Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T16:32:01.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ANAPHORA UNDER RECONSTRUCTION DURING PROCESSING IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 November 2012

Laurent Dekydtspotter ,
Yi-Ting Wang ,
Bora Kim ,
Hyun-Jin Kim ,
Hye-Kyung Kim  and
Jong Kun Lee
Laurent Dekydtspotter*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Yi-Ting Wang
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Bora Kim
Affiliation:
Yonsei University
Hyun-Jin Kim
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Hye-Kyung Kim
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Jong Kun Lee
Affiliation:
Mokpo National University
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Laurent Dekydtspotter, Department of French and Italian, Indiana University, 1020 E. Kirkwood Avenue, Ballantine Hall 642, Bloomington, Indiana 47405-7103. E-mail: ldekydts@indiana.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 561 - 590
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

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

REFERENCES

Badecker, W., & Straub, K. (2002). The processing role of structural constraints on the interpretation of pronouns and anaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 748–769.Google ScholarPubMed
Barss, A. (1986). Chains and anaphoric dependence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Belikova, A., & White, L. (2009). Evidence for the fundamental difference hypothesis or not? Island constraints revisited. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 199–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broselow, E., & Finer, D. (1991). Parameter setting in second language phonology and syntax. Second Language Research, 7, 35–59.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006a). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006b). Grammatical processing in language learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interface environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 25, 257–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, P., Hermon, G., & Sung, L.-M. (1990). Principles and parameters of long-distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 1–22.Google Scholar
Cole, P., & Sung, L.-M. (1994). Head-movement and long distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry, 25, 355–406.Google Scholar
Crocker, M. (1996). Computational psycholinguistics: An interdisciplinary approach to the study of language. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekydtspotter, L. (2001). The universal parser and interlanguage: Domain specific mental organization in the comprehension of combien interrogatives in English-French interlanguage. Second Language Research, 17, 91–143.Google Scholar
Dekydtspotter, L., & Miller, A. K. (2009). Probing for intermediate traces in the processing of long-distance wh-dependencies in English as a second language. In Bowles, M., Ionin, T., Montrul, S., & Tremblay, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009) (pp. 113–124). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Dekydtspotter, L., Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (2006). The comparative fallacy in L2 processing research. In Grantham O’Brien, M., Shea, C., & Archibald, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2006): The Banff conference (pp. 33–40). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Dekydtspotter, L., & Sprouse, R. A. (2003). Interlanguage representations, computations and intuitions. In Liceras, J. M., Zobl, H., & Goodluck, H. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2002) (pp. 45–54). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, S., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 677–738.CrossRefGoogle 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
Felser, C., Roberts, L., Gross, R., & Marinis, T. (2003). The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 453–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felser, C., Sato, M., & Bertenshaw, N. (2009). The on-line application of Binding Principle A in English as a second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 485–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. D. (1998). Parsing to learn. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 339–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. D., & Inoue, A. (2000). Garden path re-analysis: Attach (anyway) and revision as last resort. In de Vincenzi, M. & Lombardo, V. (Eds.), Cross-linguistic perspectives on language processing (pp. 21–61). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In Coltheart, M. (Ed.), Attention and performance, XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 559–686). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, C., & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 119–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 78, 1–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In Miyashita, Y., Marantz, A., & O’Neil, W. (Eds.), Image, language and brain (pp. 95–126). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gibson, E., & Warren, T. (2004). Reading-time evidence for intermediate linguistic structure in long-distance dependencies. Syntax, 7, 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, S., McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Pronoun resolution and discourse models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 18, 266–283.Google ScholarPubMed
Hicks, G. (2009). The derivation of anaphoric relations. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirakawa, M. (1990). A study of the acquisition of English reflexives. Second Language Research, 6, 60–85.Google Scholar
Hoover, M. L., & Dwivedi, V. D. (1998). Syntactic processing in skilled bilinguals. Language Learning, 48, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornstein, N. (2000). Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J., & Liu, C.-S. L. (2001). Logophoricity, attitudes and ziji at the interface. Syntax and Semantics, 33, 141–195.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J., & Tang, C.-C. J. (1991). The local nature of the long-distance reflexive in Chinese. In Koster, J. & Reuland, E. (Eds.), Long distance anaphora (pp. 263–282). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A. (1998). Some effects of first language argument structure and morphosyntax on second language sentence processing. Second Language Research, 14, 406–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (1995). Parsing effects in second language sentence processing: Subject and object asymmetries in wh-extraction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 483–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, B.-M. (2001). The grammar and use of Korean reflexives. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 6, 134–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J.-H., Montrul, S., & Yoon, J. (2009). Binding interpretation of anaphors in Korean heritage speakers. Language Acquisition, 16, 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, D. (2009a). Further thoughts on parameters and features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 409–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, D. (2009b). Some thoughts on a contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 53–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martohardjono, G. (1993). Wh‑movement in the acquisition of a second language: A cross‑linguistic study of three languages with and without overt movement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Nicol, J. L., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Grady, W. (2005). Syntactic carpentry: An emergentist approach to syntax. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papadopoulou, D., & Clahsen, H. (2003). Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A study of relative clause attachment in Greek. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 501–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patson, N. D., & Ferreira, F. (2009). Conceptual plural information is used to guide early parsing decisions: Evidence from garden-path sentences with reciprocal verbs. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 464–486.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reinhart, T. (1983). Anaphora and semantic interpretation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T., & Reuland, E. (1993). Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 657–720.Google Scholar
Reuland, E. (2001). Primitives of binding. Linguistic Inquiry, 32, 430–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuland, E. (2006). Agreeing to bind. In Broeckhuis, H., Corver, N., Huybergts, R., Kleinhenz, U., & Koster, J. (Eds.), Organizing grammar: Linguistic studies in honor of Henk von Riemsdijk (pp. 505–513). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Rigalleau, F., & Caplan, D. (2000). Effects of gender marking in pronominal coindexation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 23–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rigalleau, F., Caplan, D., & Baudiffier, V. (2004). New arguments in favour of an automatic gender pronominal process. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 893–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runner, J., Sussman, R., & Tanenhaus, M. (2003). Assignment of reference to reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases: Evidence from eye-movements. Cognition, 89, B1–B13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Runner, J., Sussman, R., & Tanenhaus, M. (2006). Assigning reference to reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases. Cognitive Science, 30, 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. (1999). Let’s make up your mind: “Special nativist” perspectives on language, modularity of mind, and nonnative language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 635–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1994). Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In Hoekstra, T. & Schwartz, B. D. (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar: Papers in honor of Kenneth Wexler from the 1991 GLOW workshops (pp. 317–368). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprouse, R. A. (2006). Full transfer and relexification: Second language acquisition and creole genesis. In Lefebvre, C., Jourdan, C., & White, L. (Eds.), L2 acquisition and Creole genesis: Dialogues (pp. 169–181). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, A. J., Holler, J., & Kidd, E. (2007). Shallow processing of ambiguous pronouns: Evidence for delay. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1680–1696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sturt, P. (2003). The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 542–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, M. (1989). The interpretation of English reflexive pronouns by non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 281–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, M. (1991). Universal grammar and the interpretation of reflexives in a second language. Language, 67, 211–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, M. (1993). Knowledge of reflexives in a second language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wakabayashi, S. (1996). The nature of interlanguage: SLA of English reflexives. Second Language Research, 12, 266–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1995). Input, triggers, and second language acquisition: Can binding be taught? In Eckman, F., Highland, D., Lee, P. W., Milcham, J., & Rutkowski Weber, R. (Eds.), Second language acquisition: Theory and pedagogy (pp. 63–78). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Williams, J., Möbius, P., & Kim, C. (2001). Native and non-native processing of English wh-questions: Parsing strategies and plausibility constraints. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 509–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar