Bilingual Discourse Comprehension: The Role of Language Overlap in Updating the Discourse Representation

Schleicher, Karly M.; Schwartz, Ana I.

doi:10.1080/0163853x.2021.1994299

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the KReC theoretical model, this means that even though the alternative interpretation can be successfully encoded, activated and integrated into the mental representation, the initial prediction is passively reactivated from long-term memory causing competition, and therefore interference. Interestingly, although this interference effect may occur during both L1 and L2 discourse revision, it is stronger when the to-be-updated information is presented in the L2 (Schleicher & Schwartz, 2022).…”

Section: L1 and L2 Revisionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Unfortunately, the literature on revision during L2 online text comprehension is not as extensive as for evaluation. However, Schleicher and Schwartz (2022) assessed discourse revision in highly proficient bilinguals comprehending expository texts in both L1-Spanish and L2-English. In that study, contradictory information was presented across two texts.…”

Section: Revisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This would indicate difficulties to revise the situation model because that concept passively activates the initial prediction ("oven") causing interference by competition (Kendeou & O'Brien, 2014). Once more, this effect is expected in both L1 and L2 comprehension but with longer times in the latter, signalling less efficient inferential revision in the second language (Pérez et al, 2019;Schleicher & Schwartz, 2022).…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, L2 comprehenders with higher inhibitory control spent less time, indicating once more, a better ability to suppress interference coming from the no longer plausible prediction. This is related to studies showing that the no longer valid initial interpretation is maintained, causing interference and disrupting comprehension in both the L1 (e.g., Blanc et al, 2011;Rapp & Kendeou, 2009) and the L2 (Fujita & Cunnings, 2021;Pérez et al, 2019;Schleicher & Schwartz, 2022). According to the KReC theoretical model, this means that even though the alternative interpretation can be successfully encoded, activated and integrated into the mental representation, the initial prediction is passively reactivated from long-term memory causing competition, and therefore interference.…”

Section: L1 and L2 Revisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Inferential evaluation and revision in L1 and L2 text comprehension: An eye movement study

Pérez,

Schmidt,

Tsimpli

2023

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Text comprehension frequently demands the resolution of no longer plausible interpretations to build an accurate situation model, an ability that might be especially challenging during second language comprehension. Twenty-two native English speakers (L1) and twenty-two highly proficient non-native English speakers (L2) were presented with short narratives in English. Each text required the evaluation and revision of an initial prediction. Eye movements in the text and a comprehension sentence indicated less efficient performance in the L2 than in L1 comprehension, in both inferential evaluation and revision. Interestingly, these effects were determined by individual differences in inhibitory control and linguistic proficiency. Higher inhibitory control reduced the time rereading previous parts of the text (better evaluation) as well as revisiting the text before answering the sentence (better revision) in L2 comprehenders, whereas higher proficiency reduced the time in the sentence when the story was coherent, suggesting better general comprehension in both languages.

show abstract

Section: L1 and L2 Revisionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Revisionmentioning

confidence: 99%