Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T13:32:50.369Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Syntactic transfer in English-speaking Spanish learners*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2012

LAURA M. MORETT  and
BRIAN MACWHINNEY
LAURA M. MORETT*
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Cruz & University of Pittsburgh
BRIAN MACWHINNEY
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University
*
Address for correspondence: Laura M. Morett, Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, 210 S. Bouquet St., Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USAlmorett@ucsc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Competition Model studies of second language learners have demonstrated that there is a gradual replacement of first language cues for thematic role assignment by second language cues. The current study introduced two methodological innovations in the investigation of this process. The first was the use of mouse-tracking methodology (Spivey, 2007) to assess the online process of thematic role assignment. The second was the inclusion of both a task with language-specific cues and a task with language-common cues. The results of the language-common cue task indicated that, as English-dominant learners become more balanced between English and Spanish, they rely increasingly on a coalition between the animacy cue and the subject–verb agreement cue. However, the results of the language-specific cue task reveal that learners also rely on the cue of prepositional case marking in Spanish and nominal case marking in English. These results provide evidence of forward transfer, backward transfer, and rapid acquisition of cue-based sentence interpretation strategies in second language learning.

Keywords

second language acquisitionbilingualismcross-linguistic sentence processingmouse trackingCompetition Model
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , January 2013 , pp. 132 - 151
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported by a National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) Fellowship (32 CFR 168a) issued by the US Department of Defense, Air Force Office of Scientific Research, and a mini-research grant from the University of California, Santa Cruz to Laura M. Morett. We thank Alejandra Gonzalez, Melissa Gone, and Erin Parreira for assistance with data collection and Matthew Wagers for equipment support. Additionally, we thank Carmen Silva-Corvalán and three anonymous reviewers for insightful comments and suggestions. Portions of these results were presented at the Fifty-First Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society (November 2010) and the Third Annual California Cognitive Science Conference (May 2011).

References

Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1981). Second language acquisition from a functionalist perspective: Pragmatic, semantic and perceptual strategies. In Winitz, H. (ed.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences Conference on Native and Foreign Language Acquisition, pp. 190–214. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Brown, A., & Gullberg, M. (2008). Bidirectional crosslinguistic influence in L1–L2 encoding of manner in speech and gesture: A study of Japanese speakers of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 225–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Cinnaminson, NJ: Foris.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, V., Iarossi, E., Stellakis, N., & Tokumaru, Y. (2003). Effects of the L2 on the syntactic processing of the L1. In Cook, V. (ed.), Effects of the second language on the first, pp. 193–213. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devescovi, A., & D'Amico, S. (2005). The competition model: Crosslinguistic studies of online processing. In Tomasello, M. & Slobin, D. I. (eds.), Beyond nature–nurture: Essays in honor of Elizabeth Bates, pp. 165–191. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dunn, A. L., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2009). A quick, gradient Bilingual Dominance Scale. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 273–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussias, P. E. (2001). Bilingual sentence processing. In Nicol, J. L. (ed.), One mind two languages: Bilingual sentence processing, pp. 159–176. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dussias, P. E., & Sagarra, N. (2007). The effect of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N., & Sagarra, N. (2010). The bounds of adult language acquisition: Blocking and learned attention. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 553–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, T. A., Cargill, S. A., Hindy, N. C., Dale, R., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Tracking the continuity of language comprehension: Computer mouse trajectories suggest parallel syntactic processing. Cognitive Science, 31, 889–909.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flynn, S. (1996). A parameter-setting approach to second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition, pp. 121–158. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2010). MouseTracker: Software for studying real-time metnal processing using a computer mouse-tracking method. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 226–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005). Second language sentence processing: Which theory best accounts for the processing of reduced relative clauses? In Kroll, J. F. & Groot, A. M. B. De (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 268–284. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gass, S. (1987). The resolution of conflicts among competing systems: A bidirectional perspective. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, E. (1992). On the adequacy of the Competition Model. Language, 68, 812–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, A., Bates, E., & Avila, L. (1994). On-line sentence interpretation in Spanish–English bilinguals: What does it mean to be “in betweeen?”. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 417–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyams, N., & Wexler, K. (1993). On the grammatical basis of null subjects in child language. Linguistic Inquiry, 24 (3), 421–459.Google Scholar
Kail, M., & Charvillat, A. (1988). Local and topological processing in sentence comprehension by French and Spanish children. Journal of Child Language, 15, 637–662.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kempe, V., & MacWhinney, B. (1999). Processing of morphological and semantic cues in Russian and German. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 129–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilborn, K. (1989). Sentence processing in a second language: The timing of transfer. Language and Speech, 32, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilborn, K., & Cooreman, A. (1987). Sentence interpretation strategies in adult Dutch–English bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 415–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilborn, K., & Ito, T. (1989). Sentence processing in Japanese–English and Dutch–English bilinguals. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing, pp. 257–291. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Kroll, J. F., & Sunderman, G. (2009). Losing access to the native language while immersed in a second language: Evidence for the role of inhibition in second-language learning. Psychological Science, 20, 1507–1515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, H., Bates, E., & Li, P. (1992). Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Chinese. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13, 451–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101 (4), 676–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacWhinney, B. (2011). The logic of the Unified Model. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (eds.), Handbook of second language aqcquisition, pp. 211–227. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (eds.). (1989). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E., & Kliegl, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 127–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Pléh, C., & Bates, E. (1985). The development of sentence interpretation in Hungarian. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 178–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., St.James, J. D., Schunn, C., Li, P., & Schneider, W. (2001). STEP – A System for Teaching Experimental Psychology using E-Prime. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 33 (2), 287–296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Malchukov, A. (2008). Animacy and asymmetries in differential case marking. Lingua, 118, 203–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (1987). Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Dutch. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 379–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (1989). Determinants of the acquisition of cue–category mappings. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing, pp. 375–396. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. L., & MacWhinney, B. J. (1995). The time course of anaphor resolution: Effects of implicit verb causality and gender. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 543–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mimica, I., Sullivan, M., & Smith, S. (1994). An on-line study of sentence interpretation in native Croatian speakers. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 237–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabourin, L., & Stowe, L. A. (2008). Second language processing: When are first and second languages processed similarly? Second Language Research, 24, 397–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, Y. (1991). English and Japanese interlanguage comprehension strategies: An analysis based on the competition model. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12, 47–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, Y., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Language acquisition research based on the Competition Model. In Shirai, Y. (ed.), Handbook of Japanese psycholinguistics, pp. 318–328. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Spivey, M. J. (2007). The continuity of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spivey, M. J., & Dale, R. (2006). Continuous dynamics in real-time cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 207–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szekely, A., Jacobsen, T., D'Amico, S., Devescovi, A., Andonova, E., Herron, D., Lu, C. C., Pechmann, T., Pleh, C., Wicha, N., Federmeier, K., Gerdjikova, I., Gutierrez, G., Hung, D., Hsu, J., Iyer, G., Kohnert, K., Mehotcheva, T., Orozco-Figueroa, A., Tzeng, A., Tzeng, O., Arevalo, A., Vargha, A., Butler, A. C., Buffington, R., & Bates, E. (2004). A new on-line resource for psycholinguistic studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 247–250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taraban, R., & McClelland, J. L. (1990). Parsing and comprehension: A multiple-constraint view. In Balota, D. A., Flores, G. B. d'Arcais & Rayner, K. (eds.), Comprehension processes in reading, pp. 231–261. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tokowicz, N., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 173–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tokowicz, N., & Warren, T. (2010). Beginning adult L2 learners' sensitivity to morphosyntactic violations: A self-paced reading study. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1092–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolentino, L., & Tokowicz, N. (2011). Across languages, space, and time: A review of the role of cross-language similarity in L2 (morpho)syntactic processing as revealed by fMRI and ERP. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (2003). Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshimura, Y., & MacWhinney, B. (2010). The use of pronominal case in English sentence interpretation. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 619–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar