Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:09:33.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cross-modal priming in bilingual sentence processing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2018

THEODOROS MARINIS
THEODOROS MARINIS*
Affiliation:
University of Reading
*
Address for correspondence: Theodoros Marinis, School of Psychology & Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6AL, UKt.marinis@reading.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper provides a concise overview of the cross-modal priming methodology, it presents a selection of key studies to illustrate how this method can be used to address lexical and syntactic processing and discusses advantages and disadvantages, along with issues that need to be taken into consideration when designing studies that address sentence processing in bilinguals.

Keywords

cross-modal priminglexical processinggrammatical processinglexical access
Type
Review Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , May 2018 , pp. 456 - 461
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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

Anagnostopoulou, E. (2005). Cross-linguistic and cross-categorical variation of datives. In Stavrou, M. & Terzi, A. (eds.), Advances in Greek Generative Syntax. Festshrift for Dimitra Theophanopoulou-Kontou, pp. 61–126. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowers, J., & Georgala, E. (2007). The Syntax of Goals and Beneficiaries in Modern Greek. In Alexiadou, A. (ed.), Studies in the Morpho-syntax of Greek, pp. 14–46. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Featherston, S. (1999). Antecedent priming at trace positions: evidence from German scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28, 415–437.Google Scholar
Felser, C., & Roberts, L. (2007). Processing wh–dependencies in a second language: A cross–modal priming study. Second Language Research, 23, 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Georgala, E. (2012). Short object shift and ditransitive structure in Greek. In Özsoy, S., & Gürel, A. (eds.), Current Issues in Mediterranean Syntax. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Klepousniotou, E. (2002). The processing of lexical ambiguity: Homonymy and polysemy in the mental lexicon. Brain and Language, 81, 205–223.Google Scholar
Love, T., Maas, E., & Swinney, D. (2003). The influence of language exposure on lexical and syntactic language processing. Experimental Psychology, 50, 204–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Love, T., & Swinney, D. (1996). Coreference processing and levels of analysis in object-relative constructions: Demonstration of antecedent reactivation with the cross-modal priming paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 5–24.Google Scholar
Love, T., & Swinney, D. (2007). The Processing of Non-canonically Ordered Constituents in Long Distance Dependencies by Pre-school Children: a Real-time Investigation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 36, 191–206.Google Scholar
Marinis, T. (2010). Using on-line processing methods in language acquisition research. In Blom, E. & Unsworth, S. (Eds.), Experimental Methods in Language Acquisition Research. pp. 139–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Marinis, T., & van der Lely, H. (2007). On-line processing of wh-questions in children with G-SLI and typically developing children. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 42, 557–582.Google Scholar
McKee, C., Nicol, J., & McDaniel, D. (1993). Children's application of binding during sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 265–290.Google Scholar
Miller, K. (2015a). Facilitating the task for second language processing research: A comparison of two testing paradigms. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 613–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, K. (2015b). Intermediate traces and intermediate learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 487–516.Google Scholar
Nakano, Y., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2002). Antecedent priming at trace positions in Japanese long-distance scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 531–571.Google Scholar
Nicol, J. L. (1993). Reconsidering Reactivation. In Gerry, T. M. Altmann & Shillcock, R. (Eds.), Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: The Second Sperlonga Meeting, pp. 321–350. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nicol, J. L., & Swinney, D. A. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5–19.Google Scholar
Onifer, W., & Swinney, D. A. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias. Memory and Cognition, 9, 225–236.Google Scholar
Paspali, A., & Marinis, T. (2017). Integrating the filler: evidence from double object constructions in Greek relative clauses. Meletes gia tin elliniki glossa [Studies in Greek Linguistics] 37, pp. 601–614. Thessaloniki, Greece.Google Scholar
Roberts, L. (2014). Cross-modal priming with sentences. In: Jegerski, J. & VanPatten, B. (Eds.). Research Methods in Second Language Psycholinguistics. pp. 212–230. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Roberts, L., & Felser, C. (2011). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 299–331.Google Scholar
Roberts, L., Marinis, T., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2007). Antecedent priming at gap positions in children's sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 36, 175–188.Google Scholar
Schwartz, R.G., Hestvik, A., Seiger-Gardner, L., & Almodovar, D. (2016). Processing binding relations in Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 59, 1384–1394.Google Scholar
Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 18, 645–660.Google Scholar
Swinney, D., Ford, M., Frauenfelder, U., & Bresnan, J. (1988). Coreference assignment during sentence processing. In Grosz, B., Kaplan, R., Macken, M. and Sag, I. (eds). Language Structure and Processing. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Swinney, D., Love, T., Walenski, M., & Smith, E. E. (2007). Conceptual combination during sentence comprehension: Evidence for compositional processes. Psychological Science, 18, 397–400.Google Scholar
Tabossi, P. (1988). Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential contexts. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 324–340.Google Scholar