Second Language Processing and Linguistic Theory

Abstract

The distinction between representations and processes is central to most models of the cognitive science of language. Linguistic theory informs the types of representations assumed, and these representations are what are taken to be the targets of second language acquisition. Epistemologically, this is often taken to be knowledge, or knowledge-that. Techniques such as Grammaticality Judgment tasks are paradigmatic as we seek to gain insight into what a learner’s grammar looks like. Learners behave as if certain phonological, morphological, or syntactic strings (which may or may not be target-like) were well-formed. It is the task of the researcher to understand the nature of the knowledge that governs those well-formedness beliefs. Traditional accounts of processing, on the other hand, look to the real-time use of language, either in production or perception, and invoke discussions of skill or knowledge-how. A range of experimental psycholinguistic techniques have been used to assess these skills: self-paced reading, eye-tracking, ERPs, priming, lexical decision, AXB discrimination, and the like. Such online measures can show us how we “do” language when it comes to activities such as production or comprehension. There has long been a connection between linguistic theory and theories of processing as evidenced by the work of Berwick (The Grammatical Basis of Linguistic Performance). The task of the parser is to assign abstract structure to a phonological, morphological, or syntactic string; structure that does not come directly labeled in the acoustic input. Such processing studies as the Garden Path phenomenon have revealed that grammaticality and processability are distinct constructs. In some models, however, the distinction between grammar and processing is less distinct. Phillips says that “parsing is grammar,” while O’Grady builds an emergentist theory with no grammar, only processing. Bayesian models of acquisition, and indeed of knowledge, assume that the grammars we set up are governed by a principle of entropy, which governs other aspects of human behavior; knowledge and skill are combined. Exemplar models view the processing of the input as a storing of all phonetic detail that is in the environment, not storing abstract categories; the categories emerge via a process of comparing exemplars. Linguistic theory helps us to understand the processing of input to acquire new L2 representations, and the access of those representations in real time.

Turtles all the way down: Micro-cues and piecemeal transfer in L3 phonology and syntax

“…reliable) than the elements are the right-edge of the scale. As I have argued elsewhere (Archibald, 2017(Archibald, , 2018 there is a logical problem of phonological acquisition too; it is not just noticing but learning. In my reading of this hierarchy, it is really the lexical comparison of cognates which is doing the major work here (a point with which I think Westergaard agrees).…”

Crosslinguistic influence in L3 acquisition

“…Furthermore, the question arises as to how to assess overall similarity on each of the linguistic 'levels' of the hierarchy proposed by the TPM. For instance, how do we measure overall phonological similarity, what is the level of abstractness in such comparison (see Archibald, 2021Archibald, , 2023, and what should be given more 'weight' in such a summative assessment (see Archibald, 2017;Nelson et al, 2021 for a discussion)?…”

Production of Vowel /ə/ in Sundanese by Japanese Native Speakers in First Exposure

“…Other scholars have also analyzed segmentation after first exposure, such as Rast in Berthelsen et al (2020). They also claim that the L2 learner's ability to segment linguistic components from the L2 speech stream is evident and discussed the linguistic variables of input that may affect the L2 learner's segmentation ability, such as frequency of input and gestures (Archibald, 2017). Onishi (2016) has tested L2 learners' linguistic knowledge of phonotactic constraints after listening to a short auditory record in three treatments and tests.…”