Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T02:18:23.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applying the Competition Model to bilingualism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 December 2010

Brian Macwhinney
Brian Macwhinney*
Affiliation:
Carnegie-Mellon University
*
Brian MacWhinney, Department of Psychology, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This special issue brings together a set of four papers devoted to the experimental study of sentence processing by bilinguals in their second language. The basic finding reported in this research is that, in many cases, learners transfer their LI sentence processing strategies onto sentence processing in L2. Moreover, the influence of this transfer can be detected in weakened form even in fluent bilinguals who have spoken L2 for many years. In effect, these studies report on a kind of comprehension analog to “foreign accent” that first came to light during work on sentence comprehension within the framework of the Competition Model of Bates and MacWhinney (1982).

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 1987 , pp. 315 - 327
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

REFERENCES

Ammon, M. S., & Slobin, D. I. (1979). A cross-linguistic study of the processing of causative sentences. Cognition, 7, 3–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersen, H. (1979). Morphological change: Towards a typology. In Fisiak, J. (Ed.), Historical morphology. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1981). Second language acquisition from a functionalist perspective: Pragmatic, semantic and perceptual strategies. In Winitz, H. (Ed.), Annals of the New York Academy of Science Conference on Native and Foreign Language Acquisition. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar. In Wanner, E. & Gleitman, L. (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Language universals, individual variation, and the competition model. In MacWhinney, B. (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bates, E., McNew, S., MacWhinney, B., Devescovi, A., & Smith, S. (1982). Functional constraints on sentence processing: A cross-linguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245–299.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braine, M. D. S. (1971). The acquisition of language in infant and child. In Reed, C. (Ed.), The learning of language. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Braine, M. D. S. (1976). Children's first word combinations. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 41, Whole No. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braine, M. D. S. (1987). What is learned in acquiring word classes: A step toward an acquisition theory. In MacWhinney, B. (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychology experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Chen, Matthew Y., & Wang, William S-Y. (1975). Sound change: actuation and implementation. Language, 51, 255–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. (1983). The modularity of mind: An essay on faculty psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, M. (1980). Levels of processing in sentence production. In Butterworth, B. (Ed.), Language Production: Vol. 1. Speech and talk. London: Academic.Google Scholar
Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Givon, T. (1979). From discourse to syntax: Grammar as a processing strategy. In Givon, T. (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Discourse and syntax. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Holden, K. (1976). Assimilation rates of borrowings and phonological productivity. Language, 52, 131–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kail, M. (in press). Cue validity, cue cost and processing types in French sentence comprehension. In MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, J., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Understanding the relation between comprehension and production. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Psycholinguistic models of production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Kilborn, K. (1987). Sentence processing in bilinguals. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Kilborn, K., & Ito, T. (in press). Sentence processing in Japanese-English and Dutch-English bilinguals. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (in press). The learner's problem of arranging words. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1982). Names for things. Cambridge: MIT press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1975). Pragmatic patterns in child syntax. Stanford Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 10, 153–165.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1977). Starting points. Language, 53, 152–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1978). The acquisition of morphophonology. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 43, Whole no. 1.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1982). Basic syntactic processes. In Kuczaj, S. (Ed.), Language acquisition: Vol. 1. Syntax and semantics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1984). Where do categories come from? In Sophian, C. (Ed.), Child categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1986). The UNIBET: A proposal for phonological notation. Transcript Analysis, 3, 90–92.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1987). The Competition Model. In MacWhinney, B. (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Anderson, J. (1986). The acquisition of grammar. In Gopnik, M. & Gopnik, I. (Eds.), Studies in cognitive science. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (1978). Sentential devices for conveying givenness and newness: A cross-cultural developmental study. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 539–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E., & Kliegl, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 127–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Pléh, Cs., & Bates, E. (1985). The development of sentence comprehension in Hungarian. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 178–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maratsos, M., & Chalkley, M. (1980). The internal language of children's syntax: The ontogenesis and representation of syntactic categories. In Nelson, K. (Ed.), Children's language: Volume 2. New York: Gardner.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. (August 1984). Semantic and syntactic processing cues used by first and second language learners of English, Dutch, and German. Doctoral dissertation, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (1986). The development of sentence comprehension strategies in English and Dutch. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 41, 317–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, J., & MacWhinney, B. (in press). Levels of learning: a comparison of concept formation and language acquisition.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1987). The bootstrapping problem in language acquisition. In MacWhinney, B. (Ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1987). On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Unpublished paper, M.I.T.Google Scholar
Posner, M., & Keele, S. (1968). On the genesis of abstract ideas. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 353–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rumelhart, D., Hinton, G., & Williams, R. (1986). Learning internal representations by back propagation. In Rumelhart, D. & McClelland, J., (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing, Vol. 1: Foundations. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1973). Cognitive prerequisites for development of grammar. In C. A. Ferguson & D. I. Slobin (Eds.), Studies of child language development.Google Scholar
Sridhar, S. (in press). Cognitive structures in language production: a cross-linguistic study. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E., (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of language processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stemberger, J., & MacWhinney, B. (1986a). Form-oriented inflection errors in language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 329–354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stemberger, J., & MacWhinney, B. (1986b). Frequency and the lexical storage of regularly inflected forms. Memory and Cognition, 14, 17–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taraban, R., McDonald, J., & MacWhinney, B. (in press). Category learning in a connectionist model: Learning to decline the German definite article. In Corrigan, R. (Ed.), Categorization. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wulfeck, B., Juarez, L., Bates, E., & Kilborn, K. (1986). Sentence interpretation strategies in healthy and aphasie bilingual adults. In Vaid, J. (Ed.), Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguistics and neurological perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar