Word Order Processing in a Second Language: From VO to OV
- 699 Downloads
Event-related potential studies on second language processing reveal that L1/L2 differences are due either to proficiency, age of acquisition or grammatical differences between L1 and L2 (Kotz in Brain Lang 109(2–3):68–74, 2009). However, the relative impact of these and other factors in second language processing is still not well understood. Here we present evidence from behavioral and ERP experiments on Basque sentence word order processing by L1Spanish–L2Basque early bilinguals (Age of Aquisition \(=\) 3 years) with very high proficiency in their L2. Results reveal that these L2 speakers have a preference towards canonical Subject–Object–Verb word order, which they processed faster and with greater ease than non-canonical Object–Subject–Verb. This result converges with the processing preferences shown by natives and reported in Erdocia et al. (Brain Lang 109(1):1–17, 2009). However, electrophysiological measures associated to canonical (SOV) and non-canonical (OSV) sentences revealed a different pattern in the non-natives, as compared to that reported previously for natives. The non-native group elicited a P600 component that native group did not show when comparing S and O at sentence’s second position. This pattern of results suggests that, despite high proficiency, non-native language processing recruits neural resources that are different from those employed in native languages.
KeywordsWord order processing Bilingualism VO–OV languages Morphological processing ERPs
This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science (BRAINGLOT CSD2007-00012/CONSOLIDER-INGENIO 2010); the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (FFI2010-20472, FFI2012-31360); the Basque Government, Department of Education, Universities and Research (IT665-13); the University of the Basque Country (EHUA13/39); a Juan de la Cierva Fellowship (JCI-2010-07692) to Zawiszewski; and a Ramón y Cajal Fellowship (RYC-2010-06520) to Erdocia.
- Dixon, R. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge studies in linguistics (69). UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Dryer, M. S. (2011). Order of subject, object and verb. In: M. S. Dryer, M. Haspelmath (Eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. http://wals.info/chapter/81.
- Frisch, S., & Schlesewsky, M. (2001). The N400 reflects problems of thematic hierarchizing. Basic and Clinical Neurophysiology, 12, 3391–3394.Google Scholar
- Greenberg, J. H. (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In: J. H. Greenberg JH (Ed.) Universals of language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Second printing, first paperback edition. 1966 (pp. 73–113).Google Scholar
- Hagoort, P., Brown, C., & Osterghout, L. (1999). The neurocognition of syntactic processing. In C. Brown & P. Hagoort (Eds.), Neurocognition of language (pp. 273–316). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hawkins, J. A., Dryer, M. S., Haspelmath, M., Newmeyer, F. J., Polinsky, M., & Primus, B. (2002). Symmetries and asymmetries: Their grammar, typology and parsing. Theoretical Linguistics, 28, 95–149.Google Scholar
- Johns, A., Massam, D., & Ndayiragije, J. (Eds.). (2006). Ergativity: Emerging issues. Studies in natural language and linguistic theory (Vol. 65). Dordrecht, Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Landa, J., Sarasola, I., & Salaburu, P. (2011). Euskal Hiztegiaren Maiztasun Egitura (EHME), Euskara Institutua/Basque Language Institute. Bilbao: University of the Basque Country. ISBN 978-84-693-9890-6.Google Scholar
- Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference form garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19(3), 528–553.Google Scholar
- Yetano, I., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Laka, I. (2011). Agent-initial processing preference in Basque: A visual-world eye-movement experiment. Poster presented at the 7th international morphological processing conference, BCBL, Donostia-San Sebastian.Google Scholar