Adaptation in Predictive Prosodic Processing in Bilinguals

Abstract

Native language listeners engage in predictive processing in many processing situations and adapt their predictive processing to the statistics of the input. In contrast, second language listeners engage in predictive processing in fewer processing situations. The current study uses eye-tracking data from two experiments in bilinguals’ native language (L1) and second language (L2) to explore their predictive processing based on contrastive pitch accent cues, and their adaptation in the face of prediction errors. The results of the first experiment show inhibition effects for unpredicted referents in both the L1 and the L2 that can be modeled with a Bayesian adaptation model, suggesting that bilinguals adapt their prediction in the face of prediction errors in a way that is compatible with the model. In contrast, the results of the second experiment, after a training phase that increased the predictive validity of the cue, show inhibition effects for unpredicted referents only in the L1, but not in the L2. In addition, the Bayesian adaptation model significantly predicts only the L1, but not the L2 data. The results are discussed with respect to adaptation to the statistical properties of the input.

Prediction in bilingual sentence processing: How prediction differs in a later learned language from a first language

“…Several researchers have argued that the strength of prediction is influenced by statistical contingencies between stimuli, and that the parser adapts to the input to maximize the utility of prediction and reduce the costs of potential prediction errors (e.g., Kuperberg & Jaeger, 2016). More recently, studies have shown evidence of adaptation in L2 predictive processing, but also hint at L1/L2 differences in adaptation (e.g., Foltz, 2021aFoltz, , 2021bHopp, 2021). Consequently, the utility of prediction has been discussed as another factor with the potential to explain the inter-and intra-individual variability of prediction (e.g., Grüter & Rohde, 2021;Kaan & Grüter, 2021).…”

“…If an effect of prediction shows up in the L1 but not the L2 and assuming that there was a fair amount of time for processing, then we have some indication that the costs of prediction did not outweigh its benefits in L2 processing. So far, only four studies include such a within-group, between-language comparison, three with adult L2 speakers (Dijkgraaf et al, 2017(Dijkgraaf et al, , 2019Foltz, 2021aFoltz, , 2021b and one with early simultaneous bilingual children (Theimann, Kuzmina & Hansen, 2021). Such a between-language comparison has the further advantage that it offers better control of other individual-level differences affecting both languages.…”

Syntax and object types contribute in different ways to bilinguals’ comprehension of spatial descriptions

“…Importantly, in those cases where speakers do not engage in predictive processing, they will not incur any prediction errors, and no adaptation or learning is expected to occur (Foltz, 2021b). Even prolonged L2 exposure would then not affect bilinguals' processing.…”