Skip to main content


  • Patti Spinner (a1) and Sehoon Jung (a1)

The purpose of this study was to determine whether processability theory (PT; Pienemann, 1998, 2005) accounts for the emergence of grammatical forms and structures in comprehension. Sixty-one learners of English participated in oral interviews that elicited a variety of structures relevant to PT. Learners were divided into two groups: those who produced these structures productively in speech (high level) and those who did not (low level). These groups then read grammatical and ungrammatical sentences with PT structures in a self-paced reading task. Based on Pienemann (1998), PT predicts that the high-level group should perform similarly to native speakers. However, only the native speaker control group demonstrated sensitivity to ungrammaticalities. There was evidence that learners might have acquired lower-stage structures in an implicational order in comprehension, but it was quite mixed. These results have implications for PT and for models of the L2 linguistic system that include both production and comprehension.

Corresponding author
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Patti Spinner, Michigan State University, Department of Linguistics and Languages, B-258 Wells Hall, 619 Red Cedar Rd., East Lansing, MI 48824. E-mail:
Hide All

Thanks to Jihyun Park, Suzie Johnston, Carlee Salas, Maggie Vosters, and Roman Chepyshko. We are grateful for the comments of anonymous reviewers, which improved this article greatly, although of course all errors remain our own. Parts of this study were presented at SLRF 2014 and the UIC Bilingualism Forum 2014.

Hide All
Alhawary, M. (2009). Speech processing prerequisites or L1 transfer? Evidence from English and French L2 learners of Arabic. Foreign Language Annals, 42, 367390.
Andersen, R. (1978). An implicational model for second language research. Language Learning, 28, 221282.
Bettoni, C., & Di Biase, B. (2015). Processability theory: Theoretical bases and universal schedules. In Bettoni, C. & Di Biase, B. (Eds.), Grammatical development in second languages: Exploring the boundaries of processability theory (pp. 1980). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Eurosla.
Bonilla, C. (2015). From number agreement to the subjunctive: Evidence for Processability Theory in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research, 31, 5374.
Brysbaert, M., & 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, 977990.
Buyl, A. (ms.). The relationship between morphosyntactic decoding and encoding from a processability theory perspective. In Lenzing, A., Nicholas, H., & Roos, J. (Eds.), Working with processability approaches. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Buyl, A., & Housen, A. (2015). Developmental stages in receptive grammar acquisition: A processability theory account. Second Language Research, 31, 523550.
Clahsen, H., & Hong, U. (1995). Agreement and null subjects in German L2 development: New evidence from reaction-time experiments. Second Language Research, 11, 5787.
DeKeyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 94112). London, UK: Routledge.
Di Biase, B., & Kawaguchi, S. (2002). Exploring the typological plausibility of processability theory: Language development in Italian second language and Japanese second language. Second Language Research, 18, 274302.
Dyson, B. (2009). Processability theory and the role of morphology in English as a second language development: A longitudinal study. Second Language Research, 25, 355376.
Ellis, R. (1991). Grammaticality judgments and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 161186.
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141172.
Foucart, A., & Frenck-Mestre, C. (2012). Can late L2 learners acquire new grammatical features? Evidence from ERPs and eye-tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 226248.
Glahn, E., Hakansson, G., Hammarberg, B., Holmen, A., Hvenekilde, A., & Lund, K. (2001). Processability in Scandinavian second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 389416.
Håkansson, G., & Norrby, C. (2010). Environmental influence on language acquisition: Comparing second and foreign language acquisition of Swedish. Language Learning, 60, 628650.
Hulstijn, J. (2015). Discussion: How different can perspectives on L2 development be? Language Learning, 65, 210232.
Jegerski, J. (2014). Self-paced reading. In Jegerski, J. & VanPatten, B. (Eds.), Research methods in second language psycholinguistics (pp. 2049). New York, NY: Routledge.
Jiang, N., Novokshanova, E., Masuda, K., & Wang, X. (2011). Morphological congruency and the acquisition of L2 morphemes. Language Learning, 61, 940967.
Just, M., Carpenter, P., & Woolley, J. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 228238.
Kaplan, M., & Bresnan, J. (1982). Lexical-functional grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. In Bresnan, J. (Ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations (pp. 173281). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kawaguchi, S. (2000). Acquisition of Japanese verbal morphology: Applying processability theory to Japanese. Studia Linguistica, 54, 238248.
Kawaguchi, S. (2005). Argument structure and syntactic development in Japanese as a second language. In Pienemann, M. (Ed.), Crosslinguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 253298). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Keating, G., & Jegerski, J. (2015). Experimental designs in sentence processing research: A methodological review and user’s guide. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 132.
Keatinge, D., & Keßler, J-U. (2009). The acquisition of the passive voice in English as a foreign language: Production and perception. In Keßler, J-U. & Keatinge, D. (Eds.), Research in second language acquisition: Empirical evidence across languages (pp. 4168). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars.
Kempen, G., Olsthoorn, N., & Sprenger, S. (2012). Grammatical workspace sharing during language production and language comprehension: Evidence from grammatical multitasking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 345380.
Lenzing, A. (2013). The development of the grammatical system in early second language acquisition: The multiple constraints hypothesis. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Lenzing, A. (2015). Exploring regularities and dynamic systems in L2 development. Language Learning, 65, 89122.
Lenzing, (ms.). Towards an integrated model of grammatical encoding and decoding in SLA. In Lenzing, A., Nicholas, H., & Roos, J. (Eds.), Working with processability approaches. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Levelt, W. (1993). The architecture of normal spoken language use. In Blanken, G., Dittmann, J., Grimm, H., Marshall, J., & Wallesch, C-W. (Eds.), Linguistic disorders and pathologies: An international handbook (pp. 115). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
Mansouri, F. (2005). Agreement morphology in Arabic as a second language: Typological features and their processing implications. In Pienemann, M. (Ed.), Crosslinguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 117154). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Mansouri, F., & Håkansson, G. (2007). Conceptualizing intra-stage sequencing in the learner language. In Mansouri, F. (Ed.), Second language acquisition research: Theory construction and testing (pp. 95117). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 5378.
McCarthy, C. (2008). Morphological variability in the comprehension of agreement: An argument for representation over computation. Second Language Research, 24, 459486.
Menenti, L., Gierhan, S. M., Segaert, K., & Hagoort, P. (2011). Shared language: Overlap and segregation of the neuronal infrastructure for speaking and listening revealed by functional MRI. Psychological Science, 22, 1173–82.
Pallotti, G. (2007). An operational definition of the emergence criterion. Applied Linguistics, 28, 361382.
Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2007). Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension? Trends in Cognitive Science, 11, 105110.
Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 36, 329347.
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M. (2001). Testing the procedural skill hypothesis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14, 321337.
Pienemann, M. (2005). Discussing PT. In Pienemann, M. (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 6183). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M. (2007). Processability theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 137154). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pienemann, M., Di Biase, B., & Kawaguchi, S. (2005). Extending processability theory. In Pienemann, M. (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 199251). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M., Johnston, M., & Brindley, G. (1988). Constructing an acquisition-based procedure for second language assessment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10, 217243.
Roberts, L., & Liszka, S. (2013). Processing tense/aspect agreement violations online in the second language: A self-paced reading study with French and German L2 learners of English. Second Language Research, 29, 413439.
Sagarra, N., & Herschensohn, J. (2010). The role of proficiency and working memory in gender and number agreement processing in L1 and L2 Spanish. Lingua, 120, 20222039.
Sakai, H. (2008). An analysis of Japanese university students’ oral performance in English using processability theory. System, 36, 534549.
Schütze, C. T. (1996). The empirical base of linguistics: Grammaticality judgments and linguistics methodology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Segaert, K., Menenti, L., Weber, K., Petersson, K., & Hagoort, P. (2012). Shared syntax in language production and language comprehension—An fMRI study. Cerebral Cortex, 22, 16621670.
Segalowitz, N. (2003). Automaticity and second languages. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382408). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Shibuya, M., & Wakabayashi, S. (2008). Why are L2 learners not always sensitive to subject-verb agreement? EUROSLA Yearbook, 8, 235258.
Smith, M. (2016). L2 learners and the apparent problem of morphology: Evidence from L2 Japanese. In Benati, A. and Yamashita, S. (Eds.), Theory, research, and pedagogy in learning and teaching Japanese (pp. 99125). London, UK: Palgrave.
Spinner, P. (2011). L2 assessment and morphosyntactic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 529561.
Spinner, P. (2013). Language production and reception: A processability theory study. Language Learning, 63, 704739.
Vainio, S., Pajunen, A., & Hyönä, J. (2014). L1 and L2 word recognition in Finnish: Examining L1 effects on L2 processing of morphological complexity and morphophonological transparency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36, 133162.
White, L. (1991). Second language competence versus second language performance: UG or processing strategies? In Eubank, L. (Ed.), Point counterpoint: Universal grammar in the second language (pp. 167189). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
White, L., Valenzuela, E., Kozlowska-MacGregor, M., & Leung, Y-K. (2004). Gender and number agreement in nonnative Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 105–33.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Studies in Second Language Acquisition
  • ISSN: 0272-2631
  • EISSN: 1470-1545
  • URL: /core/journals/studies-in-second-language-acquisition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed