Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:42:39.249Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Construct operationalization, L1 effects, and context in second language processing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2016

ALAN JUFFS
ALAN JUFFS*
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
*
Address for correspondence: ALAN JUFFS, Department of Linguistics, University of Pittsburgh, Cathedral of Learning, Room 2816, 4200 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15260[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Cunnings (2016) provides welcome insights into differences between native speaker (NS) sentence processing, adult non-native speaker processing (NNS), and working memory capacity (WMC) limitations. This commentary briefly raises three issues: construct operationalization; the role of first language (L1); and context.

Type
Peer Commentaries
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , August 2017 , pp. 694 - 695
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

Choi, Y., & Trueswell, J. C. (2010). Children's (in)ability to recover from Garden Paths in a verb-final language: evidence from developing control in sentence processing. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 106, 41–61. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2010.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060024 Google Scholar
Fedorenko, E., Piantadosi, S., & Gibson, E. (2012). Processing Relative Clauses in Supportive Contexts. Cognitive Science, 36 (3), 471–497. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01217.x Google Scholar
Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: a distance based theory of linguistic complexity. In Miyashita, Y., Marantz, A., & O'Neil, W. (Eds.), Image, language, brain (pp. 95–126). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2015). Individual differences in the second language processing of object-subject ambiguities. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36 (2), 129–173. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0142716413000180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A., & Rodríguez, G. A. (2014). Second language sentence processing. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P., & Keller, T. A. (1996). The capacity theory of comprehension: new frontiers of evidence and arguments. The Psychological Review, 103, 773–780. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, K. I. (2016). The impact of L1 writing system on ESL knowledge of vowel and consonant spellings. Reading and Writing, 29 (6). DOI 10.1007/s11145-016-9673-5.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2008). A unified model. In Robinson, P. & Ellis, N. C. (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 341–371). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Miller, A. K. (2014). Accessing and maintaining referents in L2 processing of wh-dependencies. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4 (2), 167–191. doi:10.1075/lab.4.2.02mil Google Scholar
van Dyke, J. A., Johns, C. L., & Kukona, A. (2014). Low working memory is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition, 131, 373–403. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.01.007 Google Scholar
Wu, Z., & Juffs, A. (2016). What kind of priming is most effective in the processing of relative clauses in context? Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America Annual Meeting. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/plsa.v1i0.3728.Google Scholar