The Comprehension of Words and Sentences in Two Languages

Kroll, Judith F.; Dussias, Paola E.

doi:10.1002/9780470756997.ch7

Cited by 37 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, our results can be seen as an another illustration of the relatively higher cognitive cost associated with deploying one's second (or third or fourth or … ) rather than one's native language (Kroll & Dussias, 2013 ;Kroll & Gollan, in press ): since cognitive resources are divided, language learners adopt a conservative approach and lean towards producing the complementizer. Future studies could examine if and to what extent thatvariation in learner language is indeed a function of overall language profi ciency, and if native-like that -patterns (in the sense of native-like distributions of that and zero-that ) are ever attained by the most advanced language learners.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

That-variation in German and Spanish L2 English

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In certain English finite complement clauses, inclusion of the complementizer that is optional. Previous research has identified various factors that influence when native speakers tend to produce or omit the complementizer, including syntactic weight, clause juncture constraints, and predicate frequency. The present study addresses the question to what extent German and Spanish learners of English as a second language (L2) produce and omit the complementizer under similar conditions. 3,622 instances of English adjectival, object, and subject complement constructions were retrieved from the International Corpus of English and the German and Spanish components of the International Corpus of Learner English. A logistic regression model suggests that L2 learners’ and natives’ production is largely governed by the same factors. However, in comparison with native speakers, L2 learners display a lower rate of complementizer omission. They are more impacted by processing-related factors such as complexity and clause juncture, and less sensitive to verb-construction cue validity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

That-variation in German and Spanish L2 English

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When considering comprehension, the models tend support the idea that activation is initially non-selective, because listeners have no control over which language is going to be used. Then, following the onset of the linguistic input, a bottom-up bias for the target language occurs, while cross-language representations still interact during (auditory) lexical access (e.g., Costa, 2005;Costa, La Heij, & Navarrete, 2006;Dijkstra, 2005;Green, 1998;Kroll & Dussias, 2004;Spivey & Marian, 1999;but see FitzPatrick & Indefrey, 2010;Rodriguez-Fornells, Rotte, Heinze, Nösselt, & Münte, 2002). Whilst when considering spoken language comprehension, the bottom-up bias can occur rapidly, based only on a small amount of low-level auditory linguistic information.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Interlocutor identity affects language activation in bilinguals

Molnar

Ibáñez-Molina

Carreiras

2015

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is an ongoing debate as to whether or not second language (L2) learners process sentences similarly to native speakers and whether this depends on the linguistic structure under investigation (Clahsen & Felser, 2006a, b; Dussias & Piñar, 2009; Kroll & Dussias, 2004). For example, Clahsen and Felser (2006a, b) argue that L2 learners can achieve native-like processing in the domain of lexical semantics and in the processing of local dependencies, such as subject–verb agreement and gender concord within the noun phrase, but they differ from native speakers in the way they process non-local dependencies, such as wh- dependencies involving empty categories.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%