Syntactic processing by skilled bilinguals

Language Learning

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 1-29

  Hoover, Michael L ^a   Dwivedi, Veena D ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032367406     PISSN: 00238333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9922.00031     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Aaronson, D., & Ferres, S. (1984). The word-by-word reading paradigm: An experimental and theoretical approach. In D. E. Kieras & M. S. Just (Eds.), New methods in reading comprehension research (pp. 31-68). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Alderson, J. C. (1984). Reading in a foreign language: A reading problem or a language problem? In J. C. Alderson & A. H. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading in a foreign language (pp. 1-27). London: Longman.
3. Ammon, M. S., & Slobin, D. I. (1979). A cross-linguistic study of the processing of causative sentences. Cognition, 7, 3-17.
4. Auger, J. (1994). Pronominal clitics in Québec colloquial French: A morphological analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
5. Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157-194). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Baudot, J. (1992). Frequences d'utilisation des mots en français écrit contemporain. Montreal: Presses de l'Université de Montréal.
7. Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language (pp. 279-352). New York: John Wiley.
8. Bever, T. G., & Townsend, D. (1995, March). Sentence processing involves two stages. Paper presented at the CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Tucson, AZ.
9. Clark, H. H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335-359.
10. Cuetos, F., Mitchell, D. C., & Corley, M.M.B. (1996). Parsing in different languages. In M. Carreiras, J. E. García-Albea & N. Sebastián-Gallés (Eds.), Language processing in Spanish (pp. 145-189). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. De Vincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
12. De Vincenzi, M., & Job, R. (1993). Some observations on the universality of the late closure strategy. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 189-206.
13. De Vincenzi, M., & Job, R. (1995). An investigation of late closure: The role of syntax, thematic structure, and pragmatics in initial interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1303-1321.
14. Dwivedi, V., & Hoover, M. L. (1996). Processing the French causative construction. Unpublished manuscript, McGill University, Montreal.
15. Favreau, M., & Segalowitz, N. (1983). Automatic and controlled processes in reading a second language. Memory and Cognition, 11, 565-574.
16. Ford, M., Bresnan J. W., & Kaplan R. M. (1982). A competence based theory of syntactic closure. In J. W. Bresnan (Ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations (pp. 727-796). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Frazier, L. (1987). Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5, 519-559.
18. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Frazier, L., & Fodor, J.D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition. 6, 291-325.
20. Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178-210.
21. Hoover, M. L. (1992). Processing strategies in Spanish and English. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21, 275-299.
22. Hoover, M. L., & Berdugo-Oviedo, G. (1996). Syntactic processing by Spanish and English readers: The signaling hypothesis. Unpublished manuscript, McGill University, Montreal.
23. Juffs, A., & Harrington M. (1996). Garden path sentences and error data in second language sentence processing. Language Learning, 46, 283-326.
24. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
25. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122-149.
26. Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
27. Perfetti, C. A., Finger, E., & Hogaboam, T. (1978). Sources of vocalization latency differences between skilled and less skilled young readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 730-739.
28. Perfetti, C. A., & Hogaboam, T. (1975). Relationship between single word decoding and reading comprehension skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 461-469.
29. Posner, M., & Snyder, C. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R.C. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55-86). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Renaud, A. (1996). The Great Presenter software for the Macintosh [computer software]. Montreal: Laboratory for Applied Cognitive Science, McGill University.
31. Segalowitz, N. (1986). Skilled reading in the second language. In J. Vaid (Ed.), Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguistic and neuropsychological perspectives (pp. 3-19). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Segalowitz, N., & Hébert, M. (1990). Phonological recoding in the first and second language reading of skilled bilinguals. Language Learning, 40, 503-538.
33. Stanovich, K. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71.
34. Stanovich, K., & West, R. (1979). Mechanisms of sentence context effects in reading: Automatic activation and conscious attention. Memory and Cognition, 7, 77-85.
35. Stanovich, K., West, R., & Feeman, D. (1981). A longitudinal study of sentence context effects in second-grade children: Tests of interactive compensatory model. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 32, 185-199.