The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English

By Claudia Felser, Leah Roberts, T. Marinis, R. Gross. Applied Psycholinguistics, 2003

268 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4faa5beebdf57ea03f404b23bafa39cf1e5c6634

How researchers see this paper

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

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Ian Cunnings
2. Holger Hopp
3. Claudia Felser
4. Harald Clahsen
5. A. Sorace
6. Paola E. Dussias
7. Nuria Sagarra
8. Advaith Siddharthan

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Ian Cunnings
2. Holger Hopp
3. A. Sorace
4. Claudia Felser
5. Harald Clahsen
6. Nuria Sagarra
7. Paola E. Dussias
8. Advaith Siddharthan

Citations in the corpus

• Selective optionality in language development (2005, background): “…questions that have arisen from the study of patterns of differences in endstate grammars: evidence from psycholinguistics and the cognitive neuroscience of bilingualism (Felser et al 2003; Friederici and Hahne 2001, among others) provides some indications of how these questions may be addressed.”
• PARSING STRATEGIES IN L1 AND L2 SENTENCE PROCESSING (2003, result): “In addition to the present set of findings, a recent study of RC attachment in English (Felser et al. 2002) yielded parallel results.”
• Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing (2006, background): “…than native-language processing such that L2 speakers are sensitive to lexical-semantic and pragmatic information, yet make only very restricted or no use of syntactic or phrase-structural information in parsing (compare Felser et al., 2003; Clahsen and Felser, 2006; Felser and Roberts, to appear).”
• Syntactic Simplification and Text Cohesion (2006, background): “There are also studies that suggest that for genuinely ambiguous cases, adult speakers’ attachment preferences are influenced by the type of preposition (showing, a preference for NP1 attachment for complex NPs joined by of, and a preference for NP2 attachment for noun phrases joined by with), thoug”
• Parsing and Working Memory in Bilingual Sentence Processing (2016, background): “I begin by discussing studies examining relative clause attachment ambiguities, as these were influential in motivating the SSH. Felser et al. (2003) investigated sentences like (5), where the relative clause (‘who was reading a letter’) can modify either the first NP (‘the secretary’) or the second”
• Grammatical processing in language learners (2006, methodology): “Although the extent to which properties of a learner’s L1 influence their real-time processing of the L2 input remains to be determined, studies by Felser et al. (2003) and Papadopoulou and Clahsen (2003) provide evidence against the transfer of L1 ambiguity resolution preferences.”
• The effect of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish–English bilinguals (2007, background): “FrenckMestre attributed this pattern of results to the influence of the native language on second language processing (but see Felser et al. (2003) and Papadopoulou and Clashen (2003) for evidence against an L1 transfer account in proficient L2 learners whose L1 and L2 favor the same attachment…”