Bilingual processing of case-marking and locative verbs in Korean: Use of L2-unique information

Abstract

Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions:

Previous studies show conflicting findings regarding bilingual processing of target information not instantiated in learners’ first language. The current study addresses this issue by investigating whether Chinese speakers can integrate case-marking information, which is unique to Korean, with locative verb information in their processing of the Korean locative constructions.

Design/methodology/approach:

We conducted an acceptability judgment task to assess Chinese–Korean bilinguals’ explicit knowledge of case-marking constraints on Korean locative constructions, and a self-paced reading task to probe their application of the knowledge to real-time sentence processing.

Data and analysis:

Twenty-four advanced Chinese–Korean bilinguals’ acceptability judgments and reading times were compared with those of 24 Korean monolingual speakers, using mixed-effects regression modeling.

Findings/conclusions:

Results from the offline acceptability judgment task revealed the bilinguals’ native-like judgment patterns. Both Korean monolingual and Chinese–Korean bilinguals rejected sentences with wrong case-marking sequences paired with locative verbs. In the self-paced reading task, both monolingual and bilingual speakers showed increased reading times when a mismatch arose between case-marking and locative verb information, indicating their sensitivity to locative agreement violations.

Originality:

While previous studies have investigated bilinguals’ integration of multiple sources of information, this study adds a new perspective to this issue by testing whether bilinguals can use L2-unique information (i.e., case marking) to integrate it with other types of information (i.e., locative verbs) for sentence processing.

Significance/implications:

Our findings are consistent with the competition model which predicts that L2-unique information presents little processing difficulty for bilinguals. At the same time, the current results lend credence to the idea that increased proficiency allows bilinguals to integrate multiple information sources during processing.

Keywords

Korean locative constructions bilingual processing case marking locative verbs self-paced reading task

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baayen

R. H.

Davidson

D. J.

Bates

D. M.

(2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005

Barr

D. J.

Levy

Scheepers

Tily

H. J.

(2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001

Bates

D. M.

Maechler

Bolker

Walker

(2014). Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4 (R package version 1.1–4). http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4

Christensen

R. H. B.

(2015). A tutorial on fitting cumulative link models with the ordinal package. http://www.cran.r-project.org/package=ordinal/

Clahsen

Felser

(2006). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060206

Clahsen

Felser

(2018). Some notes on the shallow structure hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 693–706. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263117000250

Drummond

(2013). Ibex Farm. http://spellout.net/ibexfarm/

Dussias

P. E.

Kroff

J. R. V.

Tamargo

R. E. G.

Gerfen

(2013). When gender and looking go hand in hand: Grammatical gender processing in L2 Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 353–387. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000915

Ellis

(2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 164–194. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml015

10.

Ellis

Hafeez

Martin

K. I.

Chen

Boland

Sagarra

(2014). An eye-tracking study of learned attention in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35, 547–579. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000501

11.

Frenck-Mestre

Kim

S. K.

Choo

Ghio

Herschensohn

Koh

(2019). Look and listen! The online processing of Korean case by native and non-native speakers. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34, 385–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1549332

12.

Grüter

Lau

Ling

(2020). How classifiers facilitate predictive processing in L1 and L2 Chinese: The role of semantic and grammatical cues. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35, 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1648840

13.

Grüter

Lew-Williams

Fernald

(2012). Grammatical gender in L2: A production or a real-time processing problem? Second Language Research, 28, 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658312437990

14.

Herbay

A. C.

Gonnerman

L. M.

Baum

S. R.

(2018). How do French–English bilinguals pull verb particle constructions off? Factors influencing second Language processing of unfamiliar structures at the syntax-semantics interface. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1885. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01885

15.

Hopp

(2009). The syntax–discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and online performance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 463–483. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990253

16.

Hopp

(2015). Semantics and morphosyntax in predictive L2 sentence processing. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53, 277–306. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2015-0014

17.

Hopp

(2018). The bilingual mental lexicon in L2 sentence processing. Second Language, 17, 5–27. https://doi.org/10.11431/secondlanguage.17.0_5

18.

Jiang

(2004). Morphological insensitivity in second language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 603–634. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716404001298

19.

Jiang

(2007). Selective integration of linguistic knowledge in adult second language learning. Language Learning, 57, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00397.x

20.

Joo

(2003). Second language learnability and the acquisition of the argument structure of English locative verbs by Korean speakers. Second Language Research, 19, 305–328. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658303sr225oa

21.

Just

M. A.

Carpenter

P. A.

Woolley

J. D.

(1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.111.2.228

22.

Kim

Kang

Kim

Lee

(2011). Korean educational model for international standards. National Institute of Korean Language.

23.

Kim

Landau

Phillips

(1999). Cross-linguistic differences in Children’s Syntax for Locative verbs. Proceedings of BUCLD, 26, 337–348.

24.

Lago

Mosca

Stutter Garcia

. (2021). The role of crosslinguistic influence in multilingual processing: Lexicon versus syntax. Language Learning, 71, 163–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12412

25.

Lee

(1997). The meanings and acquisition of the Korean locative verbs. In Lee

(Ed.), Linguistic theories and Korean semantic and syntax acquisition I (pp. 103–126). Mineumsa.

26.

Luk

Z. P.

Shirai

. (2009). Is the acquisition order of grammatical morphemes impervious to L1 knowledge? Evidence from the acquisition of plural -s, articles and possessive ’s. Language Learning, 59, 721–754. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00524.x

27.

MacWhinney

(2005). A unified model of language acquisition. In Kroll

de Groot

A. M. B.

(Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 49–67). Oxford University Press.

28.

MacWhinney

(2013). The logic of the unified model. In Gass

S. M.

Mackey

(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 211–227). Routledge.

29.

Marinis

Roberts

Felser

Clahsen

. (2005). Gaps in second language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050035

30.

Mitsugi

(2020). Generating predictions based on semantic categories in a second language: A case of numeral classifiers in Japanese. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 58, 323–349. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0118

31.

Montrul

Rodriguez Louro

(2006). Beyond the syntax of the Null Subject Parameter: A look at the discourse-pragmatic distribution of null and overt subjects by L2 learners of Spanish. In Torrens

Escobar

(Eds.), The acquisition of syntax in romance languages (pp. 401–418). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

32.

Ojima

Nakata

Kakigi

(2005). An ERP study of second language learning after childhood: Effects of proficiency. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1212–1228. https://doi.org/10.1162/0898929055002436

33.

Omaki

Schulz

(2011). Filler-gap dependencies and island constraints in second-language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 563–588. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263111000313

34.

Pan

Schimke

Felser

(2015). Referential context effects in non-native relative clause ambiguity resolution. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19, 298–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006913515769

35.

Pinker

(1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. MIT Press.

36.

Ratcliff

(1993). Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 510–532. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.510

37.

R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/

38.

Roberts

Gullberg

Indefrey

(2008). Online pronoun resolution in L2 discourse: L1 influence and general learner effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 333–357. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080480

39.

Sohn

H. M.

(1999). The Korean language. Cambridge University Press.

40.

Sorace

(2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor

41.

Sorace

Filiaci

(2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22, 339–368. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr271oa

42.

Tokowicz

MacWhinney

(2005). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar. An event-related potential investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 173–204. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050102

43.

Tolentino

L. C.

Tokowicz

(2011). Across languages, space and time: A review of the role of cross-language similarity in L2 (morpho)syntactic processing as revealed by fMRI and ERP methods. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 91–125. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263110000549

44.

Trenkic

Mirkovic

Altmann

G. T.

(2014). Real-time grammar processing by native and non-native speakers: Constructions unique to the second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17, 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728913000321

45.

Witzel

Nicol

(2012). Deeper than shallow: Evidence for structure-based parsing biases in second-language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33, 419–456. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716411000427

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.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB