Theories and frameworks in second language processing

Malko, Anton; Ehrenhofer, Lara; Phillips, Colin

doi:10.1017/s1366728916001000

Bilingualism

2016

DOI: 10.1017/s1366728916001000

|View full text |Cite

Theories and frameworks in second language processing

Anton Malko

Lara Ehrenhofer

Colin Phillips

Abstract: Analyzing L2 sentence processing in terms of cue-based memory retrieval is promising. But this useful general framework has yet to become a specific theory of L1-L2 differences.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2017

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many commentators applaud Cunnings’ attempt to derive the specifics of non-native sentence comprehension from difficulties in cue-based memory retrieval. At the same time, however, commentators are concerned that Cunnings’ account may not be explicit enough (Malko, Ehrenhofer & Phillips, 2017; Tremblay & Coughlin, 2017; Kaan, 2017) and in some cases may go beyond what is currently supported by empirical evidence (Dillon, 2017), that core notions may be too vague and in need of clarification (Juffs, 2017; Gabriele, Fiorentino & Covey, 2017), and that attested L1/L2 differences remain that are hard to explain in terms of interference and retrieval difficulties (Jacob, Lago & Patterson, 2017). Experts in bilingualism raise methodological concerns and draw attention to factors neglected by Cunnings, such as the potential influence of an L2 on an individual's skills in the L1 (Dussias, Beatty-Martínez & Perrotti, 2017) and the role of individual differences (Montrul & Tanner, 2017; Hopp, 2017; Keating, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Memory retrieval and sentence processing: Differences between native and non-native speakers

Abutalebi

Clahsen

2017

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efficient comprehension of sentences requires rapidly and continuously accessing and integrating different sources of information in real time. Psycholinguists have developed detailed models and theories to account for the processes involved in on-line sentence comprehension as well as a number of sophisticated experimental designs for studying these processes. But how about real-time sentence processing in bilinguals? The study of bilingual sentence processing has received considerable attention and has led to a remarkable growth of experimental studies over the last 10 years. The focus of these studies has been on late bilinguals, i.e., on second-language (L2) learners who learned a non-native language after early childhood, as adolescents or adults. These studies have revealed both similarities and differences between native (L1) and non-native (L2) sentence processing. Several proposals have been made to account for the experimental findings, but the significance and nature of native vs. non-native differences in sentence processing has remained controversial. Some researchers have claimed that L1 and L2 sentence processing are essentially the same and that observed performance differences between native and non-native sentence comprehension are due to peripheral factors, e.g., decoding problems, working memory limitations, slower processing speed, difficulties with lexical access and retrieval, or a reduced ability to predict during L2 processing (e.g., McDonald, 2006; Hopp, 2016; Kaan, 2014). Others have posited more substantial differences between L1 and L2 processing. One prominent proposal is Clahsen and Felser's (2006a, b) Shallow-Structure Hypothesis (SSH). Assuming multi-stream models of language processing (e.g., Ferreira & Patson, 2007) with two routes from form to meaning, a heuristic one that employs surface-form information, lexical and semantic cues, and an algorithmic route that relies on a full grammatical parse, the SSH holds that L2 processing relies less on grammatical and more on non-grammatical information sources, in comparison to L1 processing of syntactic (and morphological) phenomena.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Memory retrieval and sentence processing: Differences between native and non-native speakers

Abutalebi

Clahsen

2017

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Interference in Native and Non-Native Sentence Processing

Cunnings

2017

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary aim of my target article was to demonstrate how careful consideration of the working memory operations that underlie successful language comprehension is crucial to our understanding of the similarities and differences between native (L1) and non-native (L2) sentence processing. My central claims were that highly proficient L2 speakers construct similarly specified syntactic parses as L1 speakers, and that differences between L1 and L2 processing can be characterised in terms of L2 speakers being more prone to interference during memory retrieval operations. In explaining L1/L2 differences in this way, I argued a primary source of differences between L1 and L2 processing lies in how different populations of speakers weight cues that guide memory retrieval.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Theories and frameworks in second language processing

Abstract: Analyzing L2 sentence processing in terms of cue-based memory retrieval is promising. But this useful general framework has yet to become a specific theory of L1-L2 differences.

Cited by 2 publications

References 7 publications

Memory retrieval and sentence processing: Differences between native and non-native speakers

Memory retrieval and sentence processing: Differences between native and non-native speakers

Interference in Native and Non-Native Sentence Processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About