The influence of first language on the processing of wh-movement in English as a second language

By Alan Juffs. 2005

194 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aa9df92a5e70ecb79ed95acbf199d95b02fb9cbe

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

TIMED AND UNTIMED GRAMMATICALITY JUDGMENTS MEASURE DISTINCT TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE (2015, unknown): “In analyzing correct responses only, we followed the convention of reading time analyses in previous processing studies (e.g., L1: Garnsey, Pearlmutter, Myers, & Lotocky, 1997 ; Phillips, 2006 ; L2: Dussias & Piñar, 2010 ; Juffs, 2005 ; Omaki & Schulz, 2011 ; White & Juffs, 1998 ).”
Proficiency and working memory based explanations for nonnative speakers’ sensitivity to agreement in sentence processing (2012, background): “For example, Juffs (2004, 2005) report that the ability of Chinese, Japanese, and Spanish L2 learners of English to process sentences that contain temporary syntactic ambiguities (e.g., After the children cleaned the house looked very neat and tidy) or wh- movements (e.g., Who did the woman suggest…”
Processing empty categories in a second language: When naturalistic exposure fills the (intermediate) gap* (2012, background): “A follow-up study (Juffs, 2005) aimed to correct these issues by adding a few words at the end of the experimental sentences, while controlling for any potential L1 transfer effects and WM limitations.”
Scalar implicatures in second language acquisition (2010, unknown): “…in the psycholinguistic literature on L2 acquisition that when learners interpret complex sentences, they demonstrate largely the same parsing decisions and patterns as native comprehenders, but they are significantly slower and less accurate (Juffs, 2004, 2005, 2006; Clahsen and Felser, 2006).”
Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing (2006, background): “Reading-time studies on gap-filling effects in wh-movement by Juffs and Harrington (1996), Williams et al. (2001) and Juffs (2005) demonstrate that, like natives, non-natives attempt to integrate a displaced constituent as early as possible with a potential subcategorizer, thus showing evidence of…”
Grammatical processing in language learners (2006, methodology): “…the processing of fillergap dependencies in the L2 provide evidence for on-line filler integration but are ambiguous with respect to the question of whether L2 learners apply a verb-driven or structure-based gap-filling strategy (Juffs, 2005; Juffs & Harrington, 1995; Williams et al., 2001).”
CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND WORKING MEMORY CAPACITY IN INTERACTION-DRIVEN L2 LEARNING (2012, background): “…terms of its relation to L2 learning (e.g., Geva & Ryan, 1993 ; Harrington & Sawyer, 1992 ; Havik, Roberts, van Hout, Schreuder, & Haverkort, 2009 ; Juffs, 2004 , 2005 ; Kormos & Sáfár, 2008 ; Mackey, Adams, Stafford, & Winke, 2010 ; Mackey, Philp, Egi, Fujii, & Tatsumi, 2002 ; Miyake & Friedman,…”
Continuity and shallow structures in language processing (2006, result): “Although few studies have investigated the influence of WM on L2 processing, the results available thus far seem to confirm this prediction (see Felser & Roberts, 2005; Juffs, 2004, 2005; Sato & Felser, 2005).”
The role of L1 and L2 working memory in literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading (2010, background): “A number of other studies, however, found only a moderate relationship between L1 and L2 WM capacities, correlations ranging between .39 and .68 (Harrington & Sawyer, 1992; Juffs, 2004, 2005; Miyake & Friedman, 1998).”
Aspects of working memory in L2 learning (2011, background): “These areas include vocabulary learning (Cheung 1996), sentence processing (Juffs 2005; Dussias & Piñar 2010), grammar learning (Speciale et al.”
Effects of reading span and plausibility in the reanalysis of wh-gaps by Chinese-English second language speakers (2010, methodology): “It is worth noting that studies that have examined the relationship between availability of cognitive resources and sentence processing in a second language have heretofore not yielded results supporting the existence of such a relationship (e.g. Juffs, 2004, 2005; Felser and Roberts, 2007).”
The on-line application of binding Principle A in English as a second language* (2009, background): “, 2008) or little (Juffs, 2005) evidence of L1 influence on learners’ processing performance, the possible role of language background in learners’ processing of reflexives should nevertheless be investigated more systematically, which we plan to do in future research.”