Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:26:49.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NATIVE AND NONNATIVE PROCESSING OF ACTIVE AND PASSIVE SENTENCES

THE EFFECTS OF PROCESSING INSTRUCTION ON THE ALLOCATION OF VISUAL ATTENTION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2018

James F. Lee  and
Stephen Doherty
James F. Lee*
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales, Sydney
Stephen Doherty
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales, Sydney
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to James F. Lee, School of Humanities and Languages, 258 Morven Brown Building, UNSW Sydney, NSW 2052. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study compares native and nonnative processing of Spanish active and passive sentences. The nonnative speakers were tested before and after receiving processing instruction on the Spanish passive. The native speakers were tested once and provide a baseline for comparisons. We measured accuracy and response time to select the correct response in a paired picture matching task. We used eye-tracking measures to capture processing behaviors on both active and passive verb forms. We measured processing using time to first fixation on the verb area of interest, mean first fixation duration, mean first pass time, and mean second pass time. The results revealed that processing passive sentences comes at a cost to both native and nonnative speakers. After instruction the nonnative speakers showed no significant differences with native speakers in accuracy and response time. Also, the nonnative speakers’ processing behaviors became more nativelike but did not reach the native speaker level.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , September 2019 , pp. 853 - 879
Open Practices
Open materials
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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 experiment in this article earned an Open Materials badge for transparent practices. The materials are available at https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.10174.54086.

We would like to acknowledge that the Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences through the School of Humanities & Languages funded various aspects of this research through the Faculty Research Grants and Conference Travel Grants to both authors. We presented aspects of this study at the Pacific Second Language Research Forum in Tokyo in 2016, the Symposium on Second Language Acquisition Research: A Psycholinguistic and Neurolinguistic Perspective at the University of Portsmouth in 2018, and the Annual Meeting of the American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese in Salamanca in 2018. We are grateful for the feedback we received from audience members in general. Special thanks are owing to Alessandro Benati, Michael Leeser, Ronald Leow, Paul Malovrh, Nuria Sagarra, Cristina Sanz, Michael Ullman, and the SSLA reviewers. Any remaining deficiencies are our own.

References

REFERENCES

Baldie, B. J. (1976). The acquisition of the passive voice. Journal of Child Language, 3, 331–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benati, A., & Lee, J. F. (2010). Processing instruction and discourse. London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Benati, A., Lee, J. F., & McNulty, E. M. (2010). Exploring the effects of processing instruction on a discourse-level guided composition with the Spanish subjunctive after the adverb cuando. In Benati, A., & Lee, J. F. (Eds.), Processing instruction and discourse (pp. 97–147). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Berman, R., & Slobin, D. (1994) Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bever, T. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In Hayes, J. (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language (pp. 279–362). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Borer, H., & Wexler, K. (1987). The maturation of syntax. In Roeper, T. & Williams, E. (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 123–172). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buschman, T. J., & Miller, E. K. (2007). Top-down versus bottom-up control of attention in the prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices. Science, 315, 1860–1862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrasco, M. (2011). Visual attention: The past 25 years. Vision Research, 51, 1484–1525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culman, H., Henry, N., & VanPatten, B. (2009). The role of explicit information in instructed SLA: An On-line study with processing instruction and German accusative case inflections. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 42, 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabrowski, E., & Street, J. (2006). Individual differences in language attainment: Comprehension of passive sentences by native and non-native English speakers. Language Sciences, 28, 604–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doherty, S. (2012). Investigating the effects of controlled language on the reading and comprehension of machine translated texts: A mixed-methods approach using eye tracking (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Dublin, IRL: Dublin City University.Google Scholar
Doherty, S. (2018). Analyzing relationships and time-course data in eye tracking studies of translation processes and products. In Federici, F. & Walker, C. (Eds.), Eye tracking and multidisciplinary studies on translation (pp. 71–94). London, UK: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doherty, S. (2019). Eye tracking in translation . London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Doherty, S., & O’Brien, S. (2014). Assessing the usability of raw machine translated output: A user-centered study using eye tracking. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 30, 40–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doherty, S., O’Brien, S., & Carl, M. (2010). Eye tracking as an MT evaluation technique. Machine Translation, 24, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doherty, S., & Kruger, J. L. (2018). The development of eye tracking in empirical research on subtitling and captioning. In Dwyer, T., Perkins, C., Redmond, S., & Sita, J. (Eds.), Eye tracking the moving image (pp. 46–64). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Duchowski, A. T. (2007). Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice. London, UK: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Ellis, N., & Sagarra, N. (2010). The bounds of adult language acquisition: Blocking and learned attention. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, C., Bellugi, U., & Brown, R. (1963). Control of grammar in imitation, comprehension and production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hikima, N. (2011). The effects of processing instruction and re-exposure on interpretation discourse level tasks: The case of Japanese passive forms (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Greenwich, UK: University of Greenwich.Google Scholar
Hunt, A. R., & Kingstone, A. (2003). Covert and overt voluntary attention: Linked or independent? Cognitive Brain Research, 18, 102–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyams, N., Ntelitheos, D., & Manorohanta, C. (2006). Acquisition of the Malagasy voicing system: Implications for the adult grammar. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 24, 1049–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Indrarathne, B., & Kormos, J. (2017). Attentional processing of input in explicit and implicit conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39, 401–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irwin, D. E. (2004). Fixation location and fixation duration as indices of cognitive processing. In Henderson, J. M. & Ferreira, F. (Eds.), The interface of language, vision, and action: Eye movements and the visual world (pp. 105–133). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Issa, B., & Morgan-Short, K. (2018). Effects of external and internal attentional manipulations on second language grammar development: An eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1–29. doi: 10.1017/S027226311800013X.Google Scholar
Issa, B., Morgan-Short, K., Villegas, B., & Raney, G. (2015). An eye tracking study on the role of attention and its relationship with motivation. In Roberts, L., McManus, K., Vanek, N., & Trenkic, D. (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook, Vol. 15 (pp. 114–142). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jackson, C. N. (2008). Proficiency level and the interaction of lexical and morphosyntactic information during L2 sentence processing. Language Learning, 58, 875–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, C. N. (2010). The processing of subject-object ambiguities by English and Dutch L2 learners of German. In VanPatten, B. & Jegerski, J. (Eds.), Research in second language processing and parsing (pp. 207–230). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, K., & Kim, H. (2013). L1 Korean transfer in processing L2 English sentences. In Voss, E. (Ed.), Selected proceedings of the 2011 second language research forum (pp. 118–128). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Lee, J. F. (2014a). Processing instruction: Where research meets practice. In Benati, A., Laval, C., & Arche, M. (Eds.), The grammar dimension in instructed second language learning (pp. 58–81). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Lee, J. F. (2014b). The relationship between learning rate and learning outcome for processing instruction on the Spanish passive voice. In Benati, A., Laval, C., & Arche, M. (Eds.), The grammar dimension in instructed second language learning (pp. 147–163). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Lee, J. F. (2015). Processing instruction on the Spanish passive with transfer-of-training effects to anaphoric and cataphoric reference contexts. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 53, 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. F. (2017). Word order and linguistic factors in the second language processing of Spanish passive sentences. Hispania, 100, 649–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. F., & Benati, A. (2009). Research and perspectives on processing instruction. Berlin, GER: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. F., & Doherty, S. (forthcoming). The effects of implicit positive and negative feedback on processing subsequent target linguistic items: An eye tracking study of processing instruction. In Leow, R. P. (Ed.), The Routledge research handbook on classroom language learning. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lee, J. F., & McNulty, E. M. (2013). The effects of language background on the results of processing instruction on the Spanish subjunctive/indicative contrast after the adverb cuando. In Lee, J. F. & Benati, A. (Eds.), Individual differences in processing instruction (pp. 49–81). London, UK: Equinox.Google Scholar
Lee, J. F., & VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative language teaching happen (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Leow, R. P. (2015). Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: A student-centered approach. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lewondowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Brown, G. D. (2009). No temporal decay in verbal short-term memory. Trends in Cognitive Science, 13, 120–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Transfer appropriate processing as a model for classroom second language acquisition. In Han, Z. (Ed.), Understanding second language process (pp. 27–44). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Liversedge, S., Gilchrist, I. D., & Everling, S. (2011). The Oxford handbook of eye movements. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liversedge, S., Paterson, K., & Pickering, M. (1998). Eye movements and measures of reading time. In Underwood, G. (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 55–75). Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (2013). Visual working memory capacity: From psychophysics and neurobiology to individual differences. Trends in Cognitive Science, 17, 391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (Eds.) (1989). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2007). The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 940–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, A. (2012). The Tobii I-VT fixation filter - algorithm description. Tobii I-VT Fixation Filter. Retrieved from www.tobii.com/Global/Analysis/Training/WhitePapers/Tobii_WhitePaper_TobiiIVTFixationFilter.pdf.Google Scholar
Papadoulou, D. (2005). Reading-time studies of second language ambiguity resolution. Second Language Research, 21, 98–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pienneman, M. (1998). Language processing and language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pienneman, M. (2007). Processability theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 141–154). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pierce, A. (1992). The acquisition of passives in Spanish and the question of A-chain maturation. Language Acquisition, 2, 55–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qin, J. (2008). The effect of processing instruction and dictogloss tasks on the acquisition of the English passive voice. Language Teaching Research, 12, 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reichle, E., & Reingold, E. (2013). Neurophysiological constraints on the eye-mind link. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, L., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2013). Using eye tracking to investigate topics in L2 acquisition and L2 processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 213–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. (1966). Grammatical transformations and sentence comprehension in childhood and adulthood. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7, 876–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D., & Bever, T. (1982). Children use canonical sentence schemas: A crosslinguistic study of word order and inflections. Cognition, 78, 123–164.Google Scholar
Stromswold, K. (2006). Why children understand and misunderstand sentences: An eye tracking study of passive sentences. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report TR-85.Google Scholar
Uludag, O., & VanPatten, B. (2012). The comparative effects of processing instruction and dictogloss on the acquisition of the English passive by speakers of Turkish. IRAL, 50, 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research and commentary (pp. 5–31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2007). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 115–135). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., Collopy, E., Price, J., Borst, S., & Qualin, A. (2013). Explicit information, grammatical sensitivity, and the first-noun principle: A cross-linguistic study in processing instruction. Modern Language Journal, 97, 504–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Oikennon, S. (1996). Explanation versus structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 495–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction and the French causative: A replication. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 97–117). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, K. (2010). The acquisition of English passive constructions by Mandarin speakers: A developmental perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Sydney, AU: University of Western Sydney.Google Scholar
Wong, W., & Ito, K. (2017). The effects of processing instruction and traditional instruction on L2 online processing of the causative construction in French: An eye tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1–28. doi: 10.1017/S0272263117000274.Google Scholar
Wright, R. D., & Ward, L. M. (2008). Orienting of attention. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lee and Doherty Meekins supplementary material

Appendix

Download Lee and Doherty Meekins supplementary material(File)
File 301.1 KB