Non-native Readers Are More Sensitive to Changes in Surface Linguistic Information than Native Readers*

In the present study we challenge the generally accepted view based primarily on L1 data that surface linguistic information decays rapidly during reading and that only propositional information is retained in memory. In two eye-tracking experiments, we show that both L1 and L2 adult readers retain verbatim information of a text. In particular, the reading behaviour of L2 German learners revealed that they were sensitive to both lexical (synonyms) and syntactic (active/passive alternation) substitutions during a second reading of the texts, while L1 exhibited only reduced sensitivity to the lexical substitutions. The results deliver an important piece of evidence that complies with several current processing (e.g., Shallow Structure Hypothesis), acquisition (Declarative/Procedural Model) and cognitive (e.g., Fuzzy Trace Theory) approaches and adds a new dimension to their empirical and theoretical basis.

SECOND LANGUAGE USERS EXHIBIT SHALLOW MORPHOLOGICAL PROCESSING

The present study tests the Shallow Structure Hypothesis (SSH), which claims that compared to L1 processing, L2 language processing generally underuses grammatical information, prioritizing nongrammatical information. Specifically, this cross-modal priming study tests SSH at the level of morphology, investigating whether late advanced L2 learners construct hierarchically structured representations for trimorphemic derived words during real-time processing as native speakers do. Our results support SSH. In lexical decision on English trimorphemic words (e.g., unkindness or [[un-[kind]]-ness]), L1 recognition of the targets was facilitated by their bimorphemic morphological-structural constituent primes (e.g., unkind), but not by their bimorphemic nonconstituent primes (e.g., kindness), which were only semantically and formally related to the target. In contrast, L2 recognition was equally facilitated by both constituent and nonconstituent primes. These results suggest that unlike L1 processing, L2 processing of multimorphemic words is not mainly guided by detailed morphological structure, overrelying on nonstructural information.

Acquisition of L2 Japanese WH questions: Evidence of phonological contiguity and non-shallow structures

In this article we look at some of the structural properties of second language (L2) Japanese WH questions. In Japanese the WH words are licensed to remain in situ by the prosodic contiguity properties of the phrases which have no prosodic boundaries between the WH word and the question particle. In a rehearsed-reading, sentence production task, we look to see whether non-native speakers of Japanese who are learning the L2 in university classes in North America are able to acquire grammars which are constrained by such universal properties as Match Theory and Contiguity Theory. While linear mixed effects analyses of the pitch contours reveal that the L2ers have not acquired the phonetic implementation distinction of the documented pitch boost on WH words compared to non-WH DPs, our data show that the participants have acquired the pitch compression patterns indicative of having no prosodic phrases intervening between the WH word and the question particle. This property of Japanese WH questions is not taught in their classes, and, thus we argue, that the data are supportive of the position that interlanguage grammars are constrained by universal grammatical properties such as the prosodic contiguity of WH-phrase licensing. We also present these results as being counter to the Shallow Structure Hypothesis.

Attachment Preferences of L2 Learners in a Production Task

This study investigated whether L2 learners of English process sentences semantically or syntactically when they areengaged in production rather than comprehension. Thirty-four Persian speaking second language learners of Englishacross two proficiency levels participated in a production task which involved completing sentences such as Andyshot the man with… with a determiner phrase (DP) of their own choice. In majority of cases, the participants acrossboth proficiency levels supplied DPs that were semantically related to the verb (i.e., semantic-based processing). Thefindings are argued to support the constraint-based theories and shallow structure hypothesis.

Do late bilinguals access pure morphology during word recognition? A masked-priming study on Hebrew as a second language

This study extends research on morphological processing in late bilinguals to a rarely examined language type, Semitic, by reporting results from a masked-priming experiment with 58 non-native, advanced, second-language (L2) speakers of Hebrew in comparison with native (L1) speakers. We took advantage of a case of ‘pure morphology’ in Hebrew, the so-called binyanim, which represent (essentially arbitrary) morphological classes for verbs. Our results revealed a non-native priming pattern for the L2 group, with root-priming effects restricted to non-finite prime words irrespective of binyanim type. We conclude that root extraction in L2 Hebrew word recognition is less sensitive to both morphological and morphosyntactic cues than in the L1, in line with the Shallow-Structure Hypothesis of L2 processing.

Investigating auditory processing of syntactic gaps with L2 speakers using pupillometry

According to the Shallow Structure Hypothesis (SSH), second language (L2) speakers, unlike native speakers, build shallow syntactic representations during sentence processing. In order to test the SSH, this study investigated the processing of a syntactic movement in both native speakers of English and proficient late L2 speakers of English using pupillometry to measure processing cost. Of particular interest were constructions where movement resulted in an intermediate gap between clauses. Pupil diameter was recorded during auditory presentation of complex syntactic constructions. Two factors were manipulated: syntactic movement (such that some conditions contained movement while others did not), as well as syntactic movement type (either causing an intermediate gap or not). Grammaticality judgments revealed no differences between the two groups, suggesting both were capable of comprehending these constructions. Pupil change slope measurements revealed a potential sensitivity to intermediate gaps for only native speakers, however, both native and late L2 speakers showed similar facilitation during processing of the second gap site. Acoustic analysis revealed potential acoustic cues that may have facilitated the processing of these constructions. This suggests that, contrary to the predictions of the SSH, late L2 speakers are capable of constructing rich syntactic representations during the processing of intermediate gap constructions in spoken language.

SOME NOTES ON THE SHALLOW STRUCTURE HYPOTHESIS

Since the Shallow Structure Hypothesis (SSH) was first put forward in 2006, it has inspired a growing body of research on grammatical processing in nonnative (L2) speakers. More than 10 years later, we think it is time for the SSH to be reconsidered in the light of new empirical findings and current theoretical assumptions about human language processing. The purpose of our critical commentary is twofold: to clarify some issues regarding the SSH and to sketch possible ways in which this hypothesis might be refined and improved to better account for L1 and L2 speakers’ performance patterns.

Memory retrieval and sentence processing: Differences between native and non-native speakers

Efficient comprehension of sentences requires rapidly and continuously accessing and integrating different sources of information in real time. Psycholinguists have developed detailed models and theories to account for the processes involved in on-line sentence comprehension as well as a number of sophisticated experimental designs for studying these processes. But how about real-time sentence processing in bilinguals? The study of bilingual sentence processing has received considerable attention and has led to a remarkable growth of experimental studies over the last 10 years. The focus of these studies has been on late bilinguals, i.e., on second-language (L2) learners who learned a non-native language after early childhood, as adolescents or adults. These studies have revealed both similarities and differences between native (L1) and non-native (L2) sentence processing. Several proposals have been made to account for the experimental findings, but the significance and nature of native vs. non-native differences in sentence processing has remained controversial. Some researchers have claimed that L1 and L2 sentence processing are essentially the same and that observed performance differences between native and non-native sentence comprehension are due to peripheral factors, e.g., decoding problems, working memory limitations, slower processing speed, difficulties with lexical access and retrieval, or a reduced ability to predict during L2 processing (e.g., McDonald, 2006; Hopp, 2016; Kaan, 2014). Others have posited more substantial differences between L1 and L2 processing. One prominent proposal is Clahsen and Felser's (2006a, b) Shallow-Structure Hypothesis (SSH). Assuming multi-stream models of language processing (e.g., Ferreira & Patson, 2007) with two routes from form to meaning, a heuristic one that employs surface-form information, lexical and semantic cues, and an algorithmic route that relies on a full grammatical parse, the SSH holds that L2 processing relies less on grammatical and more on non-grammatical information sources, in comparison to L1 processing of syntactic (and morphological) phenomena.

On the role of discourse-level information in second-language sentence processing

Based on a detailed review of existing studies of high-proficiency second-language (L2) learners who acquired the L2 in adolescence/adulthood, Cunnings (Cunnings, 2016) argues that Sorace's (2011) Interface Hypothesis (IH) and Clahsen and Felser's (2006) Shallow Structure Hypothesis (SSH) do not explain the existing data as well as his memory-based approach which posits that memory-retrieval processes in the L1 and L2 do not pattern alike. Cunnings proposes that L1 and L2 processing differ in terms of comprehenders’ ability to retrieve from memory information constructed during sentence processing. He concludes that L2 processing is more susceptible to interference effects during retrieval, and, most relevantly for this commentary, that discourse-based cues to memory retrieval are more heavily weighted in L2 than L1 processing.