Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T20:31:47.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The storage and composition of inflected forms in adult-learned second language: A study of the influence of length of residence, age of arrival, sex, and other factors*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2012

LAURA BABCOCK ,
JOHN C. STOWE ,
CHRISTOPHER J. MALOOF ,
CLAUDIA BROVETTO  and
MICHAEL T. ULLMAN
LAURA BABCOCK
Affiliation:
Brain and Language Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA & Cognitive Neuroscience Sector, SISSA (Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati), Trieste, Italy
JOHN C. STOWE
Affiliation:
Brain and Language Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA
CHRISTOPHER J. MALOOF
Affiliation:
Brain and Language Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA
CLAUDIA BROVETTO
Affiliation:
Brain and Language Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA & ANEP (Administración Nacional de Educación Pública), Montevideo, Uruguay
MICHAEL T. ULLMAN*
Affiliation:
Brain and Language Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Michael Ullman, Brain and Language Lab, Department of Neuroscience, Georgetown University, Box 571464, Washington, DC 20057-1464, USA[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It remains unclear whether adult-learned second language (L2) depends on similar or different neurocognitive mechanisms as those involved in first language (L1). We examined whether English past tense forms are computed similarly or differently by L1 and L2 English speakers, and what factors might affect this: regularity (regular vs. irregular verbs), length of L2 exposure (length of residence), age of L2 acquisition (age of arrival), L2 learners’ native language (Chinese vs. Spanish), and sex (male vs. female). Past tense frequency effects were used to examine the type of computation (composition vs. storage/retrieval). The results suggest that irregular past tenses are always stored. Regular past tenses, however, are either composed or stored, as a function of various factors: both sexes store regulars in L2, but only females in L1; greater lengths of residence lead to less dependence on storage, but only in females; higher adult ages of arrival lead to more reliance on storage. The findings suggest that inflected forms can rely on either the same or different mechanisms in L2 as they do in L1, and that this varies as a function of multiple interacting factors.

Keywords

late-learned second language (L2)length of residence (LoR)age of arrival (AoA)declarative memoryprocedural memory
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , October 2012 , pp. 820 - 840
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.)

Footnotes

*

Support for this project was provided to MTU by NSF SBR-9905273, NIH R01 MH58189, and NIH R01 HD049347, and to MTU and CB by NSF BCS 0001961. We would like to thank Elizabeth Prado and Matthew Walenski for helpful comments. We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their input and suggestions.

References

Abutalebi, J. (2008). Neural aspects of second language representation and language control. Acta Psychologica, 128 (3), 466–478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alegre, M., & Gordon, P. (1999). Frequency effects and the representational status of regular inflections. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, H. R. (2004). Statistics in psycholinguistics: A critique of some current gold standards. Mental Lexicon Working Papers, 1 (1), 1–47.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., & Moscoso del Prado Martin, F. (2005). Semantic density and past-tense formation in three Germanic languages. Language, 81 (3), 666–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basnight-Brown, D. M., Chen, L., Hua, S., Kostic, A., & Feldman, L. B. (2007). Monolingual and bilingual recognition of regular and irregular English verbs: Sensitivity to form similarity varies with first language experience. Journal of Memory and Language, 57 (1), 65–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck, M.-L. (1997). Regular verbs, past tense and frequency: Tracking down a potential source of NS/NNS competence differences. Second Language Research, 13 (2), 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, H., Lambon Ralph, M. A., Seidenberg, M. S., McClelland, J. L., & Patterson, K. (2003). Deficits in phonology and past tense morphology: What's the connection? Journal of Memory and Language, 48 (3), 502–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D., & Flege, J. E. (2001). Regular–irregular dissociations in the acquisition of English as a second language. In BUCLD 25: Proceedings of the 25th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 123–132. Boston, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D., & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constaints in second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In Gass, S. M. & Schacter, J. (eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition, pp. 41–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowden, H. W., Gelfand, M. P., Sanz, C., & Ullman, M. T. (2010). Verbal inflectional morphology in L1 and L2 Spanish: A frequency effects study examining storage vs. composition. Language Learning, 60 (1), 44–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caplan, D., Rochon, E., & Waters, G. S. (1992). Articulatory and phonological determinants of word length effects in span tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45 (2), 177–192.Google ScholarPubMed
Chu, S.-c. R. (1982). Chinese grammar and English grammar: A comparative study. Taipei: Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Church, K. (1988). A stochastic parts program and noun phrase parser for unrestricted text. Presented at the Second Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, Austin, TX.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006a). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27 (1), 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006b). How native-like is non-native language proceessing? Trends in Cognitive Science, 10 (12), 564–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., Felser, C., Neubauer, K., Sato, M., & Silva, R. (2010). Morphological structure in native and nonnative language processing. Language Learning, 60 (1), 21–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daugherty, K., & Seidenberg, M. (1992). Rules or connections? The past tense revisited. Presented at the Milwaukee Rules Conference, Milwaukee, WI.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. J., & Long, M. H. (2005). The handbook of second language acquisition. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27 (2), 305–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., Kostic, A., Basnight-Brown, D. M., Durdevic, D. F., & Pastizzo, M. J. (2010). Morphological facilitation for regular and irregular verb formations in native and non-native speakers: Little evidence for two distinct mechanisms. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13 (2), 119–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fellbaum, C. E. (1998). Wordnet: An electronic database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 78–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, N., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2012). The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gor, K. (2010). Introduction. Beyond the obvious: Do second language learners process inflectional morphology? Language Learning, 60 (1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. W. (2003). Neural basis of the lexicon and the grammar in L2 acquisition. In Hout, R. v., Hulk, A., Kuiken, F. & Towell, R. (eds.), The interface between syntax and the lexicon in second language acquisition, pp. 197–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henne, H., Rongen, O. B., & Hansen, L. J. (1977). A handbook on Chinese language structure. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Hernandez, A. E., & Li, P. (2007). Age of acquisition: Its neural and computational mechanisms. Psychological Bulletin, 133 (4), 638–650.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Indefrey, P. (2006). A meta-analysis of hemodynamic studies on first and second language processing: Which suggested differences can we trust and what do they mean? Language Learning, 56 (Suppl. 1), 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joanisse, M. F., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1999). Impairments in verb morphology after brain injury: A connectionist model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 96 (13), 7592–7597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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 (1), 60–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kessler, B., Treiman, R., & Mullennix, J. (2002). Phonetic biases in Voice Key Response Time Measurements. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 145–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotz, S. A. (2009). A critical review of ERP and fMRI evidence on L2 syntactic processing. Brain & Language, 109, 68–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, J. F., & de Groot, A. M. B. (eds.) (2005). Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lalleman, J. A., van Santen, A. J., & van Heuven, V. J. (1997). L2 processing of Dutch regular and irregular verbs. Institut voor Togepaste Linguistik, 115/116, 1–26.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22 (1), 1–38; discussion 38–75.Google ScholarPubMed
Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Marcus, G. F., Pinker, S., Ullman, M. T., Hollander, M., Rosen, T. J., & Xu, F. (1992). Overregularization in language acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 57 (4) (Serial No. 228), 1–165.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 (11), 465–472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan-Short, K., Finger, I., Grey, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2012). Second language processing shows increased native-like neural responses after months of no exposure. PLoS ONE, 7 (3), e32974.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 (1), 154–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan-Short, K., Steinhauer, K., Sanz, C., & Ullman, M. T. (2012). Explicit and implicit second language training differentially affect the achievement of native-like brain activation patterns. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00119. Published online by MIT Press, August 23, 2011. [To be published in print, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24 (4).]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan-Short, K., & Ullman, M. T. (2012). The neurocognition of second language. In Gass & Mackey (eds.), pp. 282–299.Google 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 (3), 403–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9 (1), 97–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, M. (1994). Neurolinguistic aspects of implicit and explicit memory: Implications for bilingualism and SLA. In Ellis, N. C. (ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages, pp. 393–419. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, M. (2009). Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages (vol. 40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6 (11), 456–463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plunkett, K., & Marchman, V. (1993). From rote learning to system building: Acquiring verb morphology in children and connectionist nets. Cognition, 48, 21–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Portin, M., Lehtonen, M., Harrer, G., Wande, E., Niemi, J., & Laine, M. (2008). L1 effects on the processing of inflected nouns in L2. Acta Psychologica, 128 (3), 452–465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prado, E., & Ullman, M. T. (2009). Can imageability help us draw the line between storage and composition? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Language, Memory, and Cognition, 35 (4), 849–866.Google ScholarPubMed
Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In McClelland, J. L., Rumelhart, D. E. & PDP Research Group (eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructures of cognition (vol. 2): Psychological and biological models, pp. 272–326. Cambridge, MA: Bradford/MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, G. L., & Roberts, T. P. L. (2009). Second language research using magnetoencephalography: A review. Second Language Research, 25 (1), 135–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. (1992). Connectionism without tears. In Davis, S. (ed.), Connectionism: Theory and practice, pp. 84–137. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva, R. (2009). Morphological processing in a second language: Evidence from psycholinguistic experiments. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Essex.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 (2), 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinhauer, K., White, E. J., & Drury, J. E. (2009). Temporal dynamics of late second language acquisition: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Second Language Research, 25 (1), 13–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, G. (1999). Age at immigration and second language proficiency among foreign-born adults. Language in Society, 28, 555–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolentino, L. C., & Tokowicz, N. (2011). Across languages, space, and time: A review of the role of cross-language similarity in L2 (morpho)syntactic processing as revealed by fMRI and ERP methods. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 91–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, A. (2011). Proficiency assessment standards in second language acquisition research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33 (3), 339–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (1999). Acceptability ratings of regular and irregular past tense forms: Evidence for a dual-system model of language from word frequency and phonological neighbourhood effects. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14 (1), 47–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2001). The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4 (1), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2004). Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92 (1–2), 231–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ullman, M. T. (2005). A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In Sanz, C. (ed.), Mind and context in adult second language qcquisition: Methods, theory and practice, pp. 141–178. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2006). The declarative/procedural model and the shallow-structure hypothesis. Journal of Applied Psycholinguistics, 27 (1), 97–105.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2008). The role of memory systems in disorders of language. In Stemmer, B. & Whitaker, H. A. (eds.), Handbook of the neuroscience of language, pp. 189–198. Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2012). The declarative/procedural model. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T., Miranda, R. A., & Travers, M. L. (2008). Sex differences in the neurocognition of language. In Becker, J. B., Berkley, K. J., Geary, N., Hampson, E., Herman, J. & Young, E. (eds.), Sex on the brain: From genes to behavior, pp. 291–309. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
van der Lely, H. K. J., & Ullman, M. T. (2001). Past tense morphology in specifically language impaired and normally developing children. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16 (2), 177–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walenski, M., Mostofsky, S. H., & Ullman, M. T. (2007). Speeded processing of grammar and tool knowledge in Tourette's syndrome. Neuropsychologia, 45, 2447–2460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walenski, M., Weickert, T. W., Maloof, C. J., & Ullman, M. T. (2010). Grammatical processing in schizophrenia: Evidence from morphology. Neuropsychologia, 48, 262–269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woollams, A. M., Joanisse, M., & Patterson, K. (2009). Past-tense generation from form versus meaning: Behavioural data and simulation evidence. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 55–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed