Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-20T11:12:22.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of increasing discourse context on L1 and L2 spoken language processing*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2016

TATIANA KOHLSTEDT  and
NIVEDITA MANI
TATIANA KOHLSTEDT*
Affiliation:
Psychology of Language Research Group, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
NIVEDITA MANI
Affiliation:
Psychology of Language Research Group, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
*
Address for correspondence: Dr. Tatiana Kohlstedt, Psychology of Language Junior Research Group, Gosslerstrasse 14, 37073 Goettingen, Germany[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using the visual world paradigm, we compared first, L1 and L2 speakers’ anticipation of upcoming information in a discourse and second, L1 and L2 speakers’ ability to infer the meaning of unknown words in a discourse based on the semantic cues provided in spoken language context. It was found that native speakers were able to use the given contextual cues, throughout the discourse, to anticipate upcoming linguistic input and fixate targets consistent with the input thus far, while L2 speakers showed weaker effects of discourse context on target fixations. However, both native speakers and L2 learners alike were able to use contextual information to infer the meaning of unknown words embedded in the discourse and fixate images associated with the inferred meanings of these words, especially given adequate contextual information. We suggest that these results reflect similarly successful integration of the preceding semantic information and the construction of integrated mental representations of the described scenarios in L1 and L2.

Keywords

L2discourseintegrationpredictioneye-tracking
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , January 2018 , pp. 121 - 136
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.)

Footnotes

Supplementary material can be found online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1366728916001139

*

This work was funded by the German Initiative of Excellence (Institutional Strategy). We also acknowledge the Courant Research Centre “Text structures” for their monetary contribution towards participant fees. We thank all the native speakers and German learners who participated in the study and provided us with valuable data. We are also grateful to Jon Andoni Duñabeitia and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions.

References

Altmann, G., & Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73, 247–264.Google Scholar
Altmann, G., & Kamide, Y. (2007). The real-time mediation of visual attention by language and world knowledge: Linking anticipatory (and other) eye movements to linguistic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 502–518.Google Scholar
Ardal, S., Donald, M. W., Meuter, R., Muldrew, S., & Luce, M. (1990). Brain responses to semantic incongruity in bilinguals. Brain and Language, 39, 187–205.Google Scholar
Batterink, L., & Neville, H. (2011). Implicit and explicit mechanisms of word learning in a narrative context: an event-related potential study. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 23, 3181–3196.Google Scholar
Bensoussan, M., & Laufer, B. (1984). Lexical guessing in context in EFL reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 7, 15–31.Google Scholar
Borovsky, A., Elman, J. L., & Kutas, M. (2012). Once is enough: N400 indexes semantic integration of novel word meanings from a single exposure in context. Language Learning and Development, 8, 278–302.Google Scholar
Borovsky, A., Kutas, M., & Elman, J. L. (2013). Getting it right: word learning across the hemispheres. Neuropsychologia, 51, 825–837.Google Scholar
Borovsky, A., Kutas, M., & Elman, J. (2010). Learning to use words: Event-related potentials index single-shot contextual word learning. Cognition, 116, 289–296.Google Scholar
Boudewyn, M. A., Gordon, P. C., Long, D., Polse, L., & Swaab, T. Y. (2012). Does Discourse Congruence Influence Spoken Language Comprehension before Lexical Association? Evidence from Event-Related Potentials. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 698–733. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.577980 Google Scholar
Bradlow, A. R., & Alexander, J. A. (2007). Semantic and phonetic enhancements for speech-in-noise recognition by native and non-native listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121, 2339–2349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brysbaert, M., Buchmeier, M., Conrad, M., Jacobs, A. M., Bölte, J., & Böhl, A. (2011). The word frequency effect: a review of recent developments and implications for the choice of frequency estimates in German. Experimental psychology, 58, 412–424.Google Scholar
Camblin, C. C., Gordon, P. C., & Swaab, T. Y. (2007). The interplay of discourse congruence and lexical association during sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 103–128. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.07.005 Google Scholar
Council of Europe. (2011). Common European Framework of Reference for: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. [http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/framework_en.pdf, retrieved May 23, 2014]Google Scholar
de Leeuw, L., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2014). Context, Task, and Reader Effects in Children's Incidental Word Learning from Text. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 61, 275–287.Google Scholar
DeLong, K. a, Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2005). Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1117–21. doi:10.1038/nn1504 Google ScholarPubMed
Favreau, M., & Segalowitz, N. S. (1983). Automatic and controlled processes in the first- and second-language reading of fluent bilinguals. Memory & Cognition, 11, 565–74. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6669025 Google Scholar
Federmeier, K. D. (2007). Thinking ahead: the role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology, 44, 491–505. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00531.x Google Scholar
Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (1999). A Rose by Any Other Name: Long-Term Memory Structure and Sentence Processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 469–495. doi:10.1006/jmla.1999.2660 Google Scholar
Fraser, C. A. (1999). Lexical processing strategy use and vocabulary learning through reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 225–241.Google Scholar
Frishkoff, G. A., Perfetti, C. A., & Collins-Thompson, K. (2010). Lexical quality in the brain: ERP evidence for robust word learning from context. Developmental neuropsychology, 35, 376–403.Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1996). The structure-building framework: What it is, what it might also be, and why. Models of understanding text, 289–311.Google Scholar
Haastrup, K. (1991). Lexical inferencing procedures or talking about words: Receptive procedures in foreign language learning with special reference to English. Tubingen, Germany: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Hahne, A. (2001). What's different in second-language processing? Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 251–266.Google Scholar
Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Processing a second language: late learners’ comprehension mechanisms as revealed by event-related brain potentials. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 123–141. doi:10.1017/S1366728901000232 Google Scholar
Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38.Google Scholar
Kamide, Y., Altmann, G. T., & Haywood, S. L. (2003). The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 133–156. doi:10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00023-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3375398 Google Scholar
Kotz, S. A., & Elston-Güttler, K. (2004). The role of proficiency on processing categorical and associative information in the L2 as revealed by reaction times and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 215–235.Google Scholar
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161–163. doi:10.1038/307161a0 Google Scholar
Kutas, M., & Van Petten, C. (1994). Psychololinguistics Electrified - Event-Related Brain Potential Investigations. In Gernsbacher, M. A. (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 83–143). Academic Press. Retrieved from http://kutaslab.ucsd.edu/people/kutas/pdfs/1994.HP.83.pdf Google Scholar
Libben, M. R., & Titone, D. A. (2009). Bilingual lexical access in context: evidence from eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 381.Google Scholar
Magiste, E. (1986). Selected issues in second and third language learning. Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic perspectives, 97–122.Google Scholar
Mani, N., & Plunkett, K. (2010). In the infant's mind's ear evidence for implicit naming in 18-month-olds. Psychological science, 21, 908–913.Google Scholar
Martin, C. D., Thierry, G., Kuipers, J.-R., Boutonnet, B., Foucart, A., & Costa, A. (2013). Bilinguals reading in their second language do not predict upcoming words as native readers do. Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 574–588. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2013.08.001 Google Scholar
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1998). Memory-based language processing: psycholinguistic research in the 1990s. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 25–42. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.25 Google Scholar
McRae, K., & Matsuki, K. (2009). People Use their Knowledge of Common Events to Understand Language, and Do So as Quickly as Possible. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3, 1417–1429. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00174.x Google Scholar
Melinger, A., & Weber, A. (2006). Database of noun associations for German. [www.coli.uni-saarland.de/projects/nag, retrieved May 30, 2014]Google Scholar
Metusalem, R., Kutas, M., Urbach, T. P., Hare, M., McRae, K., & Elman, J. L. (2012). Generalized event knowledge activation during online sentence comprehension. Journal of memory and language, 66, 545–567.Google Scholar
Meyer, A. S., Belke, E., Telling, A., & Humphreys, G. W. (2007). Early activation of object names in visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 710–716.Google Scholar
Moreno, E. M., & Kutas, M. (2005). Processing semantic anomalies in two languages: an electrophysiological exploration in both languages of Spanish-English bilinguals. Brain Research. Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 205–220. doi:10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.08.010 Google Scholar
Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading research quarterly, 20, 233–253.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2003). L2 vocabulary learning from context: Strategies, knowledge sources, and their relationship with success in L2 lexical inferencing. Tesol Quarterly, 37, 645–670.Google Scholar
Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2006). Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: evidence from ERPs. Brain Research, 1118, 155–167. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.022 Google Scholar
Otten, M., & Van Berkum, J. J. a. (2008). Discourse-Based Word Anticipation During Language Processing: Prediction or Priming? Discourse Processes, 45, 464–496. doi:10.1080/01638530802356463 Google Scholar
Paribakht, S., & Wesche, M. (1999). Reading and “incidental” L2 vocabulary acquisition: An introspective study of lexical inferencing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 195–224.Google Scholar
Phillips, N. A., Segalowitz, N., O'Brien, I., & Yamasaki, N. (2004). Semantic priming in a first and second language: evidence from reaction time variability and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 237–262. doi:10.1016/S0911-6044(03)00055-1 Google Scholar
Roberts, M., & Russo, R. (2014). A student's guide to analysis of variance. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Salmon, N., & Pratt, H. (2002). A comparison of sentence- and discourse-level semantic processing: an ERP study. Brain and Language, 83, 367–83. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12468394 Google Scholar
Sanford, A. J., & Garrod, S. C. (1998). The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 26, 159–190. doi:10.1080/01638539809545043 Google Scholar
Schwartz, A. I., & Kroll, J. F. (2006). Bilingual lexical activation in sentence context. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 197–212.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (1986). Skilled reading in the second language. Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguistic and neuropsychological perspectives, 3–19.Google Scholar
Sereno, S. C., & Rayner, K. (1992). Fast priming during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 173– 184.Google Scholar
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632–1634. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7777863 Google Scholar
Testen Sie Ihr Deutsch. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.goethe.de/cgi-bin/einstufungstest/einstufungstest.pl Google Scholar
Trenkic, D., Mirkovic, J., & Altmann, G. (2013). Real-time grammar processing by native and non-native speakers: Constructions unique to the second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17, 237–257.Google Scholar
Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., Zwitserlood, P., Kooijman, V., & Hagoort, P. (2005). Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: evidence from ERPs and reading times. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 443–467. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.3.443 Google Scholar
Van Berkum, J. J., Hagoort, P., & Brown, C. M. (1999). Semantic integration in sentences and discourse: Evidence from the N400. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 11, 657–671. doi: 10.1162/089892999563724 Google Scholar
Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
van Heuven, W. J., Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2014). SUBTLEX-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1176–1190.Google Scholar
Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequency in event-related brain potentials. Memory & Cognition, 18, 380–93. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2381317 Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2008). The Effects of Context on Incidental Vocabulary Learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20, 232–245.Google Scholar
Weber-Fox, C. M., & Neville, H. J. (1996). Maturational Constraints on Functional Specializations for Language Processing: ERP and Behavioral Evidence in Bilingual Speakers. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 231–256.Google Scholar
Wicha, N. Y., Moreno, E. M., & Kutas, M. (2004). Anticipating words and their gender: An event-related brain potential study of semantic integration, gender expectancy, and gender agreement in Spanish sentence reading. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 16, 1272–1288.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. a., & Radvansky, G. a. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162–85. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9522683 Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Kohlstedt and Mani supplementary material

Kohlstedt and Mani supplementary material

Download Kohlstedt and Mani supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 98.9 KB