Morphological insensitivity in second language processing

By Wei Chen. 2004

335 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/47052d26d14bdee0608bcbd0921540e70d68e4ea

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 Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Parsing and Working Memory in Bilingual Sentence Processing (2016, background): “This ‘broken agreement’ effect (Chen et al., 2007; Jiang, 2004; Pearlmutter et al., 1999) is not predicted under either facilitatory or inhibitory interference.”
LEARNED ATTENTION IN ADULT LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (2011, background): “The low salience and low reliability of grammatical cues tends to make them less learnable (Ellis, 2006 c; Goldschneider & DeKeyser, 2001 ) and could underlie late learners’ diffi culty in processing and producing FL verbal morphology (Jiang, 2004 ; Zobl & Liceras, 1994 ).”
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).”
THE BOUNDS OF ADULT LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (2010, background): “Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 2010, 32 , 553– 580 . doi:10.1017/S0272263110000264 © Cambridge University Press 2010 0272-2631/10 $15.00 553”
Continuity and shallow structures in language processing (2006, result): “Further evidence for L2 learners’ lack of sensitivity to subject–verb agreement viola- tions during processing includes the results from a reading-time study by Jiang (2004) with Chinese-speaking learners of English.”
Proficiency and working memory based explanations for nonnative speakers’ sensitivity to agreement in sentence processing (2012, methodology): “The results of Jiang (2004) and Keating (2009) suggest that linear distance between two elements in an agreement dependency can potentially increase the difficulty with which L2 learners process such dependencies.”
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).”
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,…”
Processing tense/aspect-agreement violations on-line in the second language: A self-paced reading study with French and German L2 learners of English (2013, background): “For instance, Jiang (2004) found that Chinese L2 learners of English were not sensitive to subject–verb agreement violations in their on-line L2 processing, even though they were able to select a correctly inflected verb in an off-line forced choice task.”