Parsing Strategies in L1 and L2 Sentence Processing

Abstract

To contribute to a better understanding of second language (L2) sentence processing, the present study examines how L2 learners parse temporarily ambiguous sentences containing relative clauses. Results are reported from both off-line and on-line experiments with three groups of advanced learners of Greek whose native languages (L1s) were Spanish, German, or Russian as well as from corresponding experiments with a control group of adult native speakers of Greek. We found that, despite their nativelike mastery of the construction under investigation, the L2 learners showed relative-clause attachment preferences that were different from those of the native speakers. Moreover, the L2 learners did not exhibit L1-based preferences in their L2 Greek, as might be expected if they were directly influenced by L1 attachment preferences. We suggest that L2 learners integrate information relevant for parsing differently from native speakers, with the L2 learners relying more on lexical cues than the native speakers and less on purely structurally based parsing strategies.

Deeper than shallow: Evidence for structure-based parsing biases in second-language sentence processing

“…These findings are particularly interesting in light of the mixed findings for RC attachment in the L2 processing literature and, more specifically, in light of the failure to obtain comparable differences (for genitive construction sentences) in studies taken to support the SSH (Dussias, 2003;Felser et al, 2003;Fernández, 2002Fernández, , 2003Frenck-Mestre, 1999Papadopoulou & Clahsen, 2003). As mentioned in the Introduction, task sensitivity might play a role here.…”

“…These results were interpreted to indicate that, although both learner groups were able to make use of lexical information in their processing of RC ambiguities, neither group was influenced by predicate proximity, which is the principle that is apparently operative in the processing of these structures in L1 Greek and L1 German, nor were they able to converge on the nativelike processing of these structures according to the recency principle. Comparable results were also obtained in a study examining the L2 processing of Greek sentences involving RC attachment ambiguity by learners from a range of L1 backgrounds (Papadopoulou & Clahsen, 2003). C&F (2006b) therefore suggest that when nonstructural cues to interpretation are absent (as in the case of the genitive construction), RC attachments are made "randomly" in L2 sentence processing (p. 18).…”

“…English antecedent-reflexive gender agreement is analogous to this agreement type; both types of gender agreement are obligatory and presumably draw on comparable information sources. Another feature of our materials is that the complex NP (preceding the RC) appears in subject position, whereas in previous L2 studies examining RC attachment biases (or lack thereof), the complex NP was the object of the main verb (Dussias, 2001;Felser et al, 2003;Fernández, 2002Fernández, , 2003Frenck-Mestre, 1999Papadopoulou & Clahsen, 2003). We specifically chose subject modification in order to minimize potentially confounding sources of contextual information available to the reader upon encountering the RC.…”

How Do French–English Bilinguals Pull Verb Particle Constructions Off? Factors Influencing Second Language Processing of Unfamiliar Structures at the Syntax-Semantics Interface

“…Results of studies looking at the effect of working memory on L2 processing of long-distance dependencies, such as ambiguous relative clauses, have been inconsistent (for a review see Juffs and Harrington, 2011; Williams, 2012). Some studies have found more native-like performance only for bilinguals with high working memory capacity (Frenck-Mestre, 2002; Dussias, 2003; Kim and Christianson, 2017), while other studies have found no effects of working memory on processing (e.g., Felser et al, 2003; Papadopoulou and Clahsen, 2003). Roberts (2012) argues that WM effects are limited to studies that include a metalinguistic task in their experimental design, such as grammatical judgements, while no WM effect should be observed in L2 processing for simple sentence comprehension.…”

Input and language competence in early-start foreign language classrooms

“…This process may use various cues such as word order, morphology, or animacy, depending on language. Other studies have found that L2 learners rely on semantic over syntactic information, for instance, for ambiguity resolution in relative clauses (Clahsen and Felser 2006;Felser, Roberts, Marinis, and Gross 2003;Marinis, Roberts, Felser, and Clahsen 2005;Papadopoulou and Clahsen 2003). Information and strategies may transfer from the L1 (cf.…”