Incremental interpretation in second language sentence processing

By John N. Williams. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2006

128 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e94c0adbc55951ccc99d43502963b04b34889b07

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

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The construct of language proficiency in the study of bilingualism from a cognitive perspective* (2012, methodology): “…Athanasopoulos (2006), Chen, Shu, Liu, Zhao and Li (2007), Cole and Pickering (2010), Dong, Gui and MacWhinney (2005), Felser, Sato and Bertenshaw (2009), Kormos and Sáfár (2008), Salamoura and Williams (2006, 2007), Silva and Clahsen (2008), Snape (2008), Trenkic (2008), and Williams (2006).”
Effects of reading span and plausibility in the reanalysis of wh-gaps by Chinese-English second language speakers (2010, methodology): “However, the results in Williams (2006) are suggestive enough to motivate further investigation of whether there is a relationship between individual cognitive resources and the processing of plausibility information in an L2.”
Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing (2011, background): “Together, Williams et al.’s (2001) and Williams’ (2006) results show that when explicitly asked to pay attention to meaning, both native and nonnative readers are sensitive to plausibility information during processing, which in turn indicates that semantic or conceptual representations are built…”
Processing empty categories in a second language: When naturalistic exposure fills the (intermediate) gap* (2012, methodology): “To verify that the pattern attested in Williams et al. (2001) was due to the L2 learners’ failure to process the syntactic cues in the determiner and not to overall slower processing, Williams (2006) conducted a modified version of the above experiment.”
Parsing and Working Memory in Bilingual Sentence Processing (2016, unknown): “L2 learners also adopt ‘active’ gap-filling (Dallas & Kaan, 2008; Williams, Möbius & Kim, 2001; Williams, 2006).”
Processing Subject-Object Ambiguities in the L2: A Self-Paced Reading Study With German L2 Learners of Dutch (2009, methodology): “…of such subject-object ambiguities in English differs as a function of the plausibility of the initial interpretation (Felser & Roberts, 2004; Williams, 2006; Williams et al., 2001); for example, using a word-by-word plausibility judgment task, Williams showed that both L2 learners and…”
Grammatical gender in adult L2 acquisition: Relations between lexical and syntactic variability (2013, background): “L2 processing is generally found to be more native-like in tasks that have some metalinguistic or explicit component compared to tasks that involve comprehension only (e.g. Roberts, to appear; Williams, 2006).”