1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Pragmatics & Cognition
  4. Volume 31, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 31, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

Abstract

This study explores how syntactic and discourse-based parsing principles direct English relative clause attachment preferences. Forty-nine highly advanced L1-Persian L2-English and thirty-six English native speakers completed a self-paced reading task involving temporarily ambiguous relative clauses that were semantically associated with either the first or the second noun phrase (NP) in a complex NP (NP1–of–NP2) ( ). We manipulated the definiteness of the antecedent ( & ) to examine the extent to which a discourse-based definiteness principle — which motivates attachment to a definite NP — impacts attachment preferences. The results showed no L1/L2 differences, and both groups preferred an NP2 interpretation in relative clauses with a definite antecedent but no strong preference in relative clauses with an indefinite antecedent. The findings highlight the significance of definiteness and cast doubt on the hypothesis that L1 and L2 processing are fundamentally different.

© 2024 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00044.sol
2024-10-11
2025-06-22

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/pc.00044.sol
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/pc.00044.sol.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00044.sol&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Arabmofrad, Ali., & Hamideh Marefat
    2008 Relative clause attachment ambiguity resolution in Persian. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics11(1). 20–49.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Ariel, Mira
    1990 Accessing noun-phrase antecedents (RLE Linguistics B: Grammar). London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315857473
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315857473 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2001 Accessibility theory: An overview. InTed J. M. Sanders, Joost Schilperoord & Wilbert Spooren (eds.), Text representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.8.04ari
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.8.04ari [Google Scholar]
  4. Barr, Dale J., Roger Levy, Christoph Scheepers, & Harry J. Tily
    2013 Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language68(3). 255–278. 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker
    2015 Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software67(1). 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  6. Ben-Shachar, Matten S., Daniel Lüdecke & Do minique Makowski
    2020 Effectsize: Estimation of effect size indices and standardized parameters. Journal of Open Source Software5(56). 2815. 10.21105/joss.02815
     https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.02815 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cheng, Yesi, Jason Rothman & Ian Cunnings
    2021 Parsing preferences and individual differences in nonnative sentence processing: Evidence from eye movements. Applied Psycholinguistics42(1). 129–151. 10.1017/S014271642000065X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642000065X [Google Scholar]
  8. Cho, Jacee
    2017 The acquisition of different types of definite noun phrases in L2-English. International Journal of Bilingualism21(3). 367–382. 10.1177/1367006916629577
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006916629577 [Google Scholar]
  9. Clahsen, Harald & Claudia Felser
    2006 Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics27(1). 3–42. 10.1017/S0142716406060024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060024 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2018 Some notes on the shallow structure hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition40(3). 693–706. 10.1017/S0272263117000250
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263117000250 [Google Scholar]
  11. Clifton Jr. Charles, & Fernanda Ferreira
    1989 Ambiguity in context. Language and Cognitive Processes4(3–4). SI77–SI103. 10.1080/01690968908406364
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690968908406364 [Google Scholar]
  12. Crain, Stephen & Mark Steedman
    1985 On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological syntax processor. InDavid R. Dowty, Lauri Karttunen & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational and theoretical perspectives, 320–358. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511597855.011
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597855.011 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cuetos, Fernando & Don C. Mitchell
    1988 Cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the late closure strategy in Spanish. Cognition30(1). 73–105. 10.1016/0010‑0277(88)90004‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90004-2 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cunnings, Ian
    2017 Parsing and working memory in bilingual sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition20(4). 659–678. 10.1017/S1366728916000675
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728916000675 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dekydtspotter, Laurent, Bryan Donaldson, Amanda C. Edmonds, Audrey Liljestrand Fultz & Rebecca A. Petrush
    2008 Syntactic and prosodic computations in the resolution of relative clause attachment ambiguity by English-French learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition30(4). 453–448. 10.1017/S0272263108080728
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080728 [Google Scholar]
  16. Epstein, Richard
    2002 The definite article, accessibility, and the construction of discourse referents. Cognitive Linguistics12(4). 333–378. 10.1515/cogl.2002.007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2002.007 [Google Scholar]
  17. Felser, Claudia
    2019 Structure-sensitive constraints in non-native sentence processing. Journal of the European Second Language Association3(1). 12–22. 10.22599/jesla.52
     https://doi.org/10.22599/jesla.52 [Google Scholar]
  18. Fernández, Eva M.
    1999 Processing strategies in second language acquisition: Some preliminary results. InElaine C. Klein & Gita Martohardjono (eds.), The development of second language grammars: A generative approach, 217–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lald.18.12fer
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.18.12fer [Google Scholar]
  19. Forster, Kenneth I., & Jonathan C. Forster
    2003 DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers35(1). 116–124. 10.3758/BF03195503
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195503 [Google Scholar]
  20. Frazier, Lyn
    1978 On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Connecticut: University of Connecticut PhD dissertation.
  21. Frazier, Lyn & Charles Clifton
    1996 Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Frenck-Mestre, Cheryl
    1997 Examining second language reading: An on-line look. InAntonella Sorace, Caroline B. Heycock & Richard Shillcock (eds.), Proceedings of the GALA ’97 Conference on Language Acquisition, 444–449.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 2002 An on-line look at sentence processing in the second language. InRoberto R. Heredia & Jeanette Altarriba (eds.), Bilingual sentence processing, 217–236. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1016/S0166‑4115(02)80012‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(02)80012-7 [Google Scholar]
  24. Gibson, Edward, Neal J. Pearlmutter, Enriqueta Canseco-González & Gregory Hickok
    1996 Recency preferences in the human sentence processing mechanism. Cognition59(1). 23–59. 10.1016/0010‑0277(95)00687‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00687-7 [Google Scholar]
  25. Givón, Thomas
    1992 The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistics30(1). 5–55. 10.1515/ling.1992.30.1.5
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1992.30.1.5 [Google Scholar]
  26. Goad, Heather., Natalia B. Guzzo & Lydia White
    2021 Parsing ambiguous relative clauses in L2 English: Learner sensitivity to prosodic cues. Studies in Second Language Acquisition43(1). 83–108. 10.1017/S0272263120000285
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263120000285 [Google Scholar]
  27. Heim, Irene Roswitha
    1982 The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts PhD dissertation.
  28. Hopp, Holger
    2006 Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing. Second Language Research22(3). 369–397. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43103711
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 2014 Working memory effects in the L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses. Language Acquisition21(3). 250–278. 10.1080/10489223.2014.892943
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.892943 [Google Scholar]
  30. Ishihara, Kenji., Elizabeth Hiser & Tae Okada
    2003 Modifying C-Test for practical purposes. Doshisha Studies in Language and Culture (4). 539–568.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Klein, Natalie M., Whitney Gegg-Harrison, Greg N. Carlson & Michael K. Tanenhaus
    2013 Experimental investigations of weak definite and weak indefinite noun phrases. Cognition128(2). 187–213. 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.03.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.03.007 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kuznetsova, Alexandra, Per B. Brockhoff & Rune H. B. Christensen
    2017 lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software82(13). 1–26. 10.18637/jss.v082.i13
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13 [Google Scholar]
  33. Pan, Hui-Yu, Sarah Schimke & Claudia Felser
    2015 Referential context effects in non-native relative clause ambiguity resolution. International Journal of Bilingualism19(3). 298–313. 10.1177/1367006913515769
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006913515769 [Google Scholar]
  34. Papadopoulou, Despina & Harald Clahsen
    2003 Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A study of relative clause attachment in Greek. Studies in Second Language Acquisition25(4). 501–528. 10.1017/S0272263103000214
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263103000214 [Google Scholar]
  35. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2020 R: A language and environment for statistical computing [software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. www.R-project.org
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Solaimani, Ehsan, Florence Myles & Laurel Lawyer
    2024 Reading Realities: Context, Memory, and the Interplay of L1–L2 Comprehension [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Language and Linguistics, University of Essex.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Spivey, Michael J. & Michael K. Tanenhaus
    1998 Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modelling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition24(6). 1521–1543. 10.1037/0278‑7393.24.6.1521
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.24.6.1521 [Google Scholar]
  38. Trace, Jonathan
    2020 Clozing the gap: How far do cloze items measure?Language Testing37(2). 235–253. 10.1177/0265532219888617
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532219888617 [Google Scholar]
  39. Van Gompel, Roger P. G., Martin J. Pickering, Matthew J. Traxler
    2000 Unrestricted race: A new model of syntactic ambiguity resolution. InAllan Kennedy, Ralph Radach, Dieter Heller & Joel Pynte (eds.), Reading as a perceptual process, 621–648. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1016/B978‑008043642‑5/50029‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008043642-5/50029-2 [Google Scholar]
  40. Warren, Tessa & Edward Gibson
    2002 The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. Cognition85(1). 79–112. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(02)00087‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00087-2 [Google Scholar]
  41. Zehr, Jeremy & Florian Schwarz
    2018 Penncontroller for internet-based experiments (ibex). 10.17605/OSF.IO/MD83
     https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MD83 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00044.sol
Loading
Definiteness matters as a discourse cue in L1 and L2 processing of relative clauses
Pragmatics & Cognition 31, 185 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.00044.sol
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00044.sol
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.00044.sol
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): discourse cues; L1-L2 differences; relative clause disambiguation; shallow structuring

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error