Individual differences in the second language processing of object-subject ambiguities

Applied Psycholinguistics

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 129-173

  Hopp, Holger ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANNHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84923346892     PISSN: 01427164     EISSN: 14691817     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0142716413000180     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Adams, B. C., Clifton, C., Jr., & Mitchell, D. C. (1998). Lexical guidance in sentence processing? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 265-270.
2. Allan, D. (1992). The Oxford Placement Test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Ariji, K., Omaki, A., & Tatsuta, N. (2003). Working memory restricts the use of semantic information in ambiguity resolution. In P. Slezak (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Cognitive Science (pp. 19-25). Sydney: University of New South Wales.
4. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390-412.
5. Bowden, H. W., Sanz, C., & Stafford, C. A. (2005). Individual differences: Age, sex, working memory, and prior knowledge. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory, and practice (pp. 105-140). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
6. Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006a). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 107-126.
7. Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006b). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3-42.
8. Clifton, C., Jr. (1993). Thematic roles in sentence parsing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 222-246.
9. Coderre, E., van Heuven, W. J. B., & Conklin, K. (2011.) Lexical processing is delayed by 100ms in a second language. Paper presented at the Workshop on Bilingualism: Neurolinguistic and Psycholinguistic Perspectives, Aix en Provence.
10. Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Jambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks:Amethodological reviewand a user's guide. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 769-786.
11. DeDe, G. (2010). Utilization of prosodic information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39, 345-374.
12. 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.
13. Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Dörnyei, Z., and Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 589-630). Oxford: Blackwell.
15. Dussias, P. E., & Cramer Scaltz, T. R. (2008). Spanish-English L2 speakers' use of subcategorization bias information in the resolution of temporary ambiguity during second language reading. Acta Psychologica, 128, 501-513.
16. Dussias, P. E., & Pinar, P. (2010). Effects of reading span and plausibility in the reanalysis of wh-gaps by Chinese-English second language speakers. Second Language Research, 26, 443-472.
17. Farmer, T. A., Misyak, J. B., & Christiansen, M. H. (in press). Individual differences in sentence processing. In M. J. Spivey, K. McRae, & M. Joanisse (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
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., Marinis, T., & Gross, R. (2003). The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 453-489.
20. Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164-203.
21. Ferreira, F., Engelhardt, P. E., & Jones, M. W. (2009). Good enough language processing: A satisficing approach. In N. Taatgen, H. Rijn, J. Nerbonne, & L. Schomaker (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 413-418). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
22. Ferreira, F., & Patson, N. D. (2007). The good enough approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1, 71-83.
23. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (1998). Sentence reanalysis and visibility. In J. D. Fodor & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Reanalysis in sentence processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
24. Frenck-Mestre, C. (2002). An on-line look at sentence processing in the second language. In R. R. Heredia & J. Altarriba (Eds.), Bilingual sentence processing (pp. 217-236). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
25. Frenck-Mestre, C., & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 119-148.
26. Goethe Institut. (2010). German Placement Test. Retrieved October 2012 from http://www. goethe. de/cgi-bin/einstufungstest/einstufungstest.
27. Hachmann, W., Konieczny, L., & Müller, D. (2009). Individual differences in the processing of complex sentences. In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 309-314). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
28. Harrington, M. (2007). The coefficient of variance as an index of L2 lexical processing skill. University of Queensland Working Papers in Linguistics, 1, 2-43.
29. Havik, E., Roberts, L., van Hout, R., Schreuder, R., & Haverkort, M. (2009). Processing subject-object ambiguitities in the L2: A self-paced reading study with German L2 learners of Dutch. Language Learning, 59, 73-112.
30. Holmes, V., Stowe, L., & Cupples, L. (1989). Lexical expectations in parsing complement-verb sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 668-689.
31. Hopp, H. (2006). Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing. Second Language Research, 22, 369-397.
32. Hopp, H. (2007). Ultimate attainment at the interfaces in second language acquisition: Grammar and processing. Groningen: Grodil Press.
33. Hopp, H. (2009). The syntax-discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 463-483.
34. Hopp, H. (2010). Ultimate attainment in L2 inflectionalmorphology: Performance similarities between non-native and native speakers. Lingua, 120, 901-931.
35. Hoshino, N., Dussias, P. E., & Kroll, J. F. (2010). Processing subject-verb agreement in a second language depends on proficiency. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 87-98.
36. Jackson, C. N., & Bobb, S. C. (2009). The processing and comprehension of wh-questions among second language speakers of German. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 603-636.
37. Jackson, C. N., & Dussias, P. E. (2009). Cross-linguistic differences and their impact on L2 sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 65-82.
38. Jegerski, J. (2012). The processing of temporary subject-object ambiguities in native and near-native Mexican Spanish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 721-735.
39. Jiang, N. (2004). Morphological insensitivity in second language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 603-634.
40. Jiang, N. (2007). Selective integration of linguistic knowledge in adult second language learning. Language Learning, 57, 1-33.
41. Juffs, A. (2004). Representation, processing, and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102, 199-225.
42. Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (1996). Garden path sentences and error data in second language processing research. Language Learning, 46, 286-324.
43. Keating, G. D. (2010). The effects of linear distance and working memory on the processing of gender agreement in Spanish. In B. Van Patten and J. Jegerski (Eds.), Research in second language processing and parsing (pp. 113-134). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
44. 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.
45. Liu, Y., & Perfetti, C. A. (2003). The time course of brain activity in reading English and Chinese: An ERP study of Chinese bilinguals. Journal of Human Brain Mapping, 18, 167-175.
46. Long, D. L., & Prat, C. S. (2008). Individual differences in syntactic ambiguity resolution: Readers vary in their use of plausibility information. Memory and Cognition, 36, 375-391.
47. Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 53-78.
48. McDonald, J. L. (2006). Beyond the critical period: Processing-based explanations for poor grammaticality judgment performance by late second language learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 381-401.
49. McDonald, J. L., & Roussel, C. C. (2010). Past tense grammaticality judgment and production in non-native and stressed native English speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 429-448.
50. McLaughlin, J., Tanner, D., Pitkänen, I, Frenck-Mestre, C., Inoue, K., Valentine, G., et al. (2010). Brain potentials reveal discrete stages of L2 grammatical learning. Language Learning, 60(Suppl. 2), 123-150.
51. Michael, E., & Gollan, T. (2005). Being and becoming bilingual: Individual differences and consequences for language production. In J. Kroll & A. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 389-410). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52. Mitchell, D. C. (1994). Sentence parsing. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 375-409). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
53. Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy & L. E. Bourne (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339-364). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
54. Novick, J. M., Trueswell, J. C., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2005). Cognitive control and parsing: Reexamining the role of Broca's area in sentence comprehension. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5, 263-281.
55. Oliver, G., Gullberg, M., Hellwig, F., Mitterer, H., & Indefrey, P. (2012). Acquiring L2 sentence comprehension: A longitudinal study of word monitoring in noise. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 841-857.
56. Omaki, A., & Schulz, B. (2011). Filler-gap dependencies and island constraints in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 563-588.
57. Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (1998). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 940-961.
58. Pickering, M. J., Traxler, M. J., & Crocker, M. W. (2000). Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing: Evidence against frequency-based accounts. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 447-475.
59. Pliatsikas, C., & Marinis, T. (2013). Processing empty categories in a second language: When naturalistic exposure fills the (intermediate) gap. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 167-182.
60. Pritchett, B. L. (1992). Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
61. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
62. Reichle, E. D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26, 445-526.
63. Roberts, L., & Felser, C. (2011). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 299-331.
64. Robinson, P. (2005). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46-73.
65. Rossi, S., Gugler, M. F., Friederici, A. D., & Hahne, A. (2006). The impact of proficiency on syntactic second-language processing of German and Italian: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 2030-2048.
66. Sagarra, N., & Herschensohn, J. (2011) Proficiency and animacy effects on L2 gender agreement processes during comprehension. Language Learning, 61, 80-116.
67. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime reference guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
68. Segalowitz, N., & Hulstijn, J. (2005). Automaticity in bilingualism and second language learning. In J. Kroll & A. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 371-388). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
69. Segalowitz, N., & Segalowitz, S. J. (1993). Skilled performance practice and differentiation of speedup from automatization effects: Evidence from second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13, 369-385.
70. Segalowitz, N., Segalowitz, S. J., & Wood, A. G. (1998). Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 53-67.
71. Service, E., Simola, M., Metsänheimoi, O., & Maury, S. (2002). Bilingual working memory is affected by language skill. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 383-408.
72. Sorace, A. (2005). Syntactic optionality at interfaces. In L. Cornips & K. Corrigan (Eds.), Syntax and variation: Reconciling the biological and the social (pp. 46-111). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
73. Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of interface in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1-33.
74. Spivey, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 1521-1543.
75. Staub, A. (2007). The parser doesn't ignore intransitivity, after all. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 550-569.
76. Staub, A., & Rayner, K. (2007). Eye movements and on-line comprehension processes. In G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 327-342). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
77. Steinhauer, K., White, E., & Drury, J. E. (2009). Temporal dynamics of late second language acquisition: Evidence from event-related potentials. Second Language Research, 25, 13-41.
78. Swets, B., Desmet, T., Clifton, C., & Ferreira, F. (2008). Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: Evidence from self-paced reading. Memory and Cognition, 36, 201-216.
79. Swets, B., Desmet, T., Hambrick, D. Z., & Ferreira, F. (2007). The role of workingmemory in syntactic ambiguity resolution:Apsychometric approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 64-81.
80. Tanner, D. (2011). Agreement mechanisms in native and nonnative language processing: Electrophysiological correlates of complexity and interference. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.
81. Tanner, D., McLaughlin, J., Herschensohn, J., & Osterhout, L. (in press). Individual differences reveal stages of L2 acquisition: ERP evidence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.
82. Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (2001). Sentence comprehension: The integration of habits and rules. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
83. Traxler, M. J. (2002). Plausibility and subcategorization preference in children's processing of temporarily ambiguous sentences: Evidence from self-paced reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 75-96.
84. Traxler, M. J., & Pickering, M. J. (1996). Case marking in the parsing of complement sentences: Evidence from eye movements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 991-1004.
85. Trueswell, J., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Kello, C. (1993). Verb specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 528-533.
86. Ullman, M. T. (2005). A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory, and practice (pp. 141-178). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
87. Van Gompel, R. P. G., & Pickering, M. J. (2001). Lexical guidance in sentence processing: A note on Adams, Clifton, and Mitchell (1998). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 851-857.
88. van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Evidence against competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 284-307.
89. Van Overschelde, J. P., Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2004). Category norms: An update and expanded version of the Battig andMontague (1969) norms. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 289-335.
90. Vasishth, S., & Drenhaus, H. (2011). Locality in German. Dialogue and Discourse, 1, 59-82.
91. Williams, J. (2006). Incremental interpretation in second language sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9, 71-88.
92. 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.
93. Wilson, M. P., & Garnsey, S. M. (2009). Making simple sentences hard: Verb bias effects in simple direct object sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 368-392.
94. Wilson, F., Sorace, A., & Keller, F. (2009) Simulating L2 learners' deficits at the syntax-discourse interface in native speakers. Talk presented at the International Symposium on Bilingualism 7, Utrecht.