Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:17:12.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bilinguals on the garden-path: Individual differences in syntactic ambiguity resolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2021

Trevor Brothers Open the ORCID record for Trevor Brothers [Opens in a new window] ,
Liv J Hoversten  and
Matthew J Traxler
Trevor Brothers*
Affiliation:
Tufts University, Department of Psychology
Liv J Hoversten
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Cruz, Department of Psychology
Matthew J Traxler
Affiliation:
University of California, Davis, Department of Psychology, Center for Mind and Brain
*
Address for correspondence: Trevor Brothers, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Syntactic parsing plays a central role in the interpretation of sentences, but it is unclear to what extent non-native speakers can deploy native-like grammatical knowledge during online comprehension. The current eye-tracking study investigated how Chinese–English bilinguals and native English speakers respond to syntactic category and subcategorization information while reading sentences with object-subject ambiguities. We also obtained measures of English language experience, working memory capacity, and executive function to determine how these cognitive variables influence online parsing. During reading, monolinguals and bilinguals showed similar garden-path effects related to syntactic reanalysis, but native English speakers responded more robustly to verb subcategorization cues. Readers with greater language experience and executive function showed increased sensitivity to verb subcategorization cues, but parsing was not influenced by working memory capacity. These results are consistent with exposure-based accounts of bilingual sentence processing, and they support a link between syntactic processing and domain-general cognitive control.

Keywords

second languagesyntactic parsingverb subcategorizationexecutive functionworking memory
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , August 2021 , pp. 612 - 627
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. 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.)

References

Acheson, DJ, Wells, JB and MacDonald, MC (2008) New and updated tests of print exposure and reading abilities in college students. Behavior Research Methods 40, 278–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, BC, Clifton, C and Mitchell, DC (1998) Lexical guidance in sentence processing? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 5, 265–270..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anible, B, Twitchell, P, Waters, GS, Dussias, PE, Piñar, P and Morford, JP (2015) Sensitivity to Verb Bias in American Sign Language–English Bilinguals. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education 20, 215–228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barr, DJ, Levy, R, Scheepers, C and Tily, HJ (2013) Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of memory and language 68, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, D, Maechler, M, Bolker, B and Walker, S (2015) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1–7.Google Scholar
Botvinick, MM, Braver, TS, Barch, DM, Carter, CS and Cohen, JD (2001) Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review 108, 624–652.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brothers, T and Traxler, MJ (2016) Anticipating syntax during reading: Evidence from the boundary change paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition.Google ScholarPubMed
Brysbaert, M and New, B (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior research methods 41, 977–990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caplan, D and Waters, G (2002) Working memory and connectionist models of parsing: A reply to MacDonald and Christiansen (2002). Psychological Review 109, 66–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caplan, D and Waters, G (2005) The relationship between age, processing speed, working memory capacity, and language comprehension. Memory 13, 403–413.10.1080/09658210344000459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christianson, K, Williams, CC, Zacks, RT and Ferreira, F (2006) Younger and older adults’ “good enough” interpretations of garden-path sentences. Discourse Processes 42, 205–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chomsky, N (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H and Felser, C (2006a) Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics 27, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H and Felser, C (2006b) How native-like is non-native language processing? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10, 564–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifton, C Jr. and Staub, A (2011) Syntactic influences on eye movements in reading. In Liversedge, SP, Gilchrist, Iain D and Everling, Stefan (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Eye Movements. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 895–909.Google Scholar
Conway, ARA, Kane, MJ, Bunting, MF, Hambrick, DZ, Wilhelm, O and Engle, RW (2005) Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user's guide. Pschonomic Bulletin & Review 12, 769–786.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cop, U, Dirix, N, Drieghe, D and Duyck, W (2016) Presenting GECO: An eyetracking corpus of monolingual and bilingual sentence reading. Behavior Research Methods, 1–14.Google Scholar
Costa, A, Miozzo, M and Caramazza, A (1999) Lexical selection in bilinguals: Do words in the bilingual's two lexicons compete for selection? Journal of Memory and Language 41, 365–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunnings, I (2017) Parsing and working memory in bilingual sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 20, 659–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dallas, A, DeDe, G and Nicol, J (2013) An Event-Related Potential (ERP) Investigation of Filler-Gap Processing in Native and Second Language Speakers. Language Learning 63, 766–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M and Carpenter, PA (1980) Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19, 450–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diependaele, K, Lemhöfer, K and Brysbaert, M (2013) The word frequency effect in first and second language word recognition: A lexical entrenchment account. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 66, 843–863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dussias, PE and Scaltz, TRC (2008) Spanish–English L2 speakers’ use of subcategorization bias information in the resolution of temporary ambiguity during second language reading. Acta Psychologica 128, 501–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dussias, PE and Pinar, P (2010) Effects of reading span and plausibility in the reanalysis of wh-gaps by Chinese–English second language speakers. Second Language Research 26, 443–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engelhardt, PE, Nigg, JT and Ferreira, F (2017) Executive function and intelligence in the resolution of temporary syntactic ambiguity: An individual differences investigation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70, 1263–1281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fedorenko, E, Behr, MK and Kanwisher, N (2011) Functional specificity for high-level linguistic processing in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108, 16428–16433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fedorenko, E, Gibson, E and Rohde, D (2006) The nature of working memory capacity in sentence comprehension: Evidence against domain-specific working memory resources. Journal of Memory and Language 54, 541–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F (2003) The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology 47, 164–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferreira, F and Patson, ND (2007) The “good enough” approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass 1, 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, L (1979) On Comprehending Sentences: Syntactic Parsing Strategies. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut. West Bend, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Frazier, L (1987) Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In Coltheart, M (ed), Attention and Performance XII: The Psychology of Reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 559–586.Google Scholar
Frazier, L and Clifton, C Jr. (1996) Construal. Boston, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Frazier, L and Rayner, K (1982) Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye-movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology 14, 178–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freed, EM, Hamilton, ST and Long, DL (2017) Comprehension in proficient readers: The nature of individual variation. Journal of Memory and Language.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frenck-Mestre, C and Pynte, J (1997) Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 50, 119–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, NP and Miyake, A (2004) The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: a latent-variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 133, 101–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frisch, S, Hahne, A and Friederici, AD (2004) Word category and verb–argument structure information in the dynamics of parsing. Cognition 91, 191–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garnsey, SM, Pearlmutter, NJ, Myers, E and Lotocky, MA (1997) The contributions of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language 37, 58–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, ZM and Ferreira, VS (2006) Properties of spoken language production. The Handbook of Psycholinguistics. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, pp. 21–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H (2006) Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing. Second Language Research 22, 369–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H (2010) Ultimate attainment in L2 inflection: Performance similarities between non-native and native speakers. Lingua 120, 901–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoversten, LJ, Brothers, TA, Swaab, TY and Traxler, MJ (2015) Language membership information precedes semantic access: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 27, 2108–2116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoversten, LJ and Traxler, MJ (2016) A time course analysis of interlingual homograph processing: Evidence from eye movements. Bilingualism, Language, and Cognition. 19, 347–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R (2002) Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, G and Felser, C (2016) Reanalysis and semantic persistence in native and non-native garden-path recovery. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 69, 907–925.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
January, D, Trueswell, JC and Thompson-Schill, SL (2009) Co-localization of Stroop and syntactic ambiguity resolution in Broca's area: Implications for the neural basis of sentence processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 21, 2434–2444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jegerski, J (2012) The processing of subject–object ambiguities in native and near-native Mexican Spanish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 15, 721–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jessen, A and Felser, C (2018) Reanalysing object gaps during non-native sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs. Second Language Research 35, 285–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A (1998a) Main verb versus reduced relative clause ambiguity resolution in L2 sentence processing. Language Learning 48, 107–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A (1998b) Some effects of first language argument structure and morphosyntax on second language processing. Second Language Research 14, 406–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A (2004) Representation, processing and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society 102, 199–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A and Harrington, M (1996) Garden-path sentences and error data in second language sentence processing. Language Learning 46, 283–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Just, MA and Carpenter, PA (1992) A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory. Psychological review 99, 122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Key-DeLyria, SE and Altmann, LJ (2016) Executive Function and Ambiguous Sentence Comprehension. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 25, 252–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, E, Baek, S and Tremblay, A (2015) The role of island constraints in second language sentence processing. Language Acquisition 22, 384–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, J and Just, MA (1991) Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of memory and language 30, 580–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotz, SA (2009) A critical review of ERP and fMRI evidence on L2 syntactic processing. Brain and Language 109, 68–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krueger, CE, Bird, AC, Growdon, ME, Jang, JY, Miller, BL and Kramer, JH (2009) Conflict monitoring in early frontotemporal dementia. Neurology 73, 349–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, JF and De Groot, AM (eds) (2005) Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kuperberg, GR (2007) Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax. Brain Research 1146, 23–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, E, Lu, D and Garnsey, M (2013) L1 word order and sensitivity to verb bias in L2 processing. Bilingualism 16, 761–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K and Broersma, M (2012) Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods 44, 325–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levelt, WJ, Roelofs, A and Meyer, AS (1999) A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mattys, SL, Baddeley, A and Trenkic, D (2018) Is the superior verbal memory span of Mandarin speakers due to faster rehearsal? Memory & Cognition 46, 361–369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Love, T, Maas, E and Swinney, D (2003) The influence of language exposure on lexical and syntactic language processing. Experimental Psychology 50, 204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDonald, JL (2006) Beyond the critical period: Processing-based explanations for poor grammaticality judgment performance by late second language learners. Journal of Memory and Language 55, 381–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, MC, Pearlmutter, NJ and Seidenberg, MS (1994) Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review 101, 676–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacDonald, MC and Christiansen, MH (2002) Reassessing working memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). Psychological Review 109, 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, MC, Just, MA and Carpenter, PA (1992) Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cognitive psychology 24, 56–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marslen-Wilson, WD, Tyler, LK and Seidenberg, M (1978) Sentence processing and the clause boundary. Studies in the perception of language, 219–246.Google Scholar
Mitchell, DC (1987) Lexical guidance in human parsing: Locus and processing characteristics. In Coltheart, M (ed), Attention and Performance XII: The Psychology of Reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 601–618.Google Scholar
Novick, JM, Hussey, E, Teubner-Rhodes, S, Harbison, JI and Bunting, MF (2014) Clearing the garden-path: Improving sentence processing through cognitive control training. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 29, 186–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novick, JM, Trueswell, JC and Thompson-Schill, SL (2005) Cognitive control and parsing: Reexamining the role of Broca's area in sentence comprehension. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 5, 263–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Novick, JM, Kan, IP, Trueswell, JC and Thompson-Schill, SL (2009) A case for conflict across multiple domains: memory and language impairments following damage to ventrolateral prefrontal cortex. Cognitive Neuropsychology 26, 527–567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paap, KR and Greenberg, ZI (2013) There is no coherent evidence for a bilingual advantage in executive processing. Cognitive Psychology 66, 232–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paap, KR, Johnson, HA and Sawi, O (2015) Bilingual advantages in executive functioning either do not exist or are restricted to very specific and undetermined circumstances. Cortex 69, 265–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perfetti, CA and Hart, L (2002) The lexical quality hypothesis. Precursors of functional literacy 11, 67–86.Google Scholar
Pickering, MJ and Traxler, MJ (1998) Plausibility and recovery from garden-paths: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 24, 940.Google Scholar
Pickering, MJ, Traxler, MJ and Crocker, MW (2000) Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing: Evidence against frequency-based accounts. Journal of Memory and Language 43, 447–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pozzan, L and Trueswell, JC (2016) Second language processing and revision of garden-path sentences: a visual word study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 19, 636–643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rah, A and Adone, D (2010) Processing of the reduced relative clause versus main verb amgibuity in L2 learners at different proficiency levels. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 32, 79–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, L and Felser, C (2011) Plausibility and recovery from garden-paths in second language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics 32, 299–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, L, Gullberg, M and Indefrey, P (2008) Online pronoun resolution in L2 discourse: L1 influence and general learner effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 30, 333–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagarra, N (2013) Working memory in second language acquisition. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Servan-Schreiber, D, Cohen, JD and Steingard, S (1996) Schizophrenic deficits in the processing of context: A test of a theoretical model. Archives of General Psychiatry 53, 1105–1113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spivey-Knowlton, M and Sedivy, JC (1995) Resolving attachment ambiguities with multiple constraints. Cognition 55, 227–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Staub, A (2007) The parser doesn't ignore intransitivity, after all. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33, 550.Google Scholar
Steinhauer, K, White, EJ and Drury, JE (2009) Temporal dynamics of late second language acquisition: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Second Language Research 25, 13–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stigler, JW, Lee, S.-Y. and Stevenson, HW (1986) Digit memory in Chinese and English: Evidence for a temporally limited store. Cognition 23, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teubner-Rhodes, SE, Mishler, A, Corbett, R, Andreu, L, Sanz-Torrent, M, Trueswell, JC and Novick, JM (2016) The effects of bilingualism on conflict monitoring, cognitive control, and garden-path recovery. Cognition 150, 213–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tokowicz, N and MacWhinney, B (2005) Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies in second language acquisition 27, 173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traxler, MJ (2012) Introduction to Psycholinguistics: Understanding Language Science. Boston, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Traxler, MJ (2014) Trends in syntactic parsing: anticipation, Bayesian estimation, and good-enough parsing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 18, 605–611.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Traxler, MJ, Williams, RS, Blozis, SA and Morris, RK (2005) Working memory, animacy, and verb class in the processing of relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language 53, 204–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traxler, MJ and Pickering, MJ (1996) Plausibility and the processing of unbounded dependencies: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language 35, 454–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traxler, MJ, Long, DL, Johns, CL, Tooley, KM, Zirnstein, M and Jonathan, E (2012) Individual differences in eye-movements during reading: Working memory and speed-of-processing effects. Journal of Eye Movement Research 5, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trueswell, J, Tanenhaus, MK and Kello, C (1993) Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 19, 528–553.Google ScholarPubMed
Trueswell, JC, Tanenhaus, MK and Garnsey, SM (1994) Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language 33, 285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trueswell, JC, Sekerina, I, Hill, NM and Logrip, ML (1999) The kindergarten-path effect: Studying on-line sentence processing in young children. Cognition 73, 89–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ullman, MT (2001) The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism, Language, and Cognition 4, 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unsworth, N, Heitz, JR, Schrock, JC and Engle, RW (2005) An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods 37, 498–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Dyke, JA, Johns, CL and Kukona, A (2014) Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition 131, 373–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Gompel, RP and Pickering, MJ (2001) Lexical guidance in sentence processing: A note on Adams, Clifton, and Mitchell (1998). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 8, 851–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Gompel, RP, Pickering, MJ and Traxler, MJ (2001) Reanalysis in sentence processing: Evidence against current constraint-based and two-stage models. Journal of Memory and Language 45, 225–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Hell, JG and Tokowicz, N (2010) Event-related brain potentials and second language learning: Syntactic processing in late L2 learners at different L2 proficiency levels. Second Language Research 26, 43–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Bastian, CC, Souza, AS and Gade, M (2016) No evidence for bilingual cognitive advantages: A test of four hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 145, 246–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vosse, T and Kempen, G (2000) Syntactic structure assembly in human parsing: a computational model based on competitive inhibition and a lexicalist grammar. Cognition 75, 105–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wanner, E and Maratsos, M (1978) An ATN approach to comprehension. Linguistic theory and psychological reality, ed. by Halle, Morris, Bresnan, Joan and Miller, George, 119–61.Google Scholar
Waters, GS and Caplan, D (1996) The capacity theory of sentence comprehension: Critique of Just and Carpenter (1992). Psychological Review 103, 761–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waters, GS and Caplan, D (1997) Working memory and on-line sentence comprehension in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 26, 377–400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weber-Fox, CM and Neville, HJ (1996) Maturational constraints on functional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilingual speakers. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 8, 231–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wells, JB, Christiansen, MH, Race, DS, Acheson, DJ and MacDonald, MC (2009) Experience and sentence processing: Statistical learning and relative clause comprehension. Cognitive psychology 58, 250–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wen, Z, Mota, MB and McNeill, A (eds) (2015) Working memory in second language acquisition and processing (Vol. 87). Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, JN (2006) Incremental interpretation in second language sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9, 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoo, H and Dickey, MW (2017) Aging effects and working memory in garden-path recovery. Clinical Archives of Communication Disorders 2, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zawiszewski, A, Gutiérrez, E, Fernández, B and Laka, I (2011) Language distance and non-native syntactic processing: Evidence from event-related potentials. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 14, 400–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar