Acquiring L2 sentence comprehension: A longitudinal study of word monitoring in noise

Bilingualism

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 841-857

  Oliver, Georgina ^a   Gullberg, Marianne ^b   Hellwig, Frauke ^c   Mitterer, Holger ^d   Indefrey, Peter ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^d MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

^e RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

longitudinal; noise; second language; sentence processing; word monitoring

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866092874     PISSN: 13667289     EISSN: 14691841     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1366728912000089     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H. (1998). The CELEX Dutch database. Release N32. http://www. mpi.nl/world/celex (accessed October 10, 2004
2. Bradlow, A. R., & Bent, T. (2002). The clear speech effect for non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112 (1), 272-284. (Pubitemid 34747761)
3. Caramazza, A., & Brones, I. (1979). Lexical access in bilinguals. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 13, 212- 214.
4. Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). How native-like is non-native language processing? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10 (12), 564-570. (Pubitemid 44820969)
5. Craig, C. H. (1988). Effect of three conditions of predictability on word-recognition performance. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 31, 588-592. (Pubitemid 19006873)
6. Cutler, A., Cooke, M., Lecumberri, M. L., & Pasveer, D. (2007). L2 consonant identification in noise: Crosslanguage comparisons. Presented at the Interspeech '07, Antwerp.
7. Cutler, A., Weber, A., Smits, R., & Cooper, N. (2004). Patterns of English phoneme confusions by native and non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116 (6), 3668-3678. (Pubitemid 40029947)
8. Davidson, D. J., & Indefrey, P. (2009). Electrophysiological responses to crossed versus nested structures in German learners of Dutch. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 1335-1369.
9. De Groot, A. M. B. (1992). Determinants of word translation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 18, 1001-1018.
10. De Groot, A.M. B., & Nas, G. L. (1991). Lexical representation of cognates and noncognates in compound bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 90-123.
11. DeKeyser, R. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction, pp. 125-151. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (1999). Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 496-518.
13. Favreau, M., & Segalowitz, N. S. (1983). Automatic and controlled processes in the first-and second-language reading of fluent bilinguals. Memory and Cognition, 11 (6), 565-574.
14. Florentine, M. (1985). Speech perception in noise by fluent, non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 77, s106.
15. Florentine, M., Buus, S., Scharf, B., & Canevet, G. (1984). Speech reception thresholds in noise for native and nonnative listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, s84.
16. Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005). Eye-movement recording as a tool for studying syntactic processing in a second language: A reviewof methodologies and experimental findings. Second Language Research, 21, 175-198. (Pubitemid 40572628)
17. Garcia Lecumberri, M. L., & Cooke, M. (2006). Effect of masker type on native and non-native consonant perception in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119 (4), 2445-2454.
18. Gong, J. (2006). Comparing non-native and native speech perception in noise.Masters thesis, University of Sheffield.
19. Gullberg, M., & Indefrey, P. (2003). Language background questionnaire. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. http://www.mpi.nl/research/ researchprojects/the-dynamics-of-multilingual- processing (accessed January 30, 2005
20. Hoen,M., Meunier, F., Grataloup, C.-L., Pellegrino, F.,Grimault, N., Perrin, F., Perrot, X., & Collet, L. (2007). Phonetic and lexical interferences in informational masking during speech-in-speech comprehension. Speech Communication, 49, 905-916. (Pubitemid 47488513)
21. Hulstijn, J. H. (2010). Measuring second language proficiency. In E. Blom & S. Unsworth (eds.), Experimental methods in language acquisition research (EMLAR), pp. 185-199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
22. Kalikow, D. N., Stevens, K. N., & Elliott, L. L. (1977). Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 61 (5), 1337- 1351. (Pubitemid 8086815)
23. Kilborn, K. (1992). On-line integration of grammatical information in a second language. In R. Harris (ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals, pp. 337-350. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
24. Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L. K. (1980). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 8, 1-71.
25. Mayo, L., Florentine, M., & Buus, S. (1997). Age of secondlanguage acquisition and perception of speech in noise. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 686-693. (Pubitemid 27315100)
26. Nabelek, A. K., & Donahue, A. M. (1984). Perception of consonants in reverberation by native and non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 632-634.
27. Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In J. R. Anderson (ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition, pp. 1-55. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28. Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29. Odlin, T. (2003). Cross-linguistic influence. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition, pp. 436-486. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
30. Roberts, L.,Gullberg, M.,&Indefrey, P. (2008).On-line pronoun resolution in L2 discourse: L1 influence and general learner effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30 (3), 333-357.
31. Roussohatzaki, M., & Florentine, M. (1990). Perception of American-English in noise by Greek listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, s72.
32. Schepens, J., Dijkstra, T., & Grootjen, F. (2012). Distributions of cognates in Europe as based on Levenshtein distance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15 (1), 157-166.
33. Segalowitz, N., & Hulstijn, J. (2005). Automaticity in bilingualism and second language learning. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. De Groot (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 371-388. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
34. Segalowitz, N. S., & Segalowitz, S. J. (1993). Skilled performance, practice, and the differentiation of speedup from automatization effects: Evidence from second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 369-385.
35. Segalowitz, S. J., Segalowitz, N. S., & Wood, A. G. (1998). Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 53-67. (Pubitemid 128183054)
36. Sharwood-Smith, M., & Kellerman, E. (1986). Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition: An introduction. In E. Kellerman & M. Sharwood Smith (eds.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition, pp. 1-9. New York: Pergamon Press.
37. Shi, L.-F. (2010). Perception of acoustically degraded sentences in bilingual listeners who differ in age of English acquisition. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 821-835.
38. Shimizu, T., Makishima, K., Yoshida, M., & Yamagishi, H. (2002).Effect of background noise on perception ofEnglish speech for Japanese listeners. Auris Nasus Larynx, 29, 121- 125. (Pubitemid 34230361)