An investigation into near-nativeness at the syntax-lexicon interface: evidence from Dutch learners of English
View/ Open
Schutter2013.docx (1.965Mb)
Date
27/11/2013Author
Schutter, John-Sebastian
Metadata
Abstract
This thesis investigates whether there are differences in language comprehension and
language production between highly advanced/near-native adult learners of a second
language (late L2ers) and native speakers (L1ers), and if so, how they should be
characterised. In previous literature (Sorace & Filiaci 2006, Sorace 2011 inter alia), nonconvergence
of the near-native grammar with the native grammar has been identified as most
likely to occur at the interface between syntax and another cognitive domain. This thesis
focuses on grammatical and ungrammatical representations at the syntax-lexicon interface
between very advanced/near-native Dutch learners of English and native speakers of
English. We tested differences in syntactic knowledge representations and real-time
processing through eight experiments. By syntactic knowledge representations we mean the
explicit knowledge of grammar (specifically word order dependence on lexical-semantics)
that a language user exhibits in their language comprehension and production, and by realtime
processing we mean the language user’s ability to access implicit and explicit
knowledge of grammar under time and/or memory constraints in their language
comprehension and production.
To test for systematic differences at the syntax-lexicon interface we examined
linguistic structures in English that differ minimally in word order from Dutch depending on
the presence or absence of certain lexical items and their characteristics; these were
possessive structures with animate and inanimate possessors and possessums in either a
prenominal or postnominal construction, preposed adverbials of location (locative
inversions) followed by either unergative or unaccusative verbs, and preposed adverbials of
manner containing a negative polarity item (negative inversions) or positive polarity item
followed by either V2 or V3 word order. We used Magnitude Estimation Tasks and Speeded
Grammaticality Judgement Tasks to test comprehension, and Syntactic Priming
(with/without extra memory load) and Speeded Sentence Completion Tasks to test
production. We found evidence for differences in comprehension and production between
very advanced, near-native Dutch L2ers and native speakers of English, and that these
differences appear to be associated with processing rather than with competence. Dutch
L2ers differed from English L1ers with respect to preferences in word order of possessive
structures and after preposed adverbials of manner. However, these groups did not differ in
production and comprehension with respect to transitivity in locative inversions.
We conclude that even among highly advanced to near-native late learners of a
second language there may be non-convergence of the L2 grammar. Such non-convergence
need not coincide with the L1 grammar but may rather be a result of over-applying linguistic
L2 knowledge. Thus, very advanced to near-native L2ers still have access to limited
(meta)linguistic resources that under time and memory constraints may result in
ungrammatical language comprehension and/or production at the syntax-lexicon interface.
In sum, in explaining interface phenomena, the results of this study provide evidence
for a processing account over a representational account, i.e. Dutch L2ers showed they
possess grammatical knowledge of the specific L2 linguistic structures in comprehension and
production, but over-applied this knowledge in exceptional cases under time and/or memory
pressure. We suggest that current bilingual production models focus more on working
memory by including a separate memory component to such models and conducting
empirical research to test its influence on L2 production and comprehension.