Incremental interpretation in second language sentence processing

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.

[1]  J. Grainger,et al.  MASKED PRIMING BY TRANSLATION EQUIVALENTS IN PROFICIENT BILINGUALS , 1998 .

[2]  W. Heij,et al.  Nonverbal Context Effects in Forward and Backward Word Translation: Evidence for Concept Mediation , 1996 .

[3]  Lisa D. Sanders,et al.  An ERP study of continuous speech processing. II. Segmentation, semantics, and syntax in non-native speakers. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[4]  A. Friederici,et al.  Processing a second language: Late learners''comprehension mechanisms as revealed by event-related b , 2001 .

[5]  Martin J. Pickering,et al.  Sentence processing without empty categories , 1991 .

[6]  Alan Juffs,et al.  Garden Path Sentences and Error Data in Second Language Sentence Processing. , 1996 .

[7]  M. Pickering,et al.  Plausibility and the Processing of Unbounded Dependencies:An Eye-Tracking Study , 1996 .

[8]  Robin K. Morris,et al.  The use of thematic role information in parsing: Syntactic processing autonomy revisited , 2003 .

[9]  C. Felser,et al.  Grammatical processing in language learners , 2006, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[10]  Martin J. Pickering,et al.  Evidence against the use of subcategorisation frequency in the processing of unbounded dependencies , 2003 .

[11]  W. Kintsch.  The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. , 1988, Psychological review.

[12]  J. Kroll,et al.  Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections Between Bilingual Memory Representations , 1994 .

[13]  M. MacDonald,et al.  Individual Differences and Probabilistic Constraints in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution , 1995 .

[14]  Michael J. Fender.  A Review of L1 and L2/ESL Word Integration Skills and the Nature of L2/ESL Word Integration Development Involved in Lower‐Level Text Processing , 2001 .

[15]  M. Pickering,et al.  Plausibility and recovery from garden paths: An eye-tracking study , 1998 .

[16]  Catherine Walter,et al.  Transfer of Reading Comprehension Skills to L2 is Linked to Mental Representations of Text and to L2 Working Memory , 2004 .

[17]  M. Just,et al.  The psychology of reading and language comprehension , 1986 .

[18]  K. Forster,et al.  The role of polysemy in masked semantic and translation priming , 2004 .

[19]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[20]  Matthew W. Crocker,et al.  Parsing and Incremental Understanding During Reading , 1999 .

[21]  Leah Roberts,et al.  GAPS IN SECOND LANGUAGE SENTENCE PROCESSING , 2005, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[22]  M J Pickering,et al.  Strategies for processing unbounded dependencies: lexical information and verb-argument assignment. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[23]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Verb Argument Structure in Parsing and Interpretation: Evidence from wh-Questions , 1995 .

[24]  Lyle F. Bachman,et al.  The construct validation of self-ratings of communicative language ability , 1989 .

[25]  Laurie A. Stowe,et al.  Parsing WH-constructions: Evidence for on-line gap location , 1986 .

[26]  M. Pickering,et al.  Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing , 1999 .

[27]  John N. Williams,et al.  Native and non-native processing of English wh- questions: Parsing strategies and plausibility constraints , 2001, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[28]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Sentence processing: A tutorial review. , 1987 .

[29]  J. Kroll,et al.  From form to meaning: Stages in the acquisition of second-language vocabulary , 1999, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.

[30]  Claudia Felser,et al.  The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English , 2003, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[31]  John N. Williams.  The relationship between word meanings in the first and second language: Evidence for a common, but restricted, semantic code , 1994 .

[32]  T. S. Hyde,et al.  Differential effects of incidental tasks on the organization of recall of a list of highly associated words. , 1969 .

[33]  Brenda Hannon,et al.  Shallow Semantic Processing of Text: An Individual-Differences Account , 2004 .

[34]  Michael L. Hoover,et al.  Syntactic Processing by Skilled Bilinguals. , 1998 .

[35]  Alan Juffs,et al.  Representation, Processing and Working Memory in a Second Language , 2004 .

[36]  J. B. Wyman,et al.  What is reading ability , 1921 .

[37]  G. Bower,et al.  Comparison of associative learning strategies , 1970 .

[38]  Hsuan-Chich Chen,et al.  Patterns of lexical processing in a nonnative language. , 1989 .