L2 Prediction during complex sentence processing

Chun, Eunjin; Kaan, Edith

doi:10.1007/s41809-019-00038-0

Cited by 19 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with previous research (e.g., Chun & Kaan, 2019;Grüter et al, 2012), we found prediction in the L2 to be somewhat slower than in the L1-a difference that emerged as significant in the RT data but not the gaze data. These L1-L2 processing differences cannot be attributed to a lack of comprehension of the materials in the L2 group (all participants had been familiarized extensively, and we prioritized cognates and high-frequency words), nor to a lack of knowledge of the target structure (which was mastered by all participants).…”

Section: L1 and L2 Predictive Processing Of Verb Number Markings (Rq1)supporting

confidence: 92%

“…As the cognitive resources for prediction in the L2 may be reduced (see above; Kaan, 2014), the impact of working memory may be even stronger in L2 predictive processing. Chun and Kaan (2019) explored this topic in a visual-world prediction experiment in which they increased cognitive load by using complex stimulus sentences. Both English L1 and advanced L2 speakers successfully exploited semantic cues for prediction, though the effect started 180 ms later in the L2 group.…”

Section: The Role Of Working Memory and Awareness In Predictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using verb morphology to predict subject number in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A visual-world eye-tracking experiment

Koch

Bulté

Housen

et al. 2021

Journal of the European Second Language Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated whether adult German native speakers and Dutch-speaking secondlanguage learners of German exploit German regular verb morphology for predictive sentence processing and whether such predictive processing is moderated by working memory capacity and awareness of the predictive cue. In a picture-matching task with visual-world eye-tracking, the participants (first-language group: n = 31; secondlanguage group: n = 30) saw two pictures of action scenes, varying in the number of referents depicted (singular versus plural). Simultaneously, they heard sentences in German in which the verb suffix represented the first reliable cue for grammatical number of the upcoming subject noun phrase. Successful exploitation of this number cue was measured as anticipatory button-press reaction times and eye-movements toward the correct picture, before subject onset. We found significant prediction effects in both the first-language and the second-language group, with anticipatory processing being somewhat faster in the native speakers than in the learners. Faster reaction times on prediction trials were associated with higher working memory scores. Debriefing interviews revealed that all participants had become aware that they could use the verb form predictively, adding further evidence that prediction can be a conscious process.

show abstract

Section: L1 and L2 Predictive Processing Of Verb Number Markings (Rq1)supporting

confidence: 92%

Section: The Role Of Working Memory and Awareness In Predictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using verb morphology to predict subject number in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A visual-world eye-tracking experiment

Koch

Bulté

Housen

et al. 2021

Journal of the European Second Language Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding suggests that L2 speakers may not predict word forms to the same extent as native speakers do. Chun and Kaan (2019) also showed that, when comprehending complex structures (e.g., relative clauses), L2 speakers made semantic predictions, but in a delayed manner compared to native speakers.…”

Section: Linguistic Prediction In Regular Language Comprehensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning ahead: Interpreters predict source language in consecutive interpreting

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpreters are hypothesized to anticipate the source language (SL) in comprehension and the target language (TL) in production to facilitate timely delivery. In two experiments, we examined whether interpreters make more predictions in SL comprehension in consecutive interpreting than in regular language comprehension and whether such enhanced prediction (if any) is constrained by cognitive resources. Participants were quicker at reading a predictable versus unpredictable critical word and/or following words (e.g., Without the sunglasses/hat, the sun will hurt your eyes on the beach, where eyes is the critical word), and the prediction effect was larger when they read to later interpret (into Chinese) than to later recall. The enhanced prediction in reading to interpret disappeared when the cognitive load was high, suggesting that SL prediction in interpreting requires cognitive resources. Our findings suggest that, when cognitive resources allow, interpreters engage in enhanced linguistic prediction in SL comprehension to facilitate the delivery of interpreting.

show abstract

“…However, it is reasonable to expect such differences in the manual-visual modality for two reasons. First, these effects have been found in studies of PP for spoken languages in cases of L1 vs. L2 groups ( Martin et al, 2013 ; Kaan, 2014 ; Hopp and Lemmerth, 2018 ; Chun and Kaan, 2019 ; Schlenter, 2019 ; Henry et al, 2020 ). Second, differences in SL processing in other linguistic domains have been found to be a function of the SL age of acquisition ( Malaia et al, 2020 ; Krebs et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Predictive Processing in Sign Languages: A Systematic Review

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this article was to review existing research to assess the evidence for predictive processing (PP) in sign language, the conditions under which it occurs, and the effects of language mastery (sign language as a first language, sign language as a second language, bimodal bilingualism) on the neural bases of PP. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework. We searched peer-reviewed electronic databases (SCOPUS, Web of Science, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and EBSCO host) and gray literature (dissertations in ProQuest). We also searched the reference lists of records selected for the review and forward citations to identify all relevant publications. We searched for records based on five criteria (original work, peer-reviewed, published in English, research topic related to PP or neural entrainment, and human sign language processing). To reduce the risk of bias, the remaining two authors with expertise in sign language processing and a variety of research methods reviewed the results. Disagreements were resolved through extensive discussion. In the final review, 7 records were included, of which 5 were published articles and 2 were dissertations. The reviewed records provide evidence for PP in signing populations, although the underlying mechanism in the visual modality is not clear. The reviewed studies addressed the motor simulation proposals, neural basis of PP, as well as the development of PP. All studies used dynamic sign stimuli. Most of the studies focused on semantic prediction. The question of the mechanism for the interaction between one’s sign language competence (L1 vs. L2 vs. bimodal bilingual) and PP in the manual-visual modality remains unclear, primarily due to the scarcity of participants with varying degrees of language dominance. There is a paucity of evidence for PP in sign languages, especially for frequency-based, phonetic (articulatory), and syntactic prediction. However, studies published to date indicate that Deaf native/native-like L1 signers predict linguistic information during sign language processing, suggesting that PP is an amodal property of language processing.Systematic Review Registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021238911], identifier [CRD42021238911].

show abstract

L2 Prediction during complex sentence processing

Cited by 19 publications

References 52 publications

Using verb morphology to predict subject number in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A visual-world eye-tracking experiment

Using verb morphology to predict subject number in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A visual-world eye-tracking experiment

Planning ahead: Interpreters predict source language in consecutive interpreting

Predictive Processing in Sign Languages: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About