The effects of task-essential training on L2 processing strategies and the development of Spanish verbal morphology

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 344-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melisa Dracos ◽  
Nick Henry
Keyword(s):  
Verbal Morphology ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies

scholarly journals L3 Sentence Processing: Language-Specific or Phenomenon-Sensitive?

Languages ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
Sokolova ◽  
Slabakova
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Semantic Cues ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Reading Experiment ◽  
Linguistic Decision Making ◽  
Matrix Verb ◽  
Processing Language

The article investigates non-native sentence processing and examines the existing scholarly approaches to L2 processing with a population of L3 learners of English, whose native language is Russian. In a self-paced reading experiment, native speakers of Russian and English, as well as (low) intermediate L3 learners of English, read ambiguous relative clauses (RC) and decided on their attachment interpretation: high attachment (HA) or low attachment (LA). In the two-by-two design, linguistic decision-making was prompted by lexical semantic cues vs. a structural change caused by a certain type of matrix verb. The results show that whenever a matrix verb caused a change of syntactic modification, which entailed HA, both native and non-native speakers abandoned the default English-like LA and chose HA. Lexical semantic cues did not have any significant effect in RC attachment resolution. The study provides experimental evidence in favor of the similarity of native and non-native processing strategies. Both native speakers and L3 learners of English apply structural processing strategies and show similar sensitivity to a linguistic prompt that shapes RC resolution. Native and non-native processing is found to be prediction-based; structure building is performed in a top-down manner.

Psycholinguistically oriented second language research

2001 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 207-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Juffs
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Language Performance ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Language Research ◽  
On Line

This chapter reviews recent research that investigates second language performance from the perspective of sentence processing (on-line comprehension studies) and word recognition. It concentrates on describing methods that employ reaction time measures as correlates of processing difficulty or knowledge representation. This research suggests that second language learners employ much the same on-line processing strategies as native speakers, but that the L1 can also influence L2 processing. Reaction times in lexical decision experiments have been useful in exploring the relationship between the first and second language lexicons and automatic processes in lexical access. Finally, the chapter mentions some of the problems in this line of research, in particular the issue of individual differences in working memory and technological challenges.

Working memory effects on L1 and L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses by Korean L2 learners of English

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ji Hyon Kim ◽  
Kiel Christianson
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Response Times ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
First Language ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
L1 And L2

In this study, we report the results of two self-paced reading experiments that investigated working memory capacity effects on the processing of globally ambiguous relative clauses by advanced Korean second language (L2) learners of English. Consistent with previous monolingual literature on the processing of temporary ambiguity, we found that working memory capacity was a factor that also affected the processing of globally ambiguous relative clauses. High working memory capacity was positively correlated with a processing disadvantage reflected as slower reading times at the region where the ambiguity becomes detectable, and longer response times to decide on a correct disambiguation for the target structure. Furthermore, a similar pattern was also found in the same participants’ processing of L2 ambiguity. We conclude that for highly advanced L2 learners, the processing strategies employed for ambiguous structures are not qualitatively different between the same individual’s first language (L1) and L2, but rather differ across readers of different working memory capacities.

Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Chinese

1992 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 451-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua Liu ◽  
Elizabeth Bates ◽  
Ping Li
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Complex Interaction ◽  
Language Loss ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Forward Transfer

ABSTRACTThis study examines patterns of transfer in the sentence processing strategies displayed by Chinese-English and English–Chinese bilinguals. Our results indicate that late bilinguals display strong evidence for forward transfer: late Chinese–English bilinguals transfer animacybased strategies to English sentences; late English–Chinese bilinguals transfer English-like word order strategies to Chinese. Early bilinguals display a variety of transfer patterns, including differentiation (use of animacy strategies in Chinese and word order strategies in English) and backward transfer (use of L2 processing strategies in L1, a possible symptom of language loss). These unusual transfer patterns reflect a complex interaction of variables, including age of exposure to L2 and patterns of daily language use. Implications of these findings for the critical period hypothesis are discussed, together with some new hypotheses concerning the interaction between acquisition of L2 and maintenance of L1.

Mechanisms of Verbal Morphology Processing in Heritage Speakers of Russian

2008 ◽  
Vol Volume 6 (6.1 (Spring, 2008)) ◽  
pp. 105-126
Author(s):  
Natalia Romanova
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Mental Representations ◽  
Morphological Processing ◽  
Verbal Morphology ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Verb Forms ◽  
Rule Application

The goal of the study is to analyze the morphological processing of real and novel verb forms by heritage speakers of Russian in order to determine whether it differs from that of native (L1) speakers1 and second language (L2) learners; if so, how it is different; and which factors may guide the acquisition process. The experiment involved three groups of subjects: 28 adult native speakers, 14 adult heritage speakers, and 17 beginning American learners of Russian. The results demonstrate that (1) novel form production in heritage processing, as in native and L2 processing, is rule-based, and that rule application—i.e. the generalization rate of conjugational patterns—depends on the input-based mechanism of statistical probabilities (to be defined below), and (2) that heritage speakers' mental representations of morphological structures are unstable and their morphological processing is different from either adult native or L2 processing.

scholarly journals Still ‘native’? Morphological processing in second-language-immersed speakers

2021 ◽  
pp. 136700692110194
Author(s):  
Sandra Kotzor ◽  
Swetlana Schuster ◽  
Aditi Lahiri
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Processing System ◽  
Morphological Processing ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Language Attrition ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Morphological Differences ◽  
The Uk ◽  
L1 And L2

Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions: This paper investigates whether sustained immersion in a dominant second-language (L2) environment alters morphological processing strategies compared to those of L1-immersed speakers. Furthermore, we assess the methodological usefulness of a language-mode task in light of the validity of conducting native processing research on L2-immersed speakers. Design/methodology/approach: We use the design and stimuli of a previous long-lag visual lexical decision task conducted with native German speakers in Germany and use this group as a control. Thirty-two native German speakers resident in the UK (>2 years; minimal day-to-day German use) participated in two experimental sessions (one containing a 20-minute conversation task in German). Data and analysis: The data shows clear differences between facilitation patterns of L1 and L2-immersed participants. L2-immersed speakers display decreased sensitivity to subtle morphological differences as well as facilitation in a form condition similar to effects seen in L2 processing. Lexical decisions of pseudowords based on plausibility, however, remain similar. While the pre-experiment language-mode task resulted in overall faster responses, there was no effect on processing patterns. Findings/conclusions: L1 morphological processing is affected by continued exposure to a dominant second language with sensitivity to the internal structure or differences of morphologically complex items decreasing. The attrition group shows certain similarities to L2 morphological processing. Our findings also call for caution in the recruitment of L2-immersed experiment participants. Originality: Research on morphological processing in language attrition is scarce and no previous work has examined complex derived words. The addition of a principled manipulation of the pre-experiment task is also uncommon. Significance/implications: The possible similarity of L1-attrition and L2-learner processing challenges the concept of ‘native’ processing and the notion of ‘nativeness’ as a stable property. Further comparison of these populations may lead to a more thorough understanding of the adaptability of our processing system.

The Mere Exposure Effect and Recognition Depend on the Way You Look! *S. W. and J. D. contributed equally to this study.

2010 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie Willems ◽  
Jonathan Dedonder ◽  
Martial Van der Linden
Keyword(s):  
Differential Effect ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Mere Exposure ◽  
Perceptual Processing ◽  
Processing Strategy ◽  
Mere Exposure Effect ◽  
Exposure Effect ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Explicit Recognition ◽  
Analytic Strategy

In line with Whittlesea and Price (2001) , we investigated whether the memory effect measured with an implicit memory paradigm (mere exposure effect) and an explicit recognition task depended on perceptual processing strategies, regardless of whether the task required intentional retrieval. We found that manipulation intended to prompt functional implicit-explicit dissociation no longer had a differential effect when we induced similar perceptual strategies in both tasks. Indeed, the results showed that prompting a nonanalytic strategy ensured performance above chance on both tasks. Conversely, inducing an analytic strategy drastically decreased both explicit and implicit performance. Furthermore, we noted that the nonanalytic strategy involved less extensive gaze scanning than the analytic strategy and that memory effects under this processing strategy were largely independent of gaze movement.

Differential Mnemonic Effects of Text Processing Strategies for Good

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Hines ◽  
Mark A. McDaniel ◽  
Melissa Guynn
Keyword(s):  
Text Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document