It remains unclear whether late second language learners (L2ers) can acquire sufficient knowledge about unique-to-L2 constructions through implicit learning to build anticipations during real-time processing. To tackle this question, we conducted a visual world paradigm experiment to investigate high-proficiency late first-language Dutch second-language Mandarin Chinese learners’ online processing of syntactic cues to count vs. mass interpretations in Chinese which are unique-to-L2 and never explicitly taught. The results showed that late Dutch–Mandarin learners were sensitive to a mass-biased syntactic cue in real-time processing, and exhibited some native-like anticipatory behaviour. These findings indicate that late L2ers can acquire unique-to-L2 constructions through implicit learning, and can automatically use this knowledge to make predictions.
AllopennaPDMagnusonJSTanenhausMK (1998) Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language38: 419−39.
3.
AltmannGMirkovićJ (2009) Incrementality and prediction in human sentence processing. Cognitive Science33: 583–609.
4.
BaayenRHDavidsonDJBatesDM (2008) Mixed-effects modelling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language59: 390–412.
5.
BarnerDInagakiSLiP (2009) Language, thought, and real nouns. Cognition111: 329–44.
6.
BarrDJGannTMPierceRS (2011) Anticipatory baseline effects and information integration in visual world studies. Acta Psychologica137: 201–07.
7.
BorerH (2005) In name only: Volume 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8.
ChengCY (1973) Response to Moravscik. In: HintikkaJMoravcsikJSuppesP (eds) Approaches to natural language. Dordrecht: Reidel, 286–88.
9.
ChengLLSDoetjesJSybesmaR (2008) How universal is the Universal Grinder. Linguistics in the Netherlands25: 50–62.
10.
ChengLLSSybesmaR (1998) Yi-wan tang, yi-ge tang: Classifiers and massifiers. Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies28: 385–412.
11.
ChengLLSSybesmaR (1999) Bare and not-so-bare nouns and the structure of NP. Linguistic Inquiry30: 509–42.
12.
ChengLLSSybesmaR (2012) Classifiers and DP. Linguistic Inquiry43: 634–50.
13.
ChierchiaG (1998a) Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of ‘semantic parameter’. In: RothsteinS (ed.) Events and grammar. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 53–103.
14.
ChierchiaG (1998b) Reference to kinds across language. Natural Language Semantics6: 339–405.
15.
ChierchiaG (2010) Mass nouns, vagueness and semantic variation. Synthese174: 99–149.
16.
ChoiSHIoninTZhuYQ (2017) L1 Korean and L1 Mandarin L2 English learners’ acquisition of the count/mass distinction in English. Second Language Research34: 1–31.
17.
ClahsenHFelserC (2018) Some notes on the shallow structure hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition40: 693–706.
18.
ClearyAMLangleyMM (2007) Retention of the structure underlying sentences. Language and Cognitive Processes22: 614–28.
19.
DoetjesJ (1997) Quantifiers and selection. On the distribution of quantifying expressions in French, Dutch and English. HIL Dissertation Series, Holland Academic Graphics, The Hague, The Netherlands.
20.
DonaldsonB (2011) Left dislocation in near-native French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition33: 399–432.
21.
EngelhardtPEFerreiraF (2010) Processing coordination ambiguity. Language and Speech53: 494–509.
22.
FedermeierKDWlotkoEWDe Ochoa-DewaldEKutasM (2007) Multiple effects of sentential constraint on word processing. Brain Research1146: 75–84.
23.
FelserCRobertsLMarinisTGrossR (2003) The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics24: 453–89.
24.
GleitmanLPapafragouA (2005) Language and thought. In HolyoakKJMorrisonRG (eds) The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 633–61.
25.
GongJS (2010) Chinese classifier acquisition: Comparison of L1 child and L2 adult development. Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers: 192, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA.
26.
GrüterTLauELingW (2020) How classifiers facilitate predictive processing in L1 and L2 Chinese: The role of semantic and grammatical cues. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience35: 221–34.
27.
GrüterTLew-WilliamsCFernaldA (2012) Grammatical gender in L2: A production or a real-time processing problem?Second Language Research28: 191–215.
28.
GrüterTRohdeH (2013) L2 processing is affected by RAGE: Evidence from reference resolution. In: CabrelliJJudyTy CaboD Pascual (eds) Twelfth Conference on Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (GASLA), University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
29.
HahneAFriedericiAD (2001) Processing a second language: Late learners’ comprehension mechanisms as revealed by event-related brain potentials. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition4: 123–41.
30.
HoppH (2012) The online integration of inflection in L2 processing: Predictive processing of German gender. In: BillerAKChungEYKimballAE (eds) Proceedings of the 36th Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD 36). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 226–45.
31.
HoppH (2015) Semantics and morphosyntax in L2 predictive sentence processing. International Review of Applied Linguistics53: 277–306.
32.
HoppH (2016) Learning (not) to predict: Grammatical gender processing in second language acquisition. Second Language Research32: 277–307.
33.
HuettigFRommersJMeyerAS (2011) Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: A review and critical evaluation. Acta Psychologica137: 151–71.
34.
IljicR (1994) Quantification in Mandarin Chinese: Two markers of plurality. Linguistics32: 91–116.
35.
KamideY (2008) Anticipatory processes in sentence processing. Language and Linguistics Compass2: 647–70.
36.
KleinNMCarlsonGNLiRJJaegerTFTanenhausMK (2012) Classifying and massifying incrementally in Chinese language comprehension. In: MassamD (ed.) Count and mass across languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 261–82.
37.
KrifkaM (1992) Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In: SagIASzablocsiA (eds) Lexical matters. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information, pp. 29–53.
38.
KukonaAFangSYAicherKAChenHMagnusonJS (2011) The time course of anticipatory constraint integration. Cognition119: 23–42.
39.
LauEGrüterT (2015) Real-time processing of classifier information by L2 speakers of Chinese. In: GrilloEJepsonK (eds) BUCLD 39 Proceedings. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 311–23.
40.
LeungJHWilliamsJN (2014) Cross-linguistic differences in implicit language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition36: 733–55.
41.
Lew-WilliamsCFernaldA (2009) Fluency in using morphosyntactic cues to establish reference: How do native and non-native speakers differ. In: ChandleeJFranchiniMLordSRheinerG-M (eds) Proceedings of the 33rd annual Boston University Conference on Language Development: Volume 1. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 290–301.
42.
Lew-WilliamsCFernaldA (2010) Real-time processing of gender-marked articles by native and non-native Spanish speakers. Journal of Memory and Language63: 447–64.
43.
LiPBarnerDHuangB (2008) Classifiers as count syntax: Individuation and measurement in the acquisition of Mandarin Chinese. Language Learning and Development4: 1–42.
44.
LiPDunhamYCareyS (2009) Of substance: The nature of language effects on entity construal. Cognitive Psychology58: 487–524.
45.
LiangSY (2008) The acquisition of Chinese nominal classifiers by L2 adult learners. In: ChanMK-MKangH (eds) Proceedings of the 20th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-20). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, pp. 309–26.
46.
MirmanDDixonJAMagnusonJS (2008) Statistical and computational models of the visual world paradigm: Growth curves and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language59: 475–94.
47.
MontrulSSlabakovaR (2003) Competence similarities between native and near-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition25: 351–98.
48.
PapadopoulouDClahsenH (2003) Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition25: 501–28.
49.
PickeringMJGarrodS (2013) An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences36: 329–47.
50.
PolioC (1994) Non-native speakers’ use of nominal classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association29: 51–66.
51.
PollatsekADriegheDStockallLde AlmeidaRG (2010) The interpretation of ambiguous trimorphemic words in sentence context. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review17: 88–94.
52.
R Development Core Team (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
53.
ReberAS (1967) Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior6: 317–27.
54.
RebuschatPWilliamsJN (2012) Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics33: 829–56.
55.
RobertsLFelserC (2011) Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguist32: 299–331.
56.
RobinsonP (2005) Cognitive abilities, chunk-strength, and frequency effects in implicit artificial grammar and incidental L2 learning: Replications of Reber, Walkenfeld, and Hernstadt (1991) and Knowlton and Squire (1996) and their relevance for SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition27: 235–68.
57.
SandersLDNevilleHJ (2003) An ERP study of continuous speech processing II: Segmentation, semantics, and syntax in non-native speakers. Cognitive Brain Research15: 215–27.
58.
SchadDJVasishthSHohensteinSKlieglR (2020) How to capitalize on a priori contrasts in linear (mixed) models: A tutorial. Journal of Memory and Language110: 104038.
59.
SlabakovaR (2006) Is there a critical period for semantics?Second Language Research22: 302–38.
60.
TaiJWangL (1990) A semantic study of the classifier Tiao. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association25: 35–56.
61.
TaiJH (1992) Variation in classifier systems across Chinese dialects: Towards a cognition-based semantic approach. Chinese Language and Linguistics1: 587–608.
62.
TaiJH (1994) Chinese classifier systems and human categorization. In: ChenMYTzengO (eds) In Honor of William S.Y. Wang: Interdisciplinary studies on language and language change. Taipei: Pyramid Press, pp. 479–94.
63.
TanenhausMKSpivey-KnowltonMJEberhardKMSedivyJC (1995) Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science268: 1632–34.
64.
TolentinoLCTokowiczN (2014) Cross-language similarity modulates effectiveness of second language grammar instruction. Language Learning64: 279–309.
65.
TrenkicDMirkovicJAltmannGTM (2014) Real-time grammar processing by native and non-native speakers: Constructions unique to the second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition17: 237–57.
66.
WickhamH (2009) ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer.
67.
YanHLiuLTateM, et al. (2009) Edexcel GCSE Chinese. London: Pearson Education.
68.
YaoPStockallLHallDBorerH (2022) Processing evidence for the grammatical encoding of the mass/count distinction in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research51: 341–71.
69.
YipM (2002) Tone. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
70.
ZhangNN (2012) Countability and numeral classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. In: MassamD (ed.) Count and mass across languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 220–37.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
