Abstract
Studies examining the real-time application of structure-sensitive constraints in second-language (L2) sentence processing have shown that depending on the type of constraint under investigation, the constraint may be more likely, equally (un)likely, or less likely to be violated during L2 than during native (first-language, L1) processing. Several attempts have been made in the past to attribute L1/L2 processing differences to a specific underlying cause, including cognitive resource limitations, reduced sensitivity to grammatical information, or increased susceptibility to memory interference during L2 processing. Focusing on recent findings on the processing of referential and filler-gap dependencies, I argue that trying to reduce L1/L2 processing differences to a single cause is misguided. What is called for instead is a more careful investigation of how different types of constraint and information sources interact during L2 comprehension, taking into account what linguistic cues need to be extracted from the input or need to be re-accessed in order for a given constraint to be applied. This should provide us with a more nuanced picture of how the relative weighting or timing of constraints or information sources might differ in L2 in comparison to L1 processing.
Highlights
The primary goal of language processing research is to uncover the mental mechanisms that allow us to derive complex meanings during reading or listening from stimuli which, at the physical level, bear no obvious resemblance to these meanings at all
The difference in timing between the two types of island constraint we examined cannot be accounted for by the memory interference hypothesis, which claims that L2 comprehenders are able to build syntactic representations of the kind required for island constraints to be applied and will only attempt filler-gap dependency formation if the dependency is grammatically licensed (Cunnings, 2017, p. 667)
At no point during processing did Felser and Drummer’s (2017) participants seem to consider the wh-expression within the fronted prepositional phrase in (16a) as an antecedent for a following subject pronoun. This finding is unexpected if constraint application during L2 processing were affected by processing resource limitations, as the minimising dependency length (MDL) constraint would have favoured linking the pronoun to the wh-phrase in both weak crossover (WCO) and Strong crossover (SCO) configurations
Summary
The primary goal of language processing research is to uncover the mental mechanisms that allow us to derive complex meanings during reading or listening from stimuli which, at the physical level, bear no obvious resemblance to these meanings at all. When interpreting wh-questions, as in example (2), a constraint that belongs to a family of constraints collectively referred to as island constraints (Ross, 1967) normally prevents us from construing the fronted wh-pronoun who (the filler) as the direct object of the verb invite; the potential object gap is indicated by underscores Both referential and filler-gap dependencies involve constituents that are grammatically or semantically underspecified in some way and require licensing by another element in the current sentence or discourse in order to become fully interpretable. Structure-sensitive constraints may apply across potentially very large chunks of the sentence currently being processed Applying such constraints during real-time processing requires (i) sufficiently fast and detailed structure-building, (ii) functioning search mechanisms, including both prediction ability and the ability to re-access and navigate previously built representations, and (iii) the constraint being active in that it prevents grammatically unsuitable licensers from being considered. Focusing on the processing of referential and wh-dependencies, I examine how different types of theoretical approaches might be able to account for the observed differences and similarities between L1 and L2 processing
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of the European Second Language Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
