Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T06:42:41.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Access to verb bias and plausibility information during syntactic processing in adult Spanish–English bilinguals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2021

Patricia Román Open the ORCID record for Patricia Román [Opens in a new window] ,
Edith Kaan  and
Paola E. Dussias
Patricia Román*
Affiliation:
Universidad Loyola Andalucía Loyola Behavioral Lab
Edith Kaan
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Paola E. Dussias
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
*
Address for correspondence: Patricia Román Universidad Loyola Andalucía Departamento de PsicologíaAvda. de las Universidades, s/nDos Hermanas, Sevilla, Spain Email: proman@uloyola.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In two experiments, we examine how proficient second language speakers integrate verb bias and plausibility information during online sentence comprehension. Spanish–English speakers and native English speakers read sentences in English in which a post-verbal noun phrase (NP) could be interpreted as a direct object or a sentential subject. To examine the role of verb bias, the post-verbal NP was preceded by a verb that is preferentially followed by a direct object (DO-bias verbs) or a sentential complement (SC-bias verbs). To assess the role of plausibility, the semantic fit between the verb and the post-verbal NP was either congruent or incongruent with the direct object interpretation. The results show that both second language speakers and native speakers used verb bias information to assign a grammatical role to the post-verbal ambiguous NP with small differences. Syntactic revision of an initially incorrect DO interpretation was facilitated by the presence of an implausible NP.

Keywords

sentence comprehensionambiguity resolutionsecond language processingevent-related potentialsDO/SC ambiguityverb biasplausibilityERPsSpanish–English bilinguals
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , May 2022 , pp. 417 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Berg, P and Scherg, M (1991) Dipole models of eye movements and blinks. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 79, 36–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boland, JE (2004) Linking eye movements to sentence comprehension in reading and listening. In Carreiras, M & Clifton, C Jr. (Eds.). The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERP, and beyond. Brighton, UK: Psychology Press, pp. 51–76.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M and New, B (2009) Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods 41, 977–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carreiras, M and Clifton, C Jr. (2004) On the on-line study of language comprehension. In Carreiras, M & Clifton, C Jr. (Eds.). The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERP, and beyond. Brighton, UK: Psychology Press, pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W (1988) Punctuation and the prosody of written language. Written Communication 5, 396–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H and Felser, C (2006a) Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics 27, 3–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H and Felser, C (2006b) How native-like is non-native language processing? Trends in Cognitive Science 10, 564–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifton, C, Frazier, L and Connine, C (1984) Lexical expectations in sentence processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23, 696–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connine, C, Ferreira, F, Jones, C, Clifton, C Jr. and Frazier, L (1984) Verb frame preference: Descriptive norms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 13, 307–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussias, P and Cramer Scaltz, T (2008) Spanish–English L2 speakers' use of subcategorization bias information in the resolution of temporary ambiguity during second language reading. Acta psychologica 128, 501–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dussias, PE, Marful, A, Gerfen, C and Bajo, MT (2010) Usage frequencies of complement-taking verbs in Spanish and English: Data from Spanish monolinguals and Spanish–English bilinguals. Behavior & Research Methods 42, 1004–1011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Felser, C and Roberts, L (2004) Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing. Poster presented at AMLaP, Aix-en-Provence.Google Scholar
Felser, C and Roberts, L (2007) Processing wh- dependencies in a second language: A cross-modal priming study. Second Language Research 31, 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F and Henderson, JM (1990) Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 16, 555–568.Google ScholarPubMed
Fodor, JD and Frazier, L (1980) Is the human sentence parsing mechanism on ATN? Cognition 8, 417–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foucart, A and 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
Frazier, L and Rayner, K (1990) Taking on semantic commitments: Processing multiple meanings vs. multiple senses. Journal of Memory and Language 29, 181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C and Pynte, J (1997) Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 50A, 119–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friederici, AD, Hahne, A and Saddy, D (2002a) Distinct neurophysiological patterns reflecting aspects of syntactic complexity and syntactic repair. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 31, 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friederici, AD, Steinhauer, K and Pfeifer, E (2002b) Brain signatures of artificial language processing: Evidence challenging the critical period hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 99, 529–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisch, S, Schlesewsky, M, Saddy, D and Alpermann, A (2002) The P600 as an indicator of syntactic ambiguity. Cognition 85, B83–B92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garnsey, SM, Lotocky, MA, Pearlmutter, NJ and Myers, EM (1997a) Argument structure frequency biases for 100 sentence- complement-taking verbs. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Garnsey, SM, Pearlmutter, NJ, Myers, EM and Lotocky, MA (1997b) The contributions of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory & Language 37, 58–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillon-Dowens, M, Vergara, M, Barber, HA and Carreiras, M (2009) Morphosyntactic processing in late second-language learners. Journal of Cognitive neuroscience 22, 1870–1887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, PC, Camblin, CC and Swaab, TY (2004) On-line measures of coreferential processing. In Carreiras, M and Clifton, C (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERP, and beyond. Brighton, UK: Psychology Press, pp. 139–150.Google Scholar
Hagoort, P (2003) Interplay between syntax and semantics during sentence comprehension: ERP effects of combining syntactic and semantic violations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 15, 883–899.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahne, A and Friederici, AD (2002) Differential task effects on semantic and syntactic processes as revealed by ERPs. Cognitive Brain Research 13, 339–356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hare, M, Elman, JL, Tabaczynski, T and McRae, K (2009) The wind chilled the spectators, but the wine just chilled: sense, structure, and sentence comprehension. Cognitive Science 33, 610–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackendoff, R (1990) Semantic Structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jaeger, TF and kSnider, NE (2013) Alignment as a consequence of expectation adaptation: Syntactic priming is affected by the prime's prediction error given both prior and recent experience. Cognition 127, 57–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaan, E (2007) Event-related potentials and language processing. A brief introduction. Language and Linguistics Compass 1, 571–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaan, E and Chun, E (2018) Syntactic Adaptation. In Federmeier, KD & Watson, DG (Eds.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 68). Academic Press, pp. 85–116.Google Scholar
Kaan, E and Swaab, TY (2003) Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 15, 98–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kennison, SM (2001) Limitations on the use of verb information during sentence comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 8, 132–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kotz, S, Holcomb, PJ and Osterhout, L (2008) ERPs reveal comparable syntactic sentence processing in native and non-native readers of English. Acta Psychologica 128, 514–527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, JF and Dussias, PE (2004) The comprehension of words and sentences in two languages. In Bhatia, T & Ritchie, W (Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 169–200.Google Scholar
Kutas, M and Federmeier, KD (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 Scholar
Kutas, M and Hillyard, SA (1980a) Reading Senseless Sentences: Brain Potentials Reflect Semantic Incongruity. Science 207, 203–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kutas, M and Hillyard, SA (1980b) Event-related brain potentials to semantically inappropriate and surprisingly large words. Biological Psychology 11, 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kutas, M and Van Petten, C (1994) Psycholinguistics Electrified: Event-related potential investigations. In Gernsbacher, MA (Ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 83–143.Google Scholar
Lee, EK, Lu, HY and Garnsey, SM (2013) L1 word order and sensitivity to verb bias in L2 processing. Bilingualism: Language & Cognition 16, 761–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, MC (1994) Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity. Language and Cognitive Processes 9, 157–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, MC (2013) How language production shapes language form and comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology 4, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marian, V, Blumenfeld, HK and Kaushanskaya, M (2007) The language experience and proficiency questionnaire (LEAP–Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 50, 940–967.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McLaughlin, J, Tanner, D, Pitkänen, I, Frenck-Mestre, C, Inoue, K, Valentine, G and Osterhout, L (2010) Brain potentials reveal discrete stages of L2 grammatical learning. Language Learning 60, 123–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meseguer, E, Carreiras, M and Clifton, C Jr. (2002) Overt reanalysis strategies and eye movements during the reading of mild garden path sentences. Memory & Cognition 30, 551–561.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, DC and Holmes, VM (1985) The role of specific information about the verb in parsing sentences with local structural ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language 24, 542–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osterhout, L (1997) On the Brain Response to Syntactic Anomalies: Manipulations of Word Position and Word Class Reveal Individual Differences. Brain and Language 59, 494–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osterhout, L and Holcomb, PJ (1992) Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language 31, 785–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osterhout, L, Holcomb, PJ and Swinney, DA (1994) Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 20, 786–803.Google ScholarPubMed
Qian, Z, Lee, E, Lu, DH and Garnsey, S (2016) Verb Bias and plausibility in L2 sentence processing. In Scott, J and Waughtal, D (Eds.), Proceedings of the 40th Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 304–317). Someville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Rayner, K, Sereno, SC, Morris, RK, Schmauder, AR and Clifton, C Jr. (1989) Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes. Language and Cognitive Processes 4, SI 21–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, L and Felser, C (2011) Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics 32, 299–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, MS and MacDonald, MC (1999) A probabilistic constraints approach to language acquisition and processing. Cognitive Science 23, 569–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford, AJ and Sturt, P (2002) Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6, 382–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinhauer, K (2003) Electrophysiological correlates of prosody and punctuation. Brain and Language 86, 142–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steinhauer, K (2014) Event-related Potentials (ERPs) in Second Language Research: A Brief Introduction to the Technique, a Selected Review, and an Invitation to Reconsider Critical Periods in L2. Applied Linguistics 35, 393–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinhauer, K, White, EJ and Drury, JE (2009) Temporal dynamics of late second language acquisition: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Second Language Research 25, 13–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stowe, L (1991) Ambiguity resolution: behavioral evidence for a delay. In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 257–262). HiUsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tanenhaus, MK, Boland, J, Garnsey, SM and Carlson, GN (1989) Lexical structure in parsing long-distance dependencies. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 18, 37–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tanner, D, Mclaughlin, J, Herschensohn, J and Osterhout, L (2013) Individual differences reveal stages of L2 grammatical acquisition: ERP evidence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 16, 367–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, D and Van Hell, JG (2014) ERPs reveal individual differences in morphosyntactic processing. Neuropsychologia 56, 289–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Traxler, M and Pickering, MJ (1996) Plausibility and the processing of unbounded dependencies: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language 35, 454–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullman, M (2001) 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
Supplementary material: PDF

Román et al. supplementary material

Román et al. supplementary material

Download Román et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 55.2 KB