Event-Related Potential (ERP) study where early and proficient bilinguals behave native-like in their second language when processing (a) argument structure alternations in intransitive sentences involving agent vs. patient subjects and (b) subject verb agreement, both of which are grammatical properties shared by their two languages of these bilinguals. Compared to native Basque bilinguals (L2Spanish) on the same tasks, non-natives elicited similar sentence processing measures: (a) in the acceptability task they reacted faster and more accurately to unaccusative sentences than to unergatives and to person than number violations: (b) they generated a larger P600 for agreement violations in unaccusative sentences than unergatives; (c) they generated larger negativity and positivity effects for person than for number violations. Previous studies on Basque-Spanish bilinguals find that early and proficient non-natives display effects distinct from natives in both languages when processing grammatical properties where Basque and Spanish diverge, such as argument alignment (ergative/nominative) or word order type (OV/VO), but they perform native-like for shared properties such as subject agreement and word meaning. We contend that language distance, that is, the degree of similarity of the languages of the bilingual is a crucial factor that deserves further and detailed attention to advance our understanding of when and how bilinguals can go native in a second language.

scholarly journals Honorifics: A sociocultural verb agreement cue in Japanese sentence processing

2010 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 551-569 ◽  
Author(s):  
YUKI YOSHIMURA ◽  
BRIAN MACWHINNEY
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Role Assignment ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
New Type

ABSTRACTCase marking is the major cue to sentence interpretation in Japanese, whereas animacy and word order are much weaker. However, when subjects and their cases markers are omitted, Japanese honorific and humble verbs can provide information that compensates for the missing case role markers. This study examined the usage of honorific and humble verbs as cues to case role assignment by Japanese native speakers and second-language learners of Japanese. The results for native speakers replicated earlier findings regarding the predominant strength of case marking. However, when case marking was missing, native speakers relied more on honorific marking than word order. In these sentences, the processing that relied on the honorific cue was delayed by about 100 ms in comparison to processing that relied on the case-marking cue. Learners made extensive use of the honorific agreement cue, but their use of the cue was much less accurate than that of native speakers. In particular, they failed to systematically invoke the agreement cue when case marking was missing. Overall, the findings support the predictions of the model and extend its coverage to a new type of culturally determined cue.

Incremental interpretation in second language sentence processing

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN N. WILLIAMS
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Structural Analysis ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Similar Pattern ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
On Line ◽  
Incremental Interpretation ◽  
And Task

The degree to which native and non-native readers interpret English sentences incrementally was investigated by examining plausibility effects on reanalysis processes. Experiment 1 required participants to read sentences word by word and to make on-line plausibility judgements. The results showed that natives and non-natives immediately computed the plausibility of the preferred structural analysis, which then affected ease of reanalysis. Experiment 2 required participants to read the same sentences word by word in order to perform a memory task. The natives showed a similar pattern of results to Experiment 1, whereas for the non-natives plausibility effects were delayed. However, the non-natives still appeared to be performing immediate syntactic reanalysis. It is concluded that syntactic processing was person- and task-independent, whereas the incrementality of interpretation was more dependent on task demands for the non-natives than for the natives.

The timing of lexical and syntactic processes in second language sentence comprehension

2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 1253-1280 ◽  
Author(s):  
HOLGER HOPP
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Lexical Processing ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
Complex Object ◽  
Reading Experiment ◽  
Processing Differences

ABSTRACTThis paper investigates how lexical processing difficulty affects second language (L2) syntactic processing. In a self-paced reading experiment with 36 monolingual and 62 first language German speakers of English, we test how differences in lexical frequency moderate structural processing differences between subject and object clefts. For the L2 group, the results show linear relations between verb frequency and the location of the reading difficulty resulting from the structurally more complex object clefts. Native speakers evince comparable effects only in lower word frequency ranges. The findings indicate that greater demands on lexical processing may cause non-native-like syntactic processing in that they attenuate and delay effects of structure building in L2 sentence processing. We discuss implications for current models of L2 sentence processing.

scholarly journals Electrophysiological correlates of second language processing

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jutta L. Mueller
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Critical Periods ◽  
Complex Sentence ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Phoneme Discrimination ◽  
On Line

The aim of this article is to provide a selective review of event-related potential (ERP) research on second language processing. As ERPs have been used in the investigation of a variety of linguistic domains, the reported studies cover different paradigms assessing processing mechanisms in the second language at various levels, ranging from phoneme discrimination to complex sentence processing. Differences between ERP patterns of first language (L1) and second language (L2) speakers can help to specify and to test predictions derived from models of L2 processing or hypotheses concerning critical periods for some aspects of second language acquisition. The studies currently available suggest that ERPs are indeed sensitive to qualitative and quantitative differences in L2 speakers with regard to on-line processing.

scholarly journals Sentence processing: How words generate syntactic structures in the brain

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordi Martorell ◽  
Piermatteo Morucci ◽  
Simona Mancini ◽  
Nicola Molinaro
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
Time Resolved ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Sentence Level ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
On Line ◽  
The Brain

Language comprehension relies on the fundamental ability to create meaningful syntactic structures from single words during on-line processing. Time-resolved neuroimaging techniques can be used to measure electrophysiological activity revealing the neural dynamics underpinning these combinatorial processes in the brain. In the present chapter, we review and critically evaluate studies that have specifically investigated the electrophysiological bases of sentence-level syntactic processing using different types of analyses and paradigms. Besides reviewing event-related potential (ERP) studies, we focus on recent investigations of neural oscillations, highlighting their relevance and implications for our understanding of syntactic processing. Furthermore, we discuss critical issues related to the interpretation of current electrophysiological findings, including open questions such as the relationship between syntax and semantics and the link between ERPs and oscillations.

Some effects of first language argument structure and morphosyntax on second language sentence processing

1998 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 406-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Juffs
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Word Reading ◽  
First Language ◽  
Native English Speakers ◽  
Second Language Processing ◽  
Second Language Speakers ◽  
Verb Argument Structure

This article explores some effects of first language verb-argument structure on second language processing of English as a second language. Speakers of Chinese, Japanese or Korean, three Romance languages and native English speakers provided word-by-word reading times and grammaticality judgement data in a self-paced reading task. Results suggest that reliable differences in parsing are not restricted to cases where verb-argument structure differs crosslinguistically.

Commentary on Clahsen and Felser

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-65
Author(s):  
Cheryl Frenck-Mestre
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Current Literature ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
L1 Influence ◽  
Behavioral Evidence ◽  
L1 And L2

Clahsen and Felser (CF) have written a fairly comprehensive review of the current literature on on-line second language (L2) processing, presenting data from eye movement, self-paced reading, and event-related potential (ERP) studies with the aim of evidencing possible differences between native language (L1) and L2 processing. The thrust of the article, in regard to adult L2 processing, is apparently an attempt to gather evidence to bolster their argument about “shallow processing” in adult L2 learners. Although the authors provide the reader with a generally good overview of the current literature, their argumentation seems to be flawed at times. Consider, first, the authors' presentation of recent ERP evidence. The authors claim that L2 adult learners may lack automaticity in comparison to native speakers in regard to syntactic processing. This is based upon a delayed N400 response, often found in L2 learners compared to native speakers, as well as by the pattern of anterior negativities to morphosyntactic violations. Later, however, this line of argumentation is seemingly undermined. First, as CF rightly underline, the range of variability in anterior negativities found in L2 learners falls within the range of variation observed in native speakers. As such, variability in this response cannot be taken as a marker of differential processing specific to (shallow) syntactic processing in the second language (see also Frenck-Mestre, 2005; Osterhout et al., 2004). Second, as CF later note, the N400 (as well as P600) is systematically observed in adult L2 learners, and is often highly similar to that found for native speakers. Consider, next, the behavioral evidence cited by CF on adult L2 syntactic processing. The authors cite work on various structures, notably relative clause attachment (which has received a great deal of attention in both monolingual and L2 studies). Concerning this structure, although CF cite studies, which show both clear L1 influence on L2 processing and differential effects as a result of experience with the L1, they favor studies that fail to show such effects and reject Mitchell et al.'s (2000) tuning hypothesis as an explanatory model. (Note Mitchell and colleagues have indeed produced evidence of their own showing limitations of their model.) It is also noteworthy that CF's argumentation about the sensitivity of the measure they used to test for immediate preferences for this structure is not as strong as it could be. Indeed, where they report L2 preferences (for low attachment following thematic prepositions), the literature shows the same systematic preference independent of the language tested (cf. Mitchell et al., 2000). As such, the sensitivity of their measure may not be adequately demonstrated. In sum, although CF provide the reader with an impressive collection of current L2 studies, the viewpoint that they espouse does not seem to be as substantiated as they wish to claim.

Production of Subject-Verb Agreement in Spanish as a Second Language

2003 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 196-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet Nicol ◽  
Delia Greth
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Error Patterns ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Semantic Variables ◽  
Advanced Proficiency

Abstract. In this paper, we report the results of a study of English speakers who have learned Spanish as a second language. All were late learners who have achieved near- advanced proficiency in Spanish. The focus of the research is on the production of subject-verb agreement errors and the factors that influence the incidence of such errors. There is some evidence that English and Spanish subject-verb agreement differ in susceptibility to interference from different types of variables; specifically, it has been reported that Spanish speakers show a greater influence of semantic factors in their implementation of subject-verb agreement ( Vigliocco, Butterworth, & Garrett, 1996 ). In our study, all participants were tested in English (L1) and Spanish (L2). Results indicate nearly identical error patterns: these speakers show no greater influence of semantic variables in the computation of agreement when they are speaking Spanish than when they are speaking English.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document