Anaphora under reconstruction during processing in english as a second language

Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 561-590

  Dekydtspotter, L ^a   Wang, Y T ^a   Kim, B ^b   Kim, H J ^a   Kim, H K ^a   Kun Lee, J ^c  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Yonsei University   (South Korea)

^c Mokpo National University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870010683     PISSN: 02722631     EISSN: 14701545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0272263112000344     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Badecker, W., & Straub, K. (2002). The processing role of structural constraints on the interpretation of pronouns and anaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 748-769.
2. Barss, A. (1986). Chains and anaphoric dependence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
3. Belikova, A., & White, L. (2009). Evidence for the fundamental difference hypothesis or not? Island constraints revisited. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 199-223.
4. Broselow, E., & Finer, D. (1991). Parameter setting in second language phonology and syntax. Second Language Research, 7, 35-59.
5. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York : Praeger.
6. Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
7. Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006 a). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 107-126.
8. Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006 b). Grammatical processing in language learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3-42.
9. Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interface environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 25, 257-271.
10. Cole, P., Hermon, G., & Sung, L.-M. (1990). Principles and parameters of long-distance refl exives. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 1-22.
11. Cole, P., & Sung, L.-M. (1994). Head-movement and long distance refl exives. Linguistic Inquiry, 25, 355-406.
12. Crocker, M. (1996). Computational psycholinguistics: An interdisciplinary approach to the study of language. Dordrecht : Kluwer.
13. Dekydtspotter, L. (2001). The universal parser and interlanguage: Domain specific mental organization in the comprehension of combien interrogatives in English-French interlanguage . Second Language Research, 17, 91-143.
14. Dekydtspotter, L., & Miller, A. K. (2009). Probing for intermediate traces in the processing of long-distance wh-dependencies in English as a second language. In M. Bowles, T. Ionin, S. Montrul, & A. Tremblay (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009) (pp. 113-124). Somerville, MA : Cascadilla Press.
15. Dekydtspotter, L., Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (2006). The comparative fallacy in L2 processing research. In M. Grantham O'Brien, C. Shea, & J. Archibald (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2006): The Banff conference (pp. 33-40). Somerville, MA : Cascadilla Press.
16. Dekydtspotter, L., & Sprouse, R. A. (2003). Interlanguage representations, computations and intuitions. In J. M. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2002) (pp. 45-54). Somerville, MA : Cascadilla Press.
17. Epstein, S., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 677-738.
18. Felser, C., & Roberts, L. (2007). Processing wh-dependencies in a second language: A cross-modal priming study. Second Language Research, 23, 9-36.
19. Felser, C., Roberts, L., Gross, R., & Marinis, T. (2003). The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 453-489.
20. Felser, C., Sato, M., & Bertenshaw, N. (2009). The on-line application of Binding Principle A in English as a second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 485-502.
21. Fodor, J. D. (1998). Parsing to learn. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 339-374.
22. Fodor, J. D., & Inoue, A. (2000). Garden path re-analysis: Attach (anyway) and revision as last resort. In M. de Vincenzi & V. Lombardo (Eds.), Cross-linguistic perspectives on language processing (pp. 21-61). Dordrecht : Kluwer.
23. Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance, XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 559-686). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
24. Frenck-Mestre, C., & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 119-148.
25. Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 78, 1-76.
26. Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In Y. Miyashita, A. Marantz, & W. O'Neil (Eds.), Image, language and brain (pp. 95-126). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
27. Gibson, E., & Warren, T. (2004). Reading-time evidence for intermediate linguistic structure in long-distance dependencies. Syntax, 7, 55-78.
28. Greene, S., McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Pronoun resolution and discourse models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 18, 266-283.
29. Hicks, G. (2009). The derivation of anaphoric relations. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
30. Hirakawa, M. (1990). A study of the acquisition of English refl exives. Second Language Research, 6, 60-85.
31. Hoover, M. L., & Dwivedi, V. D. (1998). Syntactic processing in skilled bilinguals. Language Learning, 48, 1-29.
32. Hornstein, N. (2000). Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Oxford : Blackwell.
33. Huang, C.-T. J., & Liu, C.-S. L. (2001). Logophoricity, attitudes and ziji at the interface. Syntax and Semantics, 33, 141-195.
34. Huang, C.-T. J., & Tang, C.-C. J. (1991). The local nature of the long-distance refl exive in Chinese. In J. Koster & E. Reuland (Eds.), Long distance anaphora (pp. 263-282). New York : Cambridge University Press.
35. Juffs, A. (1998). Some effects of first language argument structure and morphosyntax on second language sentence processing. Second Language Research, 14, 406-424.
36. Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (1995). Parsing effects in second language sentence processing: Subject and object asymmetries in wh-extraction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 483-516.
37. Kang, B.-M. (2001). The grammar and use of Korean refl exives. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 6, 134-150.
38. Kim, J.-H., Montrul, S., & Yoon, J. (2009). Binding interpretation of anaphors in Korean heritage speakers. Language Acquisition, 16, 3-35.
39. Lardiere, D. (2009 a). Further thoughts on parameters and features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 409-422.
40. Lardiere, D. (2009 b). Some thoughts on a contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173-227.
41. Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 53-78.
42. Martohardjono, G. (1993). Wh-movement in the acquisition of a second language: A crosslinguistic study of three languages with and without overt movement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
43. Nicol, J. L., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5-20.
44. O'Grady, W. (2005). Syntactic carpentry: An emergentist approach to syntax. Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
45. Papadopoulou, D., & Clahsen, H. (2003). Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A study of relative clause attachment in Greek. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 501-528.
46. Patson, N. D., & Ferreira, F. (2009). Conceptual plural information is used to guide early parsing decisions: Evidence from garden-path sentences with reciprocal verbs. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 464-486.
47. Reinhart, T. (1983). Anaphora and semantic interpretation. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
48. Reinhart, T., & Reuland, E. (1993). Refl exivity. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 657-720.
49. Reuland, E. (2001). Primitives of binding. Linguistic Inquiry, 32, 430-492.
50. Reuland, E. (2006). Agreeing to bind. In H. Broeckhuis, N. Corver, R. Huybergts, U. Kleinhenz, & J. Koster (Eds.), Organizing grammar: Linguistic studies in honor of Henk von Riemsdijk (pp. 505-513). Berlin : Mouton de Gruyter.
51. Rigalleau, F., & Caplan, D. (2000). Effects of gender marking in pronominal coindexation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 23-52.
52. Rigalleau, F., Caplan, D., & Baudiffier, V. (2004). New arguments in favour of an automatic gender pronominal process. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 893-933.
53. Runner, J., Sussman, R., & Tanenhaus, M. (2003). Assignment of reference to refl exives and pronouns in picture noun phrases: Evidence from eye-movements. Cognition, 89, B1-B13.
54. Runner, J., Sussman, R., & Tanenhaus, M. (2006). Assigning reference to refl exives and pronouns in picture noun phrases. Cognitive Science, 30, 1-49.
55. Schwartz, B. D. (1999). Let's make up your mind: "Special nativist" perspectives on language, modularity of mind, and nonnative language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 635-655.
56. Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1994). Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In T. Hoekstra & B. D. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar: Papers in honor of Kenneth Wexler from the 1991 GLOW workshops (pp. 317-368). Amsterdam : Benjamins.
57. Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40-72.
58. Sprouse, R. A. (2006). Full transfer and relexification: Second language acquisition and creole genesis. In C. Lefebvre, C. Jourdan, & L. White (Eds.), L2 acquisition and Creole genesis: Dialogues (pp. 169-181). Amsterdam : Benjamins.
59. Stewart, A. J., Holler, J., & Kidd, E. (2007). Shallow processing of ambiguous pronouns: Evidence for delay. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1680-1696.
60. Sturt, P. (2003). The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 542-562.
61. Thomas, M. (1989). The interpretation of English refl exive pronouns by non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 281-301.
62. Thomas, M. (1991). Universal grammar and the interpretation of refl exives in a second language. Language, 67, 211-239.
63. Thomas, M. (1993). Knowledge of refl exives in a second language. Amsterdam : Benjamins.
64. Wakabayashi, S. (1996). The nature of interlanguage: SLA of English refl exives. Second Language Research, 12, 266-303.
65. White, L. (1995). Input, triggers, and second language acquisition: Can binding be taught? In F. Eckman, D. Highland, P. W. Lee, J. Milcham, & R. Rutkowski Weber (Eds.), Second language acquisition: Theory and pedagogy (pp. 63-78). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
66. Williams, J., Möbius, P., & Kim, C. (2001). Native and non-native processing of English wh-questions: Parsing strategies and plausibility constraints. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 509-540.