Online Application of Principle C in L2 Pronoun Resolution: Evidence from Self­Paced Reading

doi:10.18627/jslg.35.1.201905.85

All Issue

2019 Vol.35, Issue 1 Preview Page Next Page

Research Article

Online Application of Principle C in L2 Pronoun Resolution: Evidence from SelfPaced Reading: An, Youngjae

31 May 2019. pp. 85-95

PDF

Abstract

This study reports the results from a selfpaced reading experiment that investigates Korean-English second language (L2) speakers’ online sensitivity to Principle C on online pronoun resolution. I examine this in the context of strong crossover (SCO) configurations in English to explore the effects of first language (L1) and proficiency on L2 processing. The findings show that proficiency appears to predict Korean-English L2 speakers’ use of target grammatical knowledge online. Highly-proficient Korean-English L2 speakers demonstrate sensitivity to the SCO constraint during online pronoun resolution in that they do not consider a fronted whphrase as a potential antecedent for a gendermatched pronoun that intervenes the whphrase and its gap. However, the SCO constraint does not restrict less-proficient Korean-English L2 speakers’ online pronoun resolution. The findings also suggest that L1 is not a determinant factor in L2 processing; that is to say, L2 processing is not fundamentally different from L1 processing.

Keywords

L2 processing

selfpaced reading

whquestions

strong crossover

Principle C

References

Aldwayan, S., R. Fiorentino, and A. Gabriele. 2010. Evidence of Syntactic Constraints in the Processing of Wh-movement: A Study of Najdi Arabic Learners of English. In B. Van Patten and J. Jegerski (eds.), Research in Second Language Processing and Parsing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 65-86.10.1075/lald.53.03ald
Bley-Vroman, R. 1990. The Logical Problem of Foreign Language Learning. Linguistic Analysis 20, 3-49.
Bošković, Z. and D. Takahashi. 1998. Scrambling and Last Resort. Linguistic Inquiry 29, 347-366.10.1162/002438998553789
Büring, D. 2005. Binding Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511802669
Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Clahsen, H. and P. Muysken. 1989. The UG Paradox in L2 Acquisition. Second Language Research 5, 1-29.10.1177/026765838900500101
Clahsen, H. and C. Felser, 2006. Grammatical Processing in Language Learners. Applied Psycholinguistics 27, 3-42.10.1017/S0142716406060024
Clifton, C. and L. Frazier. 1989. Comprehending Sentences with Long Distance Dependencies. In G. N. Carlson and M. Tanenhaus (eds.), Linguistic Structure in Language Processing. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-94-009-2729-2_8
Dekydtspotter, L., B. Schwartz, and R. Sprouse. 2006. The Comparative Fallacy in L2 Processing Research. In M. G. O’Brien, C. Shea. and J. Archibald (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 33-40.
Postal, P. 1971. Crossover Phenomena. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Kush, D. 2013. Respecting Relations: Memory Access and Antecedent Retrieval in Incremental Sentence Processing. Doctoral Thesis. University of Maryland, College Park.
Frazier, M., L. Ackerman, P. Baumann, D. Potter, and M. Yoshida. 2015. Wh-filler-gap Dependency Formation Guides Reflexive Antecedent Search. Frontiers in Psychology 6. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01504
Hong, S. S. 1985. A and Ā Binding in Korean and English: Government-Binding Parameters. Doctoral Thesis. University of Connecticut.
Marinis, T. 2010. Using On-line Processing Methods in Language Acquisition Research. In E. Blom and S. Unsworth (eds.), Language Learning and Language Teaching: Vol. 27. Experimental Methods in Language Acquisition Research. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 139-162.10.1075/lllt.27.09mar
Marinis, T., L. Roberts, C. Felser, and H. Clahsen. 2005. Gaps in Second Language Sentence Processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27, 53-78.10.1017/S0272263105050035
Montalbetti, M. M. 1984. After Binding: On the Interpretation of Pronouns. Doctoral Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Peirce, J. W. 2007. Psychopy - psychophysics Software in Python. J Neurosci Methods 162, 8-13.10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.11.017 17254636PMC2018741
Reinhart, T. 1976. The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora. Doctoral Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Roberts, L. 2016. Self-paced Reading and L2 Grammatical Processing. In A. Mackey and E. Marsden (eds.), Advancing Methodology and Practice: The IRIS Repository of Instruments for Research into Second Languages. New York: Routledge, 58-73.
van Gompel, R. P. G., and S. P. Liversedge. 2003. The Influence of Morphological Information on Cataphoric Pronoun Assignment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29.1, 128-139.10.1037//0278-7393.29.1.128
VanPatten, B. and J. Jegerski. 2010. Research in Second Language Processing and Parsing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/lald.53
Wasow, T. 1972. Anaphoric Relations in English. Doctoral Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Information

Publisher :The Modern Linguistic Society of Korea

Publisher(Ko) :한국현대언어학회

Journal Title :The Journal of Studies in Language

Journal Title(Ko) :언어연구

Volume : 35

No :1

Pages :85-95

DOI :https://doi.org/10.18627/jslg.35.1.201905.85

[1] Aldwayan, S., R. Fiorentino, and A. Gabriele. 2010. Evidence of Syntactic Constraints in the Processing of Wh-movement: A Study of Najdi Arabic Learners of English. In B. Van Patten and J. Jegerski (eds.), Research in Second Language Processing and Parsing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 65-86.10.1075/lald.53.03ald

[2] Bley-Vroman, R. 1990. The Logical Problem of Foreign Language Learning. Linguistic Analysis 20, 3-49.

[3] Bošković, Z. and D. Takahashi. 1998. Scrambling and Last Resort. Linguistic Inquiry 29, 347-366.10.1162/002438998553789

[4] Büring, D. 2005. Binding Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511802669

[5] Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

[6] Clahsen, H. and P. Muysken. 1989. The UG Paradox in L2 Acquisition. Second Language Research 5, 1-29.10.1177/026765838900500101

[7] Clahsen, H. and C. Felser, 2006. Grammatical Processing in Language Learners. Applied Psycholinguistics 27, 3-42.10.1017/S0142716406060024

[8] Clifton, C. and L. Frazier. 1989. Comprehending Sentences with Long Distance Dependencies. In G. N. Carlson and M. Tanenhaus (eds.), Linguistic Structure in Language Processing. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-94-009-2729-2_8

[9] Dekydtspotter, L., B. Schwartz, and R. Sprouse. 2006. The Comparative Fallacy in L2 Processing Research. In M. G. O’Brien, C. Shea. and J. Archibald (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 33-40.

[10] Postal, P. 1971. Crossover Phenomena. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

[11] Kush, D. 2013. Respecting Relations: Memory Access and Antecedent Retrieval in Incremental Sentence Processing. Doctoral Thesis. University of Maryland, College Park.

[12] Frazier, M., L. Ackerman, P. Baumann, D. Potter, and M. Yoshida. 2015. Wh-filler-gap Dependency Formation Guides Reflexive Antecedent Search. Frontiers in Psychology 6. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01504

[13] Hong, S. S. 1985. A and Ā Binding in Korean and English: Government-Binding Parameters. Doctoral Thesis. University of Connecticut.

[14] Marinis, T. 2010. Using On-line Processing Methods in Language Acquisition Research. In E. Blom and S. Unsworth (eds.), Language Learning and Language Teaching: Vol. 27. Experimental Methods in Language Acquisition Research. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 139-162.10.1075/lllt.27.09mar

[15] Marinis, T., L. Roberts, C. Felser, and H. Clahsen. 2005. Gaps in Second Language Sentence Processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27, 53-78.10.1017/S0272263105050035

[16] Montalbetti, M. M. 1984. After Binding: On the Interpretation of Pronouns. Doctoral Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

[17] Peirce, J. W. 2007. Psychopy - psychophysics Software in Python. J Neurosci Methods 162, 8-13.10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.11.017 17254636PMC2018741

[18] Reinhart, T. 1976. The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora. Doctoral Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

[19] Roberts, L. 2016. Self-paced Reading and L2 Grammatical Processing. In A. Mackey and E. Marsden (eds.), Advancing Methodology and Practice: The IRIS Repository of Instruments for Research into Second Languages. New York: Routledge, 58-73.

[20] van Gompel, R. P. G., and S. P. Liversedge. 2003. The Influence of Morphological Information on Cataphoric Pronoun Assignment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29.1, 128-139.10.1037//0278-7393.29.1.128

[21] VanPatten, B. and J. Jegerski. 2010. Research in Second Language Processing and Parsing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/lald.53

[22] Wasow, T. 1972. Anaphoric Relations in English. Doctoral Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The Journal of Studies in LanguageISSN:1225-4770(Print) 2671-6151(Online)한국현대언어학회

All Issue