L1 effects on the emergence of ESL sentence processing skills of Chinese and Korean ESL learners

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Fender
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
English Sentence ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
Verb Phrase ◽  
Sentence Reading ◽  
On Line ◽  
Esl Learners ◽  
Chinese Esl Learners

This study examines the emergence of lower-level ESL sentence processing skills involved in integrating English words into predicate structures on-line. The aim of the present study is to examine how the L1 phrase structure and corresponding L1 word integration skills of ESL learners influence their corresponding ESL sentence processing skills in an on-line English sentence reading task. The study examined the English predicate and verb phrase processing skills of a group of Chinese ESL learners whose language has right-branching L1 verb phrase structures (head-complement word order) and a group of proficiency-matched Korean ESL learners whose native language only allows left-branching L1 verb phrase structures (i.e., complement-head word order). The Chinese ESL group (n = 20) was significantly faster than the Korean ESL group (n = 18) in reading and integrating direct object nouns into English predicate phrase structures, though there were no significant differences comprehending the sentences. In addition, the Chinese ESL group was significantly more accurate in reading and comprehending transitive sentences in which the direct objects had an embedded relative clause. The results suggest that L1 word integration skills influence and shape the emergence of on-line ESL word integration

Processing subject focus across two Spanish varieties

Probus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-127
Author(s):  
Bradley Hoot ◽  
Tania Leal
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
Experimental Results ◽  
Final Position ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
New Information ◽  
Basic Facts

AbstractLinguists have keenly studied the realization of focus – the part of the sentence introducing new information – because it involves the interaction of different linguistic modules. Syntacticians have argued that Spanish uses word order for information-structural purposes, marking focused constituents via rightmost movement. However, recent studies have challenged this claim. To contribute sentence-processing evidence, we conducted a self-paced reading task and a judgment task with Mexican and Catalonian Spanish speakers. We found that movement to final position can signal focus in Spanish, in contrast to the aforementioned work. We contextualize our results within the literature, identifying three basic facts that theories of Spanish focus and theories of language processing should explain, and advance a fourth: that mismatches in information-structural expectations can induce processing delays. Finally, we propose that some differences in the existing experimental results may stem from methodological differences.

PARSING STRATEGIES IN L1 AND L2 SENTENCE PROCESSING

2003 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 501-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Despina Papadopoulou ◽  
Harald Clahsen
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Native Languages ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
On Line ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Lexical Cues

To contribute to a better understanding of second language (L2) sentence processing, the present study examines how L2 learners parse temporarily ambiguous sentences containing relative clauses. Results are reported from both off-line and on-line experiments with three groups of advanced learners of Greek whose native languages (L1s) were Spanish, German, or Russian as well as from corresponding experiments with a control group of adult native speakers of Greek. We found that, despite their nativelike mastery of the construction under investigation, the L2 learners showed relative-clause attachment preferences that were different from those of the native speakers. Moreover, the L2 learners did not exhibit L1-based preferences in their L2 Greek, as might be expected if they were directly influenced by L1 attachment preferences. We suggest that L2 learners integrate information relevant for parsing differently from native speakers, with the L2 learners relying more on lexical cues than the native speakers and less on purely structurally based parsing strategies.

The syntax–discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 463-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
HOLGER HOPP
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
On Line ◽  
Discourse Interface ◽  
Ultimate Attainment ◽  
L1 English

This study investigates ultimate attainment at the syntax–discourse interface in adult second-language (L2) acquisition. In total, 91 L1 (first-language) English, L1 Dutch and L1 Russian advanced-to-near-native speakers of German and 63 native controls are tested on an acceptability judgement task and an on-line self-paced reading task. These centre on discourse-related word order optionality in German. Results indicate that convergence at the syntax–discourse interface is in principle possible in adult L2 acquisition, both in off-line knowledge and on-line processing, even for L1 English speakers, whose L1 does not correspond to L2 German in discourse-to-syntax mappings. At the same time, non-convergence of the L1 Dutch groups and differences in the L2 groups' performance between tasks suggest that asymmetries in L1–L2 discourse configurations and computational difficulties in mapping discourse onto syntax constrain L2 performance.

Context effects on sentence processing: A study based on the Competition Model

2001 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
I-RU SU
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Context Effects ◽  
Competition Model ◽  
English Sentence ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Main Effect ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Chinese And English

Based on the Competition Model, the present study investigated how adult monolinguals and bilinguals incorporate the context cue in assigning the agent role vis-à-vis intrasentential cues (animacy and word order). The subjects were L1 and L2 speakers of Chinese and English. The results show that both Chinese and English monolingual controls paid less attention to context than to intrasentential cues that have been identified as determinants for Chinese and English sentence processing. Nevertheless, context was found to play a bigger role in Chinese than in English. As for L2 learners, the main effect of context was significant in all groups of learners of Chinese and English. However, the Chinese EFL learners relied on context to a greater extent than did the English CFL learners when processing their respective L2.

Processing Relative Clauses in Chinese: Evidence from Event-Related Potentials

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sun Xiaoxia ◽  
Roeland Hancock ◽  
Thomas G. Bever ◽  
Cheng Xiaoguang ◽  
Lüder Schmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Complex Structures ◽  
Comprehensive Model ◽  
Garden Path ◽  
Significant Interest ◽  
Related Potentials

AbstractThe Interpretation of Chinese relative clauses has become of significant interest in sentence processing research, since some studies found that Chinese comprehension patterns violate the well-known universal subject relatives preference proposed by NAPH theory and proved by cross-linguistic studies. The current study uses the neuropsychological measure of ERP. It supports such a language-specific phenomenon, with the results showing that both subject-and object-modifying subject relatives eliciting larger ERP components than object relatives. The results suggest that object relatives are easier to process than subject relatives at both modifying positions, challenging the claim of universal subject preference for all languages. In addition, this study casts doubts on CWO and working memory-based DLT models despite results being compatible with them, and concludes that none of the current models are comprehensive enough to account for the data. Finally, this study offers a piece of evidence for the garden path effect caused by the surface NVN word order in the Chinese relative clause. All in all, this study adds to the evidence that processing preference is not universal. It contributes to a comprehensive model of how complex structures are processed.

Processing delays

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 65-78
Author(s):  
Loes Koring ◽  
Hans van de Koot
Keyword(s):  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Visual World ◽  
Visual World Paradigm ◽  
Exact Time ◽  
On Line

Abstract An eye-tracking experiment using the Visual World Paradigm (VWP) shows that in on-line sentence processing in English the argument of an unaccusative verb reactivates late after verb offset. In contrast to previous studies, this VWP experiment establishes the exact time course of this effect, which matches the time course previously found for Dutch, despite differences in word order between the two languages. Furthermore, it uncovers an early reactivation of the argument of unergative verbs that has previously gone unnoticed. Such an effect has previously been observed for Dutch, but not for English. Moreover, the effect seems to occur earlier in English than in Dutch. We suggest that this difference may be due to the more rigid word order of English, which provides the parser with more informative cues.

The On-Line Resolution of the Sentence Complement/Relative Clause Ambiguity: Evidence from Spanish

2004 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep Demestre ◽  
José E. García-Albea
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Ambiguity Resolution ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Syntactic Ambiguity ◽  
Lexical Information ◽  
Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution ◽  
On Line ◽  
Verbal Mood

Abstract. Two self-paced reading experiments investigated syntactic ambiguity resolution in Spanish. The experiments examined the way in which Spanish subjects initially interpret sentences that are temporarily ambiguous between a sentence complement and a relative clause interpretation. Experiment 1 examined whether the sentence complement preference found in English is observed in Spanish speaking subjects. In Experiment 2, verbal mood was manipulated in order to study the influence of verb-specific information on sentence processing. Since subcategorization for a subjunctive complement clause is generally assumed to be a lexical property of some verbs, the manipulation of the mood of the embedded verb affords us an interesting and novel way to examine the influence of lexical information on syntactic ambiguity resolution. Experiment 1 showed that Spanish speakers initially interpret the ambiguous that-clause as a sentence complement. Experiment 2 showed that verb-specific information, in particular, the information that specifies that a verb subcategorizes for a subjunctive complement, is accessed and used rapidly and affects the ambiguity resolution process. The results are discussed in relation to current models of sentence processing.

Cross-linguistic lexical and syntactic co-activation in L2 sentence processing

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Hopp
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Lexical Processing ◽  
First Language ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
Lexical Activation ◽  
Co Activation ◽  
On Line ◽  
Embedded Clauses

Abstract This study investigates under which conditions the L1 syntax is activated in L2 on-line sentence comprehension. We study whether cross-linguistic syntactic activation of the L1 word order is affected by lexical activation of the first language (L1) by virtue of cognate words. In two eye-tracking experiments, German-English bilinguals and English natives read English sentences containing reduced relative clauses whose surface word order partially overlaps with German embedded clauses. The verbs used were either German-English cognates or matched control verbs. The results show lexical cognate facilitation and syntactic co-activation of L1 word order, with the latter being moderated by proficiency and cognate status. Critically, syntactic co-activation is found only with English control words. We argue that fleeting co-activation of the L1 syntax becomes measurable under higher demands of lexical processing, while cognate facilitation frees resources for inhibition of the L1 syntax and target-like syntactic processing.

On-line sentence processing in Swedish: cross-linguistic developmental comparisons with French

2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHÈLE KAIL ◽  
MARIA KIHLSTEDT ◽  
PHILIPPE BONNET
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Linguistic Analysis ◽  
Competition Model ◽  
Adult Group ◽  
Cue Validity ◽  
Processing Abilities ◽  
On Line ◽  
Cost Factors

ABSTRACTThis study examined on-line processing of Swedish sentences in a grammaticality-judgement experiment within the framework of the Competition Model. Three age groups from 6 to 11 and an adult group were asked to detect grammatical violations as quickly as possible. Three factors concerning cue cost were studied: violation position (early vs. late), violation span (intraphrasal vs. interphrasal) and violation type (agreement vs. word order). Developmental results showed that children were always slower at detecting grammatical violations. Irrespective of age, participants were faster at judging sentences with late violations, especially in the younger groups. Intraphrasal violations were more rapidly detected than interphrasal ones, particularly in adults. Finally, agreement violations and word order ones did not differ. The hierarchy of cue cost factors indicated that violation span was the dominant one. A cross-linguistic analysis with French (Kail, 2004) underlines the developmental processing abilities and the interdependence between cue cost and cue validity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document