Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:05:25.317Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

LEXICAL AND SYNTACTIC CONGRUENCY IN L2 PREDICTIVE GENDER PROCESSING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2016

Holger Hopp  and
Natalia Lemmerth
Holger Hopp*
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Braunschweig
Natalia Lemmerth
Affiliation:
Universität Mannheim
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Holger Hopp, English Linguistics, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Bienroder Weg 80, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article investigates how lexical and syntactic differences in L1 and L2 grammatical gender affect L2 predictive gender processing. In a visual-world eye-tracking experiment, 24 L1 Russian adult learners and 15 native speakers of German were tested. Both Russian and German have three gender classes. Yet, they differ in lexical congruency, that is, whether a noun (“house”) is assigned to the same or a different gender class. Further, gender is syntactically realized on postnominal suffixes in Russian but on prenominal articles in German. For adjectives, both Russian and German mark gender on suffixes. In predictive gender processing, we find interactions of proficiency and congruency for gender-marked articles. Advanced L2 learners show nativelike gender prediction throughout. High-intermediate learners display asymmetries according to syntactic and lexical congruency. Predictive gender processing obtains for all nouns in the (syntactically congruent) adjective condition, yet only for lexically congruent nouns in the (syntactically incongruent) article condition.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 171 - 199
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.)

Footnotes

We would like to thank the audiences at ISBPAC 2016 in Kaiserslautern and BUCLD 41 for helpful comments. Further, we are grateful to three anonymous reviewers and the editors of SSLA for providing constructive criticism which significantly helped us in improving the paper. All errors remain our responsibility.

References

REFERENCES

Alemán Bañón, J., Fiorentino, R., & Gabriele, A. (2014). Morphosyntactic processing in advanced second language (L2) learners: An event-related potential investigation of the effects of L1-L2 similarity and structural distance. Second Language Research, 30, 275–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allopenna, P. D., Magnuson, J. S., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 419–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, D. J., Gann, T. M., & Pierce, R. S. (2011). Anticipatory baseline effects and information integration in visual world studies. Acta Psychologica, 137, 201–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. (2013). Random-effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bordag, D., & Pechmann, T. (2007). Factors influencing L2 gender processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carstens, V. (2000). Concord in minimalist theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 319–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, G. G. (1991). Gender. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COSMAS II (2008). Corpus Search, Management and Analysis System. Retrieved 20 March 2015 from http://www.ids-mannheim.de/cosmas2.Google Scholar
Cubberley, P. (2002). Russian: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dekydtspotter, L., Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (2006). The comparative fallacy in L2 processing research. In Grantham O’Brien, M., Shea, C., & Archibald, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th generative approaches to second language acquisition conference (GASLA 2006): The Banff conference (pp. 33–40). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 175–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussias, P. E., Valdés Kroff, J. R., Guzzardo Tamargo, R. E., & Gerfen, C. (2013). When gender and looking go hand in hand: Grammatical gender processing in L2 Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 353–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucart, A., & Frenck-Mestre, C. (2011). Grammatical gender processing in L2: Electrophysiological evidence of the effect of L1–L2 syntactic similarity. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14, 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucart, A., Martin, C. D., Moreno, E. M., & Costa, A. (2014). Can bilinguals see it coming? Word anticipation in L2 sentence reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1461–1469.Google ScholarPubMed
Franceschina, F. (2005). Fossilized second language grammars: The acquisition of grammatical gender. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, J., Vigliocco, G., Antón-Méndez, I., Collina, S., & Frauenfelder, U. (2008). The interplay of syntax and form in sentence production: A cross-linguistic study of form effects on agreement. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 329–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabriele, A., Fiorentino, R., & Alemán Bañón, J. (2013). Examining second language development using event-related potentials: A cross-sectional study on the processing of gender and number agreement. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 3, 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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
Goethe Institut (2010). German placement test. Retrieved 21 July 2015 from http://www.goethe.de/cgi-bin/einstufungstest/einstufungstest.pl.Google Scholar
Grüter, T., Lew-Williams, C., & Fernald, A. (2012). Grammatical gender in L2: A production or a real-time processing problem? Second Language Research, 28, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grüter, T., Rohde, H., & Schafer, A. J. (2016). Coreference and discourse coherence in L2: The roles of grammatical aspect and referential form. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism. doi: 10.1075/lab.15011.gru.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Casillas, G. (2008). Explaining frequency of verb morphology in early L2 speech. Lingua, 118, 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2010). Ultimate attainment in L2 inflectional morphology: Performance similarities between non-native and native speakers. Lingua, 120, 901–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2013). Grammatical gender in adult L2 acquisition: Relations between lexical and syntactic variability. Second Language Research, 29, 33–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2015). Semantics and morphosyntax in L2 predictive sentence processing. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 53, 277–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2016). Learning (not) to predict: Grammatical gender agreement in non-native processing. Second Language Research, 32, 277–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huettig, F., Rommers, J., & Meyer, A. S. (2011). Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: A review and critical evaluation. Acta Psychologica, 137, 151–171.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ionin, T., Ko, H., & Wexler, K. (2004). Article semantics in L2 acquisition: The role of specificity. Language Acquisition, 12, 3–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaan, E. (2014). Predictive sentence processing in L2 and L1: What is different? Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4, 257–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaan, E., Dallas, A. C., & Wijnen, F. (2010). Syntactic predictions in second-language sentence processing. In Zwart, J.-W. & de Vries, M. (Eds.), Structure preserved. Festschrift in the honor of Jan Koster (pp. 207–213). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klassen, R. (2016). The representation of asymmetric grammatical gender systems in the bilingual mental lexicon. Probus, 28(1), 9–28.Google Scholar
Köpcke, M., & Zubin, D. (1996). Prinzipien für die Genuszuweisung im Deutschen. In Lang, E. & Zifonun, G. (Eds.), Deutsch typologisch. Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Sprache 1995 (pp. 473–491). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kuperberg, G., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016). What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 32–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1983). Event-related brain potentials to grammatical errors and semantic anomalies. Memory and Cognition, 11, 539–550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lardiere, D. (2000). Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition. In Archibald, J. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 102–129). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. (2009). Some thoughts on a contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 325–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lemhöfer, K., Schriefers, H., & Indefrey, P. (2014). Idiosyncratic grammars: Syntactic processing in second language comprehensions uses subjective feature representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26, 1428–1444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., Spalek, K., & Schriefers, H. (2008). Cross-language effects of grammatical gender in bilingual word recognition and production. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 312–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lew-Williams, C. & Fernald, A. (2010). Real-time processing of gender-marked es by native and non-native Spanish speakers. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 447–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loerts, H. (2012). Uncommon gender: Eyes and brains, native and second language learners and grammatical gender (Doctoral dissertation). Rijksuniversiteit Groningen: Grodil Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2008). A unified model. In Robinson, P. & Ellis, N. (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 341–372). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Martin, C. D., Thierry, G., Kuipers, J-R., Boutonnet, B., Foucart, A., & Costa, A. (2013). Bilinguals reading in their second language do not predict upcoming words as native readers do. Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 574–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, J., Tanner, D., Pitkänen, I., Frenck-Mestre, C., Inoue, K., & Valentine, G. (2010). Brain potentials reveal discrete stages of L2 grammatical learning. Language Learning, 60, 123–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meulman, N., Stowe, L. A., Sprenger, S. A., Bresser, M., & Schmid, M. S. (2014). An ERP study on L2 syntax processing: When do learners fail? Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1072. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morales, L., Paolieri, D., Dussias, P. E., Valdés Kroff, J. R., & Gerfen, C. (2015). The gender congruency effect during bilingual spoken-word recognition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 294–310. doi: 10.1017/S1366728915000176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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 Scholar
Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osterhout, L., McLaughlin, J., Pitkanen, I., Frenck-Mestre, C., & Molinaro, N. (2006). Novice learners, longitudinal designs, and event-related potentials: A paradigm for exploring the neurocognition of second-language processing. Language Learning, 56, 199–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paolieri, D., Cubelli, R., Macizo, P., Bajo, M. T., Lotto, L., & Job, R. (2010a). Grammatical gender processing in Italian and Spanish bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 1631–1645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paolieri, D., Lotto, L., Morales, L., Bajo, M. T., Cubelli, R., & Job, R. (2010b). Grammatical gender processing in Romance languages: Evidence from bare noun production in Italian and Spanish. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 335–347. doi: 10.1080/09541440902916803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, C., & Ehrenhofer, L. (2015). The role of language processing in language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5, 409–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabourin, L., & Stowe, L. A. (2008). Second language processing: When are first and second languages processed similarly? Second Language Research, 24, 397–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salamoura, A., & Williams, J. N. (2007). The representation of grammatical gender in the bilingual lexicon: Evidence from Greek and German. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 257–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schönenberger, M. (2014). Article use in L2 English by L1 Russian and L1 German speakers. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 33, 77–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the fulltransfer/fullaccess model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekerina, I. (2015). Is grammatical agreement predictive in heritage language bilingualism? Paper presented at the workshop “Grammar in the Mental Lexicon,” University of Potsdam, August 1.Google 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, 13–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, D., McLaughlin, J., Herschensohn, J., & Osterhout, L. (2013). Individual differences reveal stages of L2 grammatical acquisition: ERP evidence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 367–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tokowicz, N., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 173–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, I. M., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007). The Interpretability Hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23, 215–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, A., & Paris, G. (2004). The origin of the linguistic gender effect in spoken-word recognition: Evidence from non-native listening. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 1446–1451.Google Scholar