Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T22:57:32.210Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Processing of regular and irregular past tense morphology in highly proficient second language learners of English: A self-paced reading study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2012

CHRISTOS PLIATSIKAS  and
THEODOROS MARINIS
CHRISTOS PLIATSIKAS
Affiliation:
University of Reading
THEODOROS MARINIS*
Affiliation:
University of Reading
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Theodoros Marinis, Department of Clinical Language Studies, University of Reading, Reading, Berkshire RG6 6AL, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dual-system models suggest that English past tense morphology involves two processing routes: rule application for regular verbs and memory retrieval for irregular verbs. In second language (L2) processing research, Ullman suggested that both verb types are retrieved from memory, but more recently Clahsen and Felser and Ullman argued that past tense rule application can be automatized with experience by L2 learners. To address this controversy, we tested highly proficient Greek–English learners with naturalistic or classroom L2 exposure compared to native English speakers in a self-paced reading task involving past tense forms embedded in plausible sentences. Our results suggest that, irrespective to the type of exposure, proficient L2 learners of extended L2 exposure apply rule-based processing.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 34 , Issue 5 , September 2013 , pp. 943 - 970
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

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

Alegre, M., & Gordon, P. (1999). Frequency effects and the representational status of regular inflections. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, M., Badecker, W., & Osterhout, L. (2003). Morphological analysis in sentence processing: An ERP study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 405–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (Version 2.5). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., et al. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beretta, A., Campbell, C., Carr, T. H., Huang, J., Schmitt, L. M., Christianson, K., et al. (2003). An ER-fMRI investigation of morphological inflection in German reveals that the brain makes a distinction between regular and irregular forms. Brain and Language, 85, 67–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E. (1997). The structure of age: In search of barriers to second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 13, 116–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2009). Processing syntax and morphology: A neurocognitive perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, Y. G., & Hakuta, K. (2004). Bilingualism and second language acquisition. In Bathia, T. K. & Ritchie, W. C. (Eds.), The hanbook of bilingualism (pp. 114–144). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L., & Slobin, D. I. (1982). Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language, 58, 265–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chwilla, D. J., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1995). The N400 as a function of the level of processing. Psychophysiology, 32, 274–285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clahsen, H., Eisenbeiss, S., Hadler, M., & Sonnenstuhl, I. (2001). The mental representation of inflected words: An experimental study of adjectives and verbs in German. Language, 77, 510–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Diego Balaguer, R., Sebastian-Galles, N., Diaz, B., & Rodriguez-Fornells, A. (2005). Morphological processing in early bilinguals: An ERP study of regular and irregular verb processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 25, 312–327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diependaele, K., Duñabeitia, J. A., Morris, J., & Keuleers, E. (2011). Fast morphological effects in first and second language word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 344–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussias, P. E. (2003). Syntactic ambiguity resolution in L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 529–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussias, P. E., & Sagarra, N. (2007). The effect of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E. (2009). Give input a chance. Input Matters in SLA, 175–190.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Liu, S. (2001). The effect of experience on adults’ acquisition of a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 527–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2002). An on-line look at sentence processing in the second language. In Altarriba, J. & Herridia, R. (Eds.), Bilingual sentence processing (pp. 218–236). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 78–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frost, R., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. I. (2000). Decomposing morphologically complex words in a nonlinear morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26, 751–765.Google Scholar
Frost, R., Deutsch, A., Gilboa, O., Tannenbaum, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2000). Morphological priming: Dissociation of phonological, semantic, and morphological factors. Memory & Cognition, 28, 1277–1288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gillon-Dowens, M., Vergara, M., Barber, H. A., & Carreiras, M. (2010). Morphosyntactic processing in late second-language learners. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 1870–1887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gor, K. (2010). Beyond the obvious: Do second language learners process inflectional morphology? Language Learning, 60, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gor, K., & Cook, S. (2010). Nonnative processing of verbal morphology: In search of regularity. Language Learning, 60, 88–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gor, K., & Long, M. H. (2009). Input and second language processing. Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, 445–472.Google Scholar
Grainger, J., Muneaux, M., Farioli, F., & Ziegler, J. C. (2005). Effects of phonological and orthographic neighbourhood density interact in visual word recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 58, 981–998.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grosjean, F. (1998). Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual issues. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 131–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahne, A. (2001). What's different in second-language processing? Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 251–266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahne, A., Mueller, J. L., & Clahsen, H. (2006). Morphological processing in a second language: Behavioral and event-related brain potential evidence for storage and decomposition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartshorne, J. K., & Ullman, M. T. (2006). Why girls say “holded” more than boys. Developmental Science, 9, 21–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopp, H. (2010). Ultimate attainment in L2 inflection: Performance similarities between non-native and native speakers. Lingua, 120, 901–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 228–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkici, B. (2005). Words and rules in L2 processing: An analysis of the dual-mechanism model. Unpublished manuscript. Middle East Technical University, Ankara.Google Scholar
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 463–470.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621–647.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehtonen, M., Niska, H., Wande, E., Niemi, J., & Laine, M. (2006). Recognition of inflected words in a morphologically limited language: Frequency effects in monolinguals and bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 121–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longworth, C. E., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., Randall, B., & Tyler, L. K. (2005). Getting to the meaning of the regular past tense: Evidence from neuropsychology. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1087–1097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lukacs, Á. & Pléh, C. (1999). Hungarian cross-modal priming and treatment of nonsense words supports the dual-process hypothesis. Behavioural and Brain Science, 2, 1030–1031.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, P. D., Noels, K. A., & Clément, R. (1997). Biases in self-ratings of second language proficiency: The role of language anxiety. Language Learning, 47, 265–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, G. F., Brinkmann, U., Clahsen, H., Wiese, R., & Pinker, S. (1995). German inflection: The exception that proves the rule. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 189–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marinis, T. (2003). Psycholinguistic techniques in second language acquisition research. Second Language Research, 19, 144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 53–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tyler, L. K. (1997). Dissociating types of mental computation. Nature, 387, 592–594.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McClelland, J. L., & Patterson, K. (2002). Rules or connections in past-tense inflections: What does the evidence rule out? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 465–472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meunier, F., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2000). Regularity and irregularity in French inflectional morphology. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cogntive Science Society, Mahwah, NJ.Google Scholar
Miozzo, M. (2003). On the processing of regular and irregular forms of verbs and nouns: Evidence from neuropsychology. Cognition, 87, 101–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan Short, K., Sanz, C., Steinhauer, K., & Ullman, M. T. (2010). Second language acquisition of gender agreement in explicit and implicit training conditions: An event related potential study. Language learning, 60, 154–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Münte, T. F., Say, T., Clahsen, H., Schiltz, K., & Kutas, M. (1999). Decomposition of morphologically complex words in English: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research, 7, 241–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muñoz, C. (2008). Symmetries and asymmetries of age effects in naturalistic and instructed L2 learning. Applied Linguistics, 29, 578–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neubauer, K., & Clahsen, H. (2009). Decomposition of inflected words in a second language: An experimental study of German participles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 403–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, A. J., Ullman, M. T., Pancheva, R., Waligura, D. L., & Neville, H. J. (2007). An ERP study of regular and irregular English past tense inflection. NeuroImage, 34, 435–445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Orsolini, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1997). Universals in morphological representation: Evidence from Italian. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penke, M., Weyerts, H., Gross, M., Zander, E., Münte, T. F., & Clahsen, H. (1997). How the brain processes complex words: An event-related potential study of German verb inflections. Cognitive Brain Research, 6, 37–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules: The ingredients of grammar. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1988). On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed model of language acquisition. Cognition, 28, 73–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 456–463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Portin, M., Lehtonen, M., & Laine, M. (2007). Processing of inflected nouns in late bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 135–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prado, E. L., & Ullman, M. T. (2009). Can imageability help us draw the line between storage and composition? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 849.Google ScholarPubMed
Rastle, K., Davis, M., & New, B. (2004). The broth in my brother's brothel: Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1090–1098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2003). Reading morphologically complex words. In Kinoshita, S. & Lupker, S. J. (Eds.), Masked priming: The state of the art. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Reid, A., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2002). Regularity and irregularity in an inflectionally complex language: Evidence from Polish. Paper presented at the 23rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Mahwah, NJ.Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Clahsen, H., Lleó, C., Zaake, W., & Münte, T. F. (2001). Event-related brain responses to morphological violations in Catalan. Cognitive Brain Research, 11, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rossi, S., Gugler, M. F., Friederici, A. D., & Hahne, A. (2006). The impact of proficiency on syntactic second-language processing of German and Italian: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 2030–2048.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). On learning the past tense of English verbs. In McClelland, J. L. & Rumelhart, D. E. (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructures of cognition (Vol. 2, pp. 216–271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002a). E-prime reference guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002b). E-prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
Silva, R., & Clahsen, H. (2008). Morphologically complex words in L1 and L2 processing: Evidence from masked priming experiments in English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonnenstuhl, I., Eisenbeiss, S., & Clahsen, H. (1999). Morphological priming in the German mental lexicon. Cognition, 72, 203–236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tsapkini, K., Jarema, G., & Kehayia, E. (2002). Regularity revisited: Evidence from lexical access of verbs and nouns in Greek. Brain and Language, 81, 103–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tyler, L. K., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Stamatakis, E. A. (2005). Differentiating lexical form, meaning, and structure in the neural language system. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 8375–8380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tyler, L. K., Stamatakis, E. A., Post, B., Randall, B., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2005). Temporal and frontal systems in speech comprehension: An fMRI study of past tense processing. Neuropsychologia, 43, 1963–1974.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
UCLES. (2001). Quick Placement Test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2001a). The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2001b). A neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 717–726.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ullman, M. T. (2004). Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92, 231–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ullman, M. T., Pancheva, R., Love, T., Yee, E., Swinney, D., & Hickok, G. (2005). Neural correlates of lexicon and grammar: Evidence from the production, reading, and judgment of inflection in aphasia. Brain and Language, 93, 185–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Veríssimo, J., & Clahsen, H. (2009). Morphological priming by itself: A study of Portuguese conjugations. Cognition, 112, 187–194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed