syntactic processing in second language production susanna flett holly branigan, martin pickering,...
TRANSCRIPT
Syntactic Processing in Second Language Production
Susanna FlettHolly Branigan, Martin Pickering,
& Antonella SoraceSchool of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences
University of Edinburgh
L2 sentence level production:
• Research focuses on L2 lexical level• What about phrasal/sentence level?
• What ?– Which structures available– How to form them
• When ?– Frequency of L2 structure– Semantic or pragmatic constraints on usage
Models of L1 production(Roelofs, 1992, 1993; Pickering & Branigan, 1998)
• Syntactic knowledge in lexicon• Combinatorial information:
• Phrasal in nature• Linked to specific lexical items• Shared between different lexical items
• Same architecture in L2?– (de Bot, 1992; Truscott & Sharwood Smith, 2004)
• Based on on-line behavioural evidence syntactic priming
• Tendency to re-used previously processed structure
Typical priming study
• Hear or read a sentence (prime)• Syntactic structure varies:
– Active: “One of the fans punched the referee”
– Passive: “The referee was punched by one of the fans”
• Then describe unrelated picture (target)
Priming Effect: Passive target more likely after passive prime
Syntactic priming
• Found with a variety of structures• (e.g., active/passive; dative PO/DO; word order; ‘that’
complementiser...)
• Not due to lexical, semantic or rhythmic overlap• (Bock, 1989; Bock & Loebell, 1990)
• Indicates abstract syntactic representations• Stronger effect if lexical overlap
• (e.g., Pickering & Branigan, 1998; Cleland & Pickering, 2003)
• Tool to study sentence level production• Well established in L1 speakers
L2 syntactic processing
• Do L2 speakers acquire:– Abstract syntactic representations?– Syntactic processing similar to L1?– L2 structural preferences?
• L2 Priming?• Stronger than in L1?• Change with proficiency?• Change with experimental context?
Experiments
• L1 and L2 Spanish (English L1)
• 1) Actives/Passives – dialogue
• 2) Actives/Passives – computerised
• 3) SV/VS – unergative verbs
• 4) SV/VS – unaccusative verbs
Experiments 1 & 2
• English and Spanish have actives and passives– John built the house– The house was built by John– Juan construyó la casa– La casa fue construida por Juan
• Spanish passive grammatical but uncommon
• Active/Passive• Same/Different verb
• (Branigan et al., 2000; Pickering & Branigan, 1998)
• Picture description game
• Dialogue with native Spanish confederate• (e.g., Branigan, Pickering & Cleland, 2000)
• Sit opposite each other
• Confederate follows script
• Spoken primes
Experiment 1
Participant hears:
“El autobús persigue el tren” OR
“El tren es perseguido por el autobús”
Different verb in prime and target:
Participant hears:
“La guitarra destruye el televisor” OR
“El televisor es destruido por la guitarra”
Same verb in prime and target:
Experiment 1
• Participants:– L1 Spanish (n=12)– Intermediate (n=12) and advanced (n=12)
L2 Spanish (L1 English)
• Scoring: Actives, Passive or Other produced in each condition
Experiment 1:Percentage of passive targets
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Act / same v Act / diff v Pass / same v Pass / diff v
L1L2
Prime Type
Group
% P
assi
ves
Experiment 2
• Social influence – pressure to conform to native speaker interlocuter?
• Experiment 2:– Monologue– Primes and pictures on computer– Visual primes
• Identical pattern of results, attenuated L2 priming
Implications
• L2 abstract representation• Linked to specific verbs lexical boost• Shared in comprehension and production• L2 more susceptible to priming than L1
• Passives exist in English and Spanish• Shared across languages
• (e.g., Hartsuiker, Pickering and Veltkamp, 2004)
• Prime a new structure?
Experiments 3 & 4: word order
• Spanish allows SV and VS order• Juan llegó ‘Juan arrived’• Llegó Juan ‘*Arrived Juan’
• Preference determined by:– lexical verb class – discourse structure
• Difficult for L2 learners to use appropriately
Intransitives
• Two intransitive verb groups – (e.g., Perlmutter, 1978)
– Unaccusatives: Arrive; enter; leave; fall• (argument is theme or patient, base-generated in object
position)
– Unergatives: Shout; dance; speak; laugh• (argument is an agent, generated in subject position)
• Semantic differences, syntactically represented– (e.g., Levin and Rappaport Hovav, 1995)
Lexical preferencesin neutral context:
• Unergatives take SV order • Mi hermana gritó (‘my sister shouted’)
• Unaccusatives prefer VS order• Llegó mi hermana (‘arrived my sister’)
• Early L2 (English L1) use only SV • Increasing sensitivity to preferences• Then over-generalise VS
(Hertel, 2003; Lozano, 2004)
Experiments 3 & 4:
• Word order is primable– (e.g., Hartsuiker & Westenberg, 2000; Hartsuiker, Kolk &
Huiskamp, 1999)
• How will priming and lexical preferences interact in L1 and L2 speakers?
Method:
• Primes presented on computer– SV or VS order– Same or different verb
• Expt 3: Unergatives (shout-type)• Expt 4: Unaccusatives (arrive-type)
• L1 Spanish (n=20)• L2 Spanish (L1 English; n=24)
Experiment 3 (unergatives):proportion of VS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
SV / same v SV / diff v VS / same v VS / diff v
L1
L2
Prime Type
Group
% V
S o
rder
Experiment 4 (unaccusatives):proportion of VS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
SV / same v SV / diff v VS / same v VS / diff v
L1
L2
Prime Type
Group
% V
S o
rder
Comparing Expts: 3 and 4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
SV / same v SV / diff v VS / same v VS / diff v
L1
L2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
SV / same v SV / diff v VS / same v VS / diff v
L1
L2
% V
S o
rder
Summary of findings
• Word order priming in L1 and L2 Spanish
• Stronger when verbal repetition
• Lexical preferences affect L1 priming
• L2 priming same for both verb groups
• L2 speakers more willing to use less frequent structures (passives, VS)
• L2 > L1 priming only when structure dispreferred in L1
Structural preferences in L1 and L2
• Priming stronger for lower-frequency structures
• (Bock, 1986; Hartsuiker & Kolk, 1998; Hartsuiker & Westermann, 2000; Scheepers, 2003)
• But dispreference of structures?– L1 dispreference resist priming
• (e.g., Pickering, Branigan & McClean, 2002, no heavy NP shift priming in English ; Hartsuiker & Kolk, 1998, passives in Dutch)
– L2 speakers: find passive and unerg-VS more acceptable
Conclusions
• Syntactic representation and processing similar in L1 and L2 (á la de Bot, 1992)– Syntactic priming– Lexical overlap boost
• L2 speakers not sensitive to preferences – can prime dispreferred structure
• L1 speakers floor effect can’t be overcome
Future Research?
• How would effects vary for:– Proficiency: beginner and near-native L2?– L1 and L2 speakers based in Spanish
environment?– Structures equally acceptable in both
languages?