Selective Integration of Linguistic Knowledge in Adult Second Language Learning

By Wei Chen. 2007

304 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/426bcf45c194b369b25557830109f2f7ae407a8a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

In Literature and Literary Theory

Citations in the corpus

Morphological Structure in Native and Nonnative Language Processing (2010, methodology): “…speakers during L2 processing comes from a number of studies using ERPs (e.g., Chen et al., 2007; Sabourin & Haverkort, 2003), self-paced reading (Jiang, 2004, 2007), eyemovement monitoring (Keating, 2009; Lew-Williams & Fernald, 2007), or timed grammaticality judgments (McDonald, 2000; Sato,…”
The syntax–discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance* (2009, background): “…that the mapping of morphological forms to syntactic function is particularly difficult even for advanced L2 learners in comprehension tasks (e.g. Jiang, 2004; 2007; McDonald, 2006), with inflectional morphology forming the “bottleneck” (Slabakova, 2006) in adult L2 acquisition and L2 processing.”
Morphological Congruency and the Acquisition of L2 Morphemes (2011, background): “This analysis may also provide an explanation for why, even given ample learning opportunities, adult L2 learners are seldom able to perform in a nativelike manner when incongruent morphemes are involved, as shown in the studies by Long (2003) and Lardiere (1998).”
Learning (not) to predict: Grammatical gender processing in second language acquisition (2016, background): “…behavioural or neurophysiological responses to gender agreement violations does not necessarily point to lack of or impairment in morphosyntactic representations (e.g. Hawkins and Casillas, 2008; Hawkins and Chan, 1997) or morphosyntactic processing routines (e.g. Jiang, 2007; Ullman, 2005).”
Agreement attraction in Spanish comprehension (2015, background): “…relationships such as agreement: agreement errors in comprehension might be more common in languages with an impoverished morphology, and specific challenges might arise for learners of a morphologically richer second language (Jia, Aaronson, & Wu, 2002; Jiang, 2004, 2007; McDonald, 2000).”
Parsing and Working Memory in Bilingual Sentence Processing (2016, unknown): “…L2 processing of different morphosyntactic agreement features (Alemán-Bañón, Fiorentino & Gabriele, 2014; Chen, Shu, Liu, Zhao & Li, 2007; Coughlin & Tremblay, 2013; Foote, 2011; Foucart & Frenck-Mestre, 2012; Jiang, 2004, 2007; Keating, 2009, 2010; Sagarra & Herschensohn, 2010, 2011, 2013).”
Proficiency and working memory based explanations for nonnative speakers’ sensitivity to agreement in sentence processing (2012, methodology): “…is known to be difficult for second-/foreign-language (L2) learners, who commonly make agreement errors in production (e.g., Lardiere, 2006; White, Valenzuela, & KozlowskaMacGregor, 2004) and do not process agreement as efficiently as native speakers do (e.g., Jiang, 2004, 2007; Keating, 2009).”
How similar are adult second language learners and Spanish heritage speakers? Spanish clitics and word order (2009, background): “tested in this study may use or may have more implicit than explicit knowledge of clitics comes from the advantages observed in the oral narrative task and in the speeded comprehension task, two tasks that supposedly minimize the use of metalinguistic knowledge (Ellis, 2005; Jiang, 2007).”
Processing empty categories in a second language: When naturalistic exposure fills the (intermediate) gap* (2012, background): “A growing number of studies has investigated sentence processing in L2 learners (Jiang, 2007; Papadopoulou & Clahsen, 2003; see also Papadopoulou, 2005 for a review of studies on ambiguity resolution in L2).”
Brain Potentials Reveal Discrete Stages of L2 Grammatical Learning (2010, background): “…will never show online sensitivity to these grammatical rules even at advanced levels of proficiency (Franceschina, 2005; Hawkins & Franceschina, 2004; Jiang, 2004, 2007); a less extreme claim is that these features can be acquired, albeit more slowly than shared features (Hopp, 2007; White, 2003).”