Interpreting experience and working memory effects on L1 and L2 morphological prediction

Abstract

The human brain tries to process information as efficiently as possible through mechanisms like prediction. Native speakers predict linguistic information extensively, but L2 learners show variability. Interpreters use prediction while working and research shows that interpreting experience mediates L2 prediction. However, it is unclear whether advantages related to interpreting are due to higher working memory (WM) capacity, a typical characteristic of professional interpreters. To better understand the role of WM during L1 and L2 prediction, English L2 learners of Spanish with and without interpreting experience and Spanish monolinguals completed a visual-world paradigm eye-tracking task and a number-letter sequencing working memory task. The eye-tracking task measured prediction of verbal morphology (present, past) based on suprasegmental information (lexical stress: paroxytone, oxytone) and segmental information (syllabic structure: CV, CVC). Results revealed that WM mediates L1 prediction, such that higher WM facilitates prediction of morphology in monolinguals. However, higher WM hinders prediction in L2 processing for non-interpreters. Interestingly, interpreters behaved similarly to monolinguals, with higher WM facilitating L2 prediction. This study provides further understanding of the variability in L2 prediction.

Practice beats age: co-activation shapes heritage speakers’ lexical access more than age of onset

“…Recent studies with L2 learners who are professional simultaneous interpreters suggest that language use and cognitive resources impact stress-suffix predictions in bilinguals. First, interpreters predicted faster than non-interpreters of the same L2 proficiency level ( Lozano-Argüelles et al, 2022 ), due to their extensive experience making predictions while interpreting. Second, verbal working memory facilitated predictions in monolinguals and interpreter L2 learners, but not non-interpreter L2 learners ( Lozano-Argüelles et al, 2022 ).…”

“…First, interpreters predicted faster than non-interpreters of the same L2 proficiency level ( Lozano-Argüelles et al, 2022 ), due to their extensive experience making predictions while interpreting. Second, verbal working memory facilitated predictions in monolinguals and interpreter L2 learners, but not non-interpreter L2 learners ( Lozano-Argüelles et al, 2022 ). To determine whether language use also affects stress-suffix predictions in early bilinguals, we recorded the percentage of time participants used Spanish on a weekly basis (see Materials for more information about this measure).…”

Whither Bilinguals, Natives, and Variability? A Commentary on “The Neurocognitive Underpinnings of Second Language Processing: Knowledge Gains From the Past and Future Outlook”

“…In ERP, a notable source of interindividual variability in processing certain types of stimuli is working memory capacity. Working memory effects are seen in both L2 processing (e.g., Reichle et al., 2016) and L1 processing (e.g., Lozano‐Argüelles et al., 2023). In the spirit of Wirtz and Pfenninger (2023), researchers might consider individual‐level working memory as a potential variable in identifying homogeneous ensembles within the larger context of heterogeneity of ERP processing data.…”