Grammatical Gender and Second Language Processing

By Laura Sabourin. 2003

145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/86b380be176bcf05300ab7bd3e6bafaf85a03a8f

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Second language processing: when are first and second languages processed similarly? (2008, background): “In fact, both German and Romance speakers, and even English speakers, can have the knowledge necessary to assign nouns to the correct Dutch gender category at a very high level of accuracy (Sabourin, 2003; Sabourin et al., 2006).”
An ERP study on L2 syntax processing: When do learners fail? (2014, background): “ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE published: 25 September 2014 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01072”
Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: Beyond structural overlap (2009, result): “Similarly, studies by Sabourin (2003), Hopp (2007), and Roberts, Gullberg, and Indefrey (2008) support the view that L2 speakers—regardless of their L1—have similar processing disadvantages in computing syntax–discourse mappings in real time.”
Electrophysiological correlates of second language processing (2005, unknown): “…hand, some striking similarities to native speakers were discovered, notably the P600 (Weber-Fox and Neville, 1996; Hahne 2001; Hahne et al., 2003; Sabourin, 2003), which suggests that more controlled syntactic parsing processes can at least in principle be acquired in a number of grammatical…”
Acquisition by processing: A modular perspective on language development (2004, background): “Evidence for a similar distinction has recently been presented for second language learners (Sabourin, 2003).”
Age and Second Language Acquisition and Processing: A Selective Overview (2006, background): “On the other hand, the study by Sabourin (2003) suggests that behavioral measures might overstate similarities, whereas ERP might pick up on differences, at least among mid-proficiency L2 learners of different L1 backgrounds.”
Continuity and shallow structures in language processing (2006, background): “Steinhauer draws attention to the evidence of nativelike performance and L1 transfer reported in some L2 processing studies (e.g., Sabourin, 2003; Tokowicz & MacWhinney, 2005), which appears to be in conflict with the SSH.”
Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing (2006, background): “Some studies find evidence of L1 properties in L2 parsing (e.g. Juffs, 1998; Frenck-Mestre, 2002; Fernandez, 2003; Sabourin, 2003) and others report no L2 processing differences between L1 groups (Papadopoulou and Clahsen, 2003; Marinis et al., 2005).”
Morphological variability in the comprehension of agreement: an argument for representation over computation (2008, background): “Sabourin (2003) reports on the overuse of common gender in neuter contexts, suggesting that common gender acts as a default in determiners and adjectives.”
Grammatical processing in language learners (2006, background): “…as for native speakers is compatible with previous ERP studies of syntactic processing in nonnative speakers, which demonstrated P600 effects for phrasestructure violations (Hahne, 2001; Weber-Fox & Neville, 1996) and violations of subject–verb agreement and gender concord (Sabourin, 2003).”