Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T09:03:51.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The on-line application of binding Principle A in English as a second language*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

CLAUDIA FELSER ,
MIKAKO SATO  and
NICHOLAS BERTENSHAW
CLAUDIA FELSER*
Affiliation:
University of Essex
MIKAKO SATO
Affiliation:
University of Essex
NICHOLAS BERTENSHAW
Affiliation:
University of Essex
*
Address for correspondence: Claudia Felser, Department of Language and Linguistics, University of Essex, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We report the results from two experiments investigating proficient Japanese-speaking learners' processing of reflexive object pronouns in English as a second language (L2). Experiment 1 used a timed grammaticality judgement task to assess learners' sensitivity to binding Principle A under processing pressure, and Experiment 2 investigated the time-course of reflexive anaphor resolution during L2 reading using the eye-movement monitoring technique. Taken together, our results show that despite having demonstrated native-like knowledge of reflexive binding in corresponding untimed tasks, the learners processed English reflexives differently from native speakers in that they took into consideration a matching discourse-prominent but binding-theoretically inappropriate antecedent when first encountering a reflexive. This suggests that unlike what has been reported in corresponding monolingual processing research (Sturt, 2003), initial antecedent search in L2 English is not constrained by binding Principle A.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , October 2009 , pp. 485 - 502
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

*

The research reported here has been supported by a University of Essex Research Promotion Fund grant to C. Felser and by an ESRC postgraduate studentship to N. Bertenshaw. We also thank Harald Clahsen, the audience at the November 2007 Workshop on “Language Processing in First and Second Language Learners” at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, and four anonymous BLC reviewers for helpful comments and suggestions.

References

Akamatsu, N. (1999). The effects of first language orthographic features on word recognition processing in English as a second language. Reading and Writing, 11, 381–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allan, D. (1992). The Oxford placement test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Badecker, W. & Straub, K. (2002). The processing role of structural constraints on the interpretation of pronouns and anaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 748–769.Google ScholarPubMed
Baumann, H., Nagengast, J. & Klaas, G. (1993). New Experimental Setup (NESU). Ms., Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Büring, D. (2005). Binding theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, P. & Sung, L.-M. (1994). Head movement and long-distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry, 25, 355–406.Google Scholar
Daneman, M. & Carpenter, P. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demirci, M. (2000). The role of pragmatics in reflexive interpretation by Turkish learners of English. Second Language Research, 16, 325–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. (1994). Local and long-distance anaphora in second-language acquisition. In Tarone, E., Gass, S. & Cohen, A. (eds.), Research methodology in second-language acquisition, pp. 207–225. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Felser, C. & Roberts, L. (2007). Processing wh-dependencies in a second language: A cross-modal priming study. Second Language Research, 23, 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005a). Eye-movement recording as a tool for studying syntactic processing in a second language: A review of methodologies and experimental findings. Second Language Research, 21, 175–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005b). Ambiguities and anomalies: What can eye-movements and event-related potentials reveal about second language sentence processing? In Kroll, J. & de Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 268–281. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grier, J. (1971). Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: Computing formulas. Psychological Bulletin, 75, 424–429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrington, M. & Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies of Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, T., Wexler, K. & Holcomb, P. (2000). An ERP investigation of binding and coreference. Brain and Language, 75, 313–346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkins, R. (2001). Second language syntax: A generative introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hirakawa, M. (1990). A study of the L2 acquisition of English reflexives. Second Language Research, 6, 60–85.Google Scholar
Hornby, A. S. (2000). Oxford advanced learners dictionary of current English (6th edn.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google 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. (2005). The influence of first language on the processing of wh-movement in English as a second language. Second Language Research, 21, 121–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, K.-Y. (2008). The role of pragmatics in reflexive interpretation in Korean learners of English. In Bowles, M., Foote, R., Perpiñán, S. & Bhatt, R. (eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2007 Second Language Research Forum, pp. 97–112. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C. & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 53–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsumura, M. (1994). Japanese learners’ acquisition of the locality requirement of English reflexives: Evidence for retreat from overgeneralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 19–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McElree, B. & Griffith, T. (1995). Syntactic and thematic processing in sentence comprehension: Evidence for a temporal dissociation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 134–157.Google Scholar
McElree, B. & Griffith, T. (1998). Structural and lexical constraints on filling gaps during sentence comprehension: A time-course analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 432–460.Google Scholar
Nagata, H. (1995). On-line and off-line reflexive resolution in Japanese logophoric sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 205–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, J. & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicol, J. & Swinney, D. (2003). The psycholinguistics of anaphora. In Barss, A. (ed.), Anaphora: A reference guide, pp. 72–104. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oshima, D. (2007). On empathic and logophoric binding. Research on Language & Computation, 5, 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollack, I. & Norman, D. (1964). A non-parametric analysis of signal detection experiments. Psychonomic Science, 1, 125–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollard, C. & Sag, I. A. (1992). Anaphors in English and the scope of binding theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 261–303.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. (1981). Definite NP anaphora and c-command. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 605–635.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. & Reuland, E. (1993). Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 657–720.Google Scholar
Roberts, L., Gullberg, M. & 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
Runner, J., Sussman, R. & Tanenhaus, M. (2003). Assignment of reference to reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases: Evidence from eye-movements. Cognition, 89, B1–B13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Runner, J., Sussman, R. & Tanenhaus, M. (2006). Assigning reference to reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases. Cognitive Science, 30, 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schütze, C. (1996). The empirical base of linguistics: Grammaticality judgments and linguistic methodology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Staub, A. & Rayner, K. (2007). Eye movements and online comprehension processes. In Gaskell, M. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics, pp. 327–342. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sturt, P. (2003). The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 542–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, M. (1991). Universal grammar and the interpretation of reflexives in a second language. Language, 67, 211–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullman, M. (2005). A cognitive perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In Sanz, C. (ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory, and practice, pp.141–178. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Walther, C. (1995). Processing reflexives in coordinate NPs: A question of point-of-view. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 39–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (2003). Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L., Bruhn-Garavito, J., Kawasaki, T., Pater, J. & Prévost, P. (1997). The researcher gave the subject a test about himself: Problems of ambiguity and preference in the investigation of reflexive binding. Language Learning, 47, 145–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J., Möbius, P. & Kim, C. (2001). Native and non-native processing of English wh-questions: Parsing strategies and plausibility constraints. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 509–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiang, M., Dillon, B. & Phillips, C. (2009). Illusory licensing effects across dependency types: ERP evidence. Brain and Language, 108, 40–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed