Brazilian Portuguese-English bilingualism does not afect metalinguistic awareness of L1 constraints in two argument structure constructions

Abstract

In the present study we investigated a corollary of the multicompetence hypothesis as a description of language representation in bilingualism. According to this hypothesis, bilingualism entails a state of linguistic knowledge that does not correspond either to L1 or L2 norms. Previous studies examining online language processing of sentences in Portuguese that simulated argument structures constructions of English have shown a departure from the restrictions of the L1 grammar (Portuguese), which supports the multicompetence hypothesis. he purpose of this study was to explore whether such departure from the L1 would be observed in a psycholinguistic task that taps bilinguals' intentional attention focus on the form of linguistic expressions in their L1, therefore depicting L1 metalinguistic awareness. he results reveal that the bilingualism efects detected during real time sentence processing do not extend to metalinguistic awareness, therefore suggesting that such efects are evanescent, and most likely implicit in nature.

Are bilingualism effects on the L1 byproducts of implicit knowledge? Evidence from two experimental tasks

“…The ultimate focus of the present study is to investigate whether such latent construct difference can account for the failure reported by Souza, Soares-Silva and Silva (2016) to replicate bilinguals' departure from L1 restrictions when processing argument structure constructions in the L1 that are only productive in their L2. It must be recalled that Souza, Soares-Silva and Silva's (2016) observations were made by way of a timed acceptability judgment task. In order to pursue the present investigation, we planned two experimental tasks (which we refer to as experiment 1 and experiment 2 from now on) to be administered in a within-subjects design.…”

“…However, recent psychometric studies have challenged the assumption that grammaticality judgment tasks and online processing tasks in experimental second language research can be regarded as measures of similar constructs (VAFAEE et al, 2016;KIM;NAM, 2016). Specifically, these studies suggest that even timed grammaticality judgments fail to tap implicit linguistic knowledge, which is the nature of representations that is largely assumed to subsidize fluent, automatic language processing.…”

“…On the other hand, the authors argue that the very nature of a grammaticality task, which quite clearly leads its participants to focus on linguistic forms rather than on comprehension, is likely to invoke explicit knowledge. According to Vafaee et al (2016), even though the imposition of strict time constraints may make activation of explicit knowledge harder, it is not possible to rule out that such knowledge base is somehow at stake in judgment calls.…”

“…Through detailed factor analyses, the authors reject the hypothesis that even a timed grammaticality judgment task is a reliable measure of implicit knowledge. Vafaee et al (2016) argue that the very nature of online psycholinguistic tasks, which capture language users sensitivity to violations and other linguistic features as comprehension unfolds, are likely to minimize the chances of access to conscious linguistic knowledge. On the other hand, the authors argue that the very nature of a grammaticality task, which quite clearly leads its participants to focus on linguistic forms rather than on comprehension, is likely to invoke explicit knowledge.…”

“…Kim and Nam (2016) argue that their findings reveal that even if the timed grammaticality judgment task taps into some implicit knowledge, it may not tap into the same strength of implicit knowledge as that which actually guides real time language processing. Vafaee et al (2016) also investigated the validity of timed and untimed grammaticality judgment tasks as measures of implicit or explicit knowledge vis-à-vis online processing tasks (namely, self-paced reading and a word monitoring task). Through detailed factor analyses, the authors reject the hypothesis that even a timed grammaticality judgment task is a reliable measure of implicit knowledge.…”