Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T14:41:01.625Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cue-Weighting mechanism and bilingualism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2016

ANNIE TREMBLAY  and
CAITLIN E. COUGHLIN
ANNIE TREMBLAY*
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
CAITLIN E. COUGHLIN
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
*
Address for correspondence: Annie Tremblay, Department of Linguistics, University of Kansas, 1541 Lilac Lane, Blake Hall Rm 427, Lawrence, KS 66045[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cunnings’ proposed theory can explain why second language (L2) learners have difficulty resolving certain types of dependencies (i.e., backward-looking dependencies) but not others (i.e., forward-looking dependencies). However, his theory should be more explicit about the mechanism underlying late L2 learners’ and native speakers’ different weightings of retrieval cues, and research framed within his theory should strive to tease apart age-of-acquisition effects from bilingualism effects.

Type
Peer Commentaries
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , August 2017 , pp. 708 - 709
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.)

References

Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.Google Scholar
Cunnings, I. (2016). Parsing and working memory in bilingual sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, doi:10.1017/S1366728916000675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, A. L., Baldwin, K., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2000). Effects of training on attention to acoustic cues. Perception and Psychophysics, 62, 1668–1680.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Francis, A. L., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2002). Selective attention and the acquisition of new phonetic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 349–366.Google ScholarPubMed
Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2006). Cue weighting in auditory categorization: Implications for first and second language acquisition. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 3059–3071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopp, H. (2014). Working memory effects in the L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses. Language Acquisition, 21, 250–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2015). Individual differences in the second language processing of object-subject ambiguities. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 129–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingvalson, E. M., Holt, L. L., & McClelland, J. L. (2011). Can native Japanese listeners learn to differentiate /r-l/ on the basis of F3 onset frequency? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 255–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingvalson, E. M., McClelland, J. L., & Holt, L. L. (2011). Predicting Native English-Like Performance by Native Japanese Speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 39, 571–584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iverson, P., Kuhl, P. K., Akahane-Yamada, R., Diesch, E., Tohkura, Y. I., Kettermann, A., & Siebert, C. (2003). A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes. Cognition, 87, B47–B57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kwon, N., Cunnings, I., & Lesmana, M. (2013). Time course of reference resolution by early and late bilinguals. Poster presented at AMLAP, Aix-Marseille Université, France.Google Scholar
Repp, B. H. (1982). Phonetic trading relations and context effects: New evidence for a phonetic mode of perception. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 81–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed