Hostname: page-component-86c4fcdb79-7kq59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-02-05T00:32:06.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The syntax–discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2009

HOLGER HOPP
HOLGER HOPP*
Affiliation:
University of Mannheim
*
Address for correspondence: English Linguistics, University of Mannheim, Schloss EW 266, 68131 Mannheim, Germanyholger.hopp@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates ultimate attainment at the syntax–discourse interface in adult second-language (L2) acquisition. In total, 91 L1 (first-language) English, L1 Dutch and L1 Russian advanced-to-near-native speakers of German and 63 native controls are tested on an acceptability judgement task and an on-line self-paced reading task. These centre on discourse-related word order optionality in German. Results indicate that convergence at the syntax–discourse interface is in principle possible in adult L2 acquisition, both in off-line knowledge and on-line processing, even for L1 English speakers, whose L1 does not correspond to L2 German in discourse-to-syntax mappings. At the same time, non-convergence of the L1 Dutch groups and differences in the L2 groups' performance between tasks suggest that asymmetries in L1–L2 discourse configurations and computational difficulties in mapping discourse onto syntax constrain L2 performance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , October 2009 , pp. 463 - 483
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

*

I am grateful to Kees de Bot, Carrie Jackson, Bonnie D. Schwartz, Antonella Sorace and Laurie Stowe, the audiences at GALANA II (Montreal) and EUROSLA 17 (Newcastle) as well as three anonymous BLC reviewers for helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. All remaining errors are my responsibility.

References

Avrutin, S. (1999). Development of the syntax–discourse interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Bader, M. & Bayer, J. (2006). Case and linking in language comprehension: Evidence from German. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Bader, M. & Meng, M. (1999). Subject–object ambiguities in German embedded clauses: An across-the-board comparison. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28 (2), 121–143.Google Scholar
Bader, M., Meng, M., Bayer, J. & Hopf, J. M. (2000). Syntaktische Funktions-Ambiguitäten im Deutschen – ein Überblick. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 19 (1), 34–102.Google Scholar
Bailyn, J. F. (1995). A configurational approach to Russian “free” word order. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Bard, E. G., Robertson, D. & Sorace, A. (1996). Magnitude estimation of linguistic acceptability. Language, 72 (1), 32–68.Google Scholar
Belletti, A. (2001). “Inversion” as focalization. In Hulk, A. & Pollock, J.-Y. (eds.), Inversion in Romance and the theory of universal grammar, pp. 60–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E. & Sorace, A. (2007). Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 25 (4), 657–689.Google Scholar
Belletti, A. & Leonini, C. (2004). Subject inversion in L2 Italian. In Foster-Cohen, S., Sharwood Smith, M., Sorace, A. & Ota, M. (eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook, pp. 95–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bini, M. (1993). La adquisicíon del italiano: Mas allá de las propiedades sintácticas del parámetro pro-drop. In Liceras, J. M. (ed.), La lingüística y el análisis de los sistemas no nativos, pp. 126–139. Ottawa: Doverhouse.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68 (4), 706–755.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2006). Age and second language acquisition and processing: A selective overview. Language Learning, 56 (1), 9–49.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in second language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44 (2), 235–249.Google Scholar
Bohnacker, U. & Rosén, C. (2008). The clause-initial position in L2 German declaratives: Transfer of information structure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30 (4), 511–538.Google Scholar
Bornkessel, I. & Schlesewsky, M. (2006). The role of contrast in the local licensing of scrambling in German: Evidence from online comprehension. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 18 (1), 1–43.Google Scholar
Bornkessel, I., Schlesewsky, M. & Friederici, A. D. (2003). Context information modulates initial processes of syntactic integration: The role of inter- vs. intrasentential predictions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 29 (5), 871–882.Google Scholar
Burzio, L. (1986). Italian syntax: A government-binding approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Carminati, M. N. (2005). Processing reflexes of the Feature Hierarchy (Person > Number > Gender) and implications for linguistic theory. Lingua, 115 (3), 259–285.+Number+>+Gender)+and+implications+for+linguistic+theory.+Lingua,+115+(3),+259–285.>Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27 (1), 3–42.Google Scholar
Cutler, A., Weber, A., Smits, R. & Cooper, N. (2004). Patterns of English phoneme confusions by native and non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116 (6), 3668–3678.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22 (4), 499–534.Google Scholar
Desmet, T. & Duyck, W. (2007). Bilingual language processing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1 (3), 168–194.Google Scholar
DeVincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Diaconescu, R. & Goodluck, H. (2004). The pronoun attraction effect for D(iscourse)-linked phrases: Evidence from speakers of a null subject language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 33 (4), 303–319.Google Scholar
Felser, C., Roberts, L., Marinis, T. & Gross, R. (2003). The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24 (3), 453–489.Google Scholar
Franceschina, F. (2005). Fossilized second language grammars: The acquisition of grammatical gender. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2002). An on-line look at sentence processing in the second language. In Heredia, R. R. & Altarriba, J. (eds.), Bilingual sentence processing, pp. 217–236. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Goodglass, H. & Kaplan, E. (1983). The assessment of aphasia and other neurological disorders. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Grewendorf, G. & Sabel, J. (1999). Scrambling in German and Japanese: Adjunction versus multiple specifiers. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 17 (1), 1–65.Google Scholar
Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K. & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modelling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21 (2), 203–226.Google Scholar
Grotjahn, R. (ed.) (2002). Der C-Test: Theoretische Grundlagen und praktische Anwendungen. Bochum: AKS Verlag.Google Scholar
Gürel, A. (2004). Selectivity in L2-induced attrition: A psycholinguistic account. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17 (1), 53–78.Google Scholar
Hahne, A. (2001). What's different in second-language processing? Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30 (3), 251–266.Google Scholar
Haider, H. & Rosengren, I. (2003). Scrambling: Nontriggered chain formation in OV languages. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 15 (3), 203–267.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. & Chan, Y.-H. C. (1997). The partial availability of UG in second language acquisition: The “failed functional features hypothesis”. Second Language Research, 13 (3), 187–226.Google Scholar
Haznedar, B. & Schwartz, B. D. (1997). Are there optional infinitives in child L2 acquisition? In Hughes, E., Hughes, M. & Greenhill, A. (eds.), BUCLD 21: Proceedings of the 21st Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 257–268. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Hemforth, B. & Konieczny, L. (2000). German sentence processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Hertel, T. J. (2003). Lexical and discourse factors in the second language acquisition of Spanish word order. Second Language Research, 19 (4), 273–304.Google Scholar
Höhle, T. (1982). Explikation für “normale Betonung” und “normale Wortstellung”. In Abraham, W. (ed.), Satzglieder im Deutschen, pp. 75–153. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2006). Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing. Second Language Research 22 (3), 369–397.Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2007). Ultimate attainment at the interfaces in second language acquisition: Grammar and processing. Ph.D.dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Jackson, C. (2007). The use and non-use of semantic information, word order, and case markings during comprehension by L2 learners of German. The Modern Language Journal, 91 (3), 418–432.Google Scholar
Järvikivi, J., van Gompel, R., Hyönä, J. & Bertram, R. (2005). Ambiguous pronoun resolution: Contrasting the first-mention and subject-preference accounts. Psychological Science, 16 (4), 260–264.Google Scholar
Jiang, N. (2004). Morphological insensitivity in second language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25 (4), 603–634.Google Scholar
Jiang, N. (2007). Selective integration of linguistic knowledge in adult second language learning. Language Learning, 57 (1), 1–33.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. & Newport, E. (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.Google Scholar
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A. & Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111 (2), 228–238.Google Scholar
Kaan, E. (1997). Processing subject–object ambiguities in Dutch. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Keller, F. (2000). Evaluating competition-based models of word order. In Gleitman, L. R. & Joshi, A. K. (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 747–752. Mahawah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Keller, F., Corley, M., Corley, S., Konieczny, L. & Todirascu, A. (1998). WebExp: A Java toolbox for web-based psychological experiments (HCRC/TR-99). Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Kilborn, K. (1992). On-line integration of grammatical information in a second language. In Harris, R. (ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals, pp. 337–350. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Krämer, I. (2000). Interpreting indefinites: An experimental study of children's language comprehension. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Lenerz, J. (1977). Zur Abfolge nominaler Satzglieder im Deutschen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. & Doughty, C. J. (eds.) (2003). Handbook of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lozano, C. (2006). Focus and split intransitivity: The acquisition of word order alternations and unaccusativity in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research, 22 (2), 145–187.Google Scholar
Lozano, C. (2009). Selective deficits at the syntax–discourse interface: Evidence from the CEDEL2 corpus. In Snape, N., Leung, Y-k. I. & Smith, M. Sharwood (eds.), Representational deficits in SLA: Studies in honor of Roger Hawkins (Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 47), pp. 127–166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C. & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27 (1), 53–78.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (2000). Grammaticality judgments in a second language: Influences of age of acquisition and native language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21 (3), 395–423.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (2006). Beyond the critical period: Processing-based explanations for poor grammaticality judgment performance by late second language learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 55 (2), 381–401.Google Scholar
Meng, M., Bader, M. & Bayer, J. (1999). Die Verarbeitung von Subjekt–Objekt Ambiguitäten im Kontext. In Wachsmuth, I. & Jung, B. (eds.), Proceedings der 4. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft fuer Kognitionswissenschaft, pp. 244–249. St. Augustin: Infix.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. (2004). Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morpho-syntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7 (2), 125–142.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. & Slabakova, R. (2003). Competence similarities between native and near-native speakers: An investigation of the preterite/imperfect contrast in Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25 (3), 351–398.Google Scholar
Müller, N. & Hulk, A. (2001). Cross-linguistic influence in bilingual first language acquisition: Italian and French as recipient language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 4 (1), 1–21.Google Scholar
Neeleman, A. (1994). Complex predicates. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Neeleman, A. & Reinhart, T. (1998). Scrambling and the PF interface. In Butt, M. & Geuder, W. (eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors, pp. 309–353. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Papadopoulou, D. & Clahsen, H. (2003). Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A study of relative clause attachment in Greek. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24 (4), 501–528.Google Scholar
Prévost, P. & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 16 (2), 103–133.Google Scholar
Roberts, L., Gullberg, M. & Indefrey, P. (2008). On-line pronoun resolution in L2 discourse: L1 influence and general learner effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30 (3), 333–357.Google Scholar
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 (12), 2030–2048.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the “full transfer/full access” model. Second Language Research, 12 (1), 40–72.Google Scholar
Scovel, T. (1988). A time to speak: A psycholinguistic inquiry into the critical period for human speech. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House Publishers.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (2003). Automaticity and second languages. In Long & Doughty (eds.), pp. 382–408.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N. & Hulstijn, J. (2005). Automaticity in bilingualism and second language learning. In Kroll, J. & de Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 371–388. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sekerina, I. (2003). Scrambling and processing: Complexity, dependencies, and constraints. In Karimi, S. (ed.), Word order and scrambling, pp. 301–324. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A. & Paoli, S. (2004). Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax–pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English–Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7 (3), 183–205.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2006). Is there a critical period for semantics? Second Language Research, 22 (3), 302–338.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (2003). Near-nativeness. In Long & Doughty (eds.), pp. 130–151.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (2005). Syntactic optionality at interfaces. In Cornips, L. & Corrigan, K. (eds.), Syntax and variation: Reconciling the biological and the social, pp. 46–111. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22 (3), 339–368.Google Scholar
Stolterfoht, B. (2005). Processing word order variations and ellipses: The interplay of syntax and information structure during sentence comprehension. Ph.D. dissertation, Max-Planck-Institut für Kognitions- und Neurowissenschaften, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I. M. (2003). Features in language development. Presented at the EUROSLA 8 Conference, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I. M., Sorace, A., Heycock, C., Filiaci, F. & Bouba, M. (2003). Subjects in L1 attrition: Evidence from Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English. In Beachley, B., Brown, A. & Conlin, F. (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp.787–797. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S. (2005). Child L2, adult L2, child L1: Differences and csmilarities – A study on the acquisition of direct object scrambling in Dutch. Ph.D.dissertation, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, E. (2006). L2 end state grammars and incomplete acquisition of Spanish CLLD construction. In Slabakova, R., Montrul, S. & Prévost, P. (eds.), Inquiries in linguistic development: In honor of Lydia White, pp. 283–304. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Vallduví, E. & Engdahl, E. (1996). The linguistic realization of information packaging. Linguistics, 34 (3), 459–518.Google Scholar
van Boxtel, S. (2005). Can the late bird catch the worm? Ultimate attainment in L2 syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, Radbou University Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Weskott, T. (2003). Information structure as a processing guide. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Leipzig.Google Scholar
White, L. & Genesee, F. (1996). How native is near-native? The issue of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 12 (3), 233–265.Google Scholar
Zwart, C. J.-W. (1997). Morphosyntax of verb movement: A minimalist approach to the syntax of Dutch. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar