Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-29T11:02:55.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Limits on expectation-based processing: Use of grammatical aspect for co-reference in L2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2020

Theres Grüter Open the ORCID record for Theres Grüter [Opens in a new window]  and
Hannah Rohde
Theres Grüter*
Affiliation:
University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa
Hannah Rohde
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines the use of discourse-level information to create expectations about reference in real-time processing, testing whether patterns previously observed among native speakers of English generalize to nonnative speakers. Findings from a visual-world eye-tracking experiment show that native (L1; N = 53) but not nonnative (L2; N = 52) listeners’ proactive coreference expectations are modulated by grammatical aspect in transfer-of-possession events. Results from an offline judgment task show these L2 participants did not differ from L1 speakers in their interpretation of aspect marking on transfer-of-possession predicates in English, indicating it is not lack of linguistic knowledge but utilization of this knowledge in real-time processing that distinguishes the groups. English proficiency, although varying substantially within the L2 group, did not modulate L2 listeners’ use of grammatical aspect for reference processing. These findings contribute to the broader endeavor of delineating the role of prediction in human language processing in general, and in the processing of discourse-level information among L2 users in particular.

Keywords

aspectexpectationseye trackingpredictionreference
Type
Original Article
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , January 2021 , pp. 51 - 75
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American. American Psychologist, 63, 602–614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnold, J. E. (2001). The effect of thematic roles on pronoun use and frequency of reference continuation. Discourse Processes, 31, 137–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnon, I., & Ramscar, M. (2012). Granularity and the acquisition of grammatical gender: How order-of-acquisition affects what gets learned. Cognition, 122, 292–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barr, D. J. (2008). Analyzing “visual world” eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 457–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borovsky, A., Elman, J. L., & Fernald, A. (2012). Knowing a lot for one’s age: Vocabulary skill and not age is associated with anticipatory incremental sentence interpretation in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 112, 417–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, C. G., & Cooke, H. (2009). Lexical competition during second-language listening: Sentence context, but not proficiency, constrains interference from the native lexicon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 35, 1029–1040.Google Scholar
Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 181–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Contemori, C., & Dussias, E. P. (2018). Prediction at the discourse level in L2 English speakers: An eye-tracking study. In Bertolini, A. B. & Kaplan, M. J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 159–171). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Dijkgraaf, A., Hartsuiker, R., & Duyck, W. (2017). Predicting upcoming information in native-language and non-native-language auditory word recognition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20, 917–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Federmeier, K. D. (2007). Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology, 44, 491–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Federmeier, K. D., Kutas, M., & Schul, R. (2010). Age-related and individual differences in the use of prediction during language comprehension. Brain and Language, 115, 149–161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernald, A., Zangl, R., Portillo, A. L., & Marchman, V. A. (2008). Looking while listening: Using eye movements to monitor spoken language. In Sekerina, I. A., Fernandez, E. M., & Clahsen, H. (Eds.), Developmental psycholinguistics: On-line methods in children’s language processing (Vol. 44, pp. 97–135). London: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F., & Chantavarin, S. (2018). Integration and prediction in language processing: A synthesis of old and new. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27, 443–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferretti, T. R., Kutas, M., & McRae, K. (2007). Verb aspect and the activation of event knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 182–196.Google ScholarPubMed
Ferretti, T. R., Rohde, H., Kehler, A., & Crutchley, M. (2009). Verb aspect, event structure, and coreferential processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 191–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleur, D. S., Flecken, M., Rommers, J., & Nieuwland, M. S. (2019). Definitely saw it coming? An ERP study on the role of article gender and definiteness in predictive processing. Preprint posted on BioRxiv. doi: 10.1101/563783 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucart, A., Martin, C. D., Moreno, E. M., & Costa, A. (2014). Can bilinguals see it coming? Word anticipation in L2 sentence reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1461–1469.Google ScholarPubMed
Gabriele, A. (2009). Transfer and transition in the SLA of aspect: A bidirectional study of learners of English and Japanese. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 371–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gambi, C., Gorrie, F., Pickering, M. J., & Rabagliati, H. (2018) The development of linguistic prediction: Predictions of sound and meaning in 2-to-5 year olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 173, 351–370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garvey, C., & Caramazza, A. (1974). Implicit causality in verbs. Linguistic Inquiry, 5, 459–464.Google Scholar
Grüter, T., Lau, E., & Ling, W. (2020). How classifiers facilitate predictive processing in L1 and L2 Chinese: The role of semantic and grammatical cues. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35, 221–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüter, T., Lew-Williams, C., & Fernald, A. (2012). Grammatical gender in L2: A production or a real-time processing problem? Second Language Research, 28, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grüter, T., Rohde, H., & Schafer, A. J. (2014). The role of discourse-level expectations in non-native speakers’ referential choices. In Orman, W. & Valleau, M. J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 179–191). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Grüter, T, Rohde, H., & Schafer, A. J. (2017). Coreference and discourse coherence in L2: The roles of grammatical aspect and referential form. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 7, 199–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüter, T., Takeda, A., Rohde, H., & Schafer, A. J. (2018). Intersentential coreference expectations reflect mental models of events. Cognition, 177, 172–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartshorne, J. K. (2014). What is implicit causality? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29, 804–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopp, H. (2010). Ultimate attainment in L2 inflectional morphology: Performance similarities between non-native and native speakers. Lingua, 120, 901–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2015). Semantics and morphosyntax in L2 predictive sentence processing. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53, 277–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huettig, F. (2015). Four central questions about prediction in language processing. Brain Research, 1626, 118–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huettig, F., & Brouwer, S. (2015). Delayed anticipatory spoken language processing in adults with dyslexia—Evidence from eye-tracking. Dyslexia, 21, 97–122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huettig, F., & Guerra, E. (2019). Effects of speech rate, preview time of visual context, and participant instructions reveal strong limits on prediction in language processing. Brain Research, 1706, 196–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huettig, F., & Janse, E. (2016). Individual differences in working memory and processing speed predict anticipatory spoken language processing in the visual world. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 80–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huettig, F., & Mani, N. (2016). Is prediction necessary to understand language? Probably not. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huettig, F., & Pickering, M. J. (2019). Literacy advantages beyond reading: Prediction of spoken language. Trends in Cognitive Science, 23, 464–475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ito, A., Corley, M., & Pickering, M. J. (2018). A cognitive load delays predictive eye movements similarly during L1 and L2 comprehension. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition, 21, 251–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaan, E. (2014). Predictive sentence processing in L2 and L1: What is different? Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4, 257–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaan, E., Dallas, A., & Wijnen, F. (2010). Syntactic predictions in second-language sentence processing. In Zwart, J.-W. & de Vries, M. (Eds.), Structure preserved. Festschrift in the honor of Jan Koster (pp. 207–213). London: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kehler, A. (2002). Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Kehler, A., Kertz, L., Rohde, H., & Elman, J. (2008). Coherence and coreference revisited. Journal of Semantics, 25, 1–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, H. (2018). Cross-linguistic activation in Korean L2 learners’ processing of remention bias in English. PhD dissertation, University of Hawai‘i, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Kim, K., Grüter, T., & Schafer, A. J. (2013). Effects of event-structure and topic/focus-marking on pronoun reference in Korean. Poster presented at the 26th annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbia, SC.Google Scholar
Koornneef, A., Dotlačil, J., van den Broek, P., & Sanders, T. (2016). The influence of linguistic and cognitive factors on the time course of verb-based implicit causality. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 455–481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuperberg, G. R., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016). What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 32–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 325–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lew-Williams, C., & Fernald, A. (2007). Young children learning Spanish make rapid use of grammatical gender in spoken word recognition. Psychological Science, 18, 193–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Madden, C. J., & Ferretti, T. R. (2009). Verb aspect and the mental representation of situations. In Klein, W. & Li, P. (Eds.), The expression of time (pp. 217–240). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Magliano, J. P., & Schleich, M. C. (2000). Verb aspect and situation models. Discourse Processes, 29, 83–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mani, N., & Huettig, F. (2012). Prediction during language processing is a piece of cake—But only for skilled producers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 843–847.Google ScholarPubMed
Martin, C. D., Thierry, G., Kuipers, J., Boutonnet, B., Foucart, A., & Costa, A. (2013). Bilinguals reading in their second language do not predict upcoming words as native readers do. Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 574–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matin, E., Shao, K. C., & Boff, K. R. (1993). Saccadic overhead: Information-processing time with and without saccades. Perception, & Psychophysics, 53, 372–380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mishra, R. K., Singh, N., Pandey, A., & Huettig, F. (2012). Spoken language-mediated anticipatory eye movements are modulated by reading ability: Evidence from Indian low and high literates. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 5, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitsugi, S. (2018). Generating predictions based on semantic categories in a second language: A case of numeral classifiers in Japanese. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1515/iral-2017-0118 Google Scholar
Mitsugi, S., & MacWhinney, B. (2016). The use of case marking for predictive processing in second language Japanese. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson. (2011). Versant English Test: Test description and validation summary. Palo Alto, CA: Pearson Knowledge Technologies. http://www.versanttest.com Google Scholar
Pickering, M. J., & Gambi, C. (2018). Predicting while comprehending language: A theory and review. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 1002–1044.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlenter, J. (2019). Predictive language processing in late bilinguals: Evidence from visual-world eye-tracking. PhD dissertation, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany. doi: 10.25932/publishup-43249 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R. J., Crawley, R. A., & Kleinman, D. (1994). Thematic roles, focus, and the representation of events. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 519–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ueno, M., & Kehler, A. (2016). Grammatical and pragmatic factors in the interpretation of Japanese null and overt pronouns. Linguistics, 54, 1165–1222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Berkum, J. J. A. (2010). The brain is a prediction machine that cares about good and bad—Any implications for neuropragmatics? Italian Journal of Linguistics, 22, 181–208.Google Scholar
van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., Zwitserlood, P., Kooijman, V., & Hagoort, P. (2005). Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: Evidence from ERPs and reading times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 443–467.Google ScholarPubMed
van Berkum, J. J. A., Koornneef, A., Otten, M., & Nieuwland, M. S. (2007). Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective. Brain Research, 1146, 158–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlotko, E. W., & Federmeier, K. D. (2012). Age-related changes in the impact of contextual strength on multiple aspects of sentence comprehension. Psychophysiology, 49, 770–785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed