Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 9:2 (2019) ► pp.163–201

How subject animacy constrains motion event descriptions

Evidence from sequential and simultaneous bilinguals in French and English

ORCID logo | University of Portsmouth
| National University of Ireland, Galway
Research has indicated that during sentence processing, French native speakers predominantly rely upon lexico-semantic cues (i.e., animacy) while native speakers of English rely upon syntactic cues (i.e., word order). The present study examined sentence production in L1 French/L2 English and L1 English/L2 French sequential bilinguals. Participants used animate and inanimate entities as sentence subjects while describing motion events represented by static pictures. To test a gradual change in animacy cue weighting in second-language sequential bilinguals with different proficiency levels were included. Sentence production of sequential bilinguals was compared against that of simultaneous bilinguals. The results indicated an overall preference for the use of animate subjects for both languages at all proficiency levels. The effect of animacy was stronger for English L2 than French L2 while it did not differ between languages in simultaneous bilinguals. Evidence for potential change in the animacy-cue weighting was only observed for English L2.
Keywords: animacy of the sentence subject, motion events, simultaneous bilingualism, sequential bilingualism
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Animacy, L2 and bilingualism
  • 3.Motion events and animacy in bilinguals
  • 4.Aim and design of the study
  • 5.Method
    • 5.1Participants
    • 5.2Task
    • 5.3Procedure
    • 5.4Analysis
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Quantitative analysis
      • Sequential bilinguals
      • Simultaneous bilinguals
    • 6.2Qualitative analysis
      • Sequential bilinguals
      • Simultaneous bilinguals
  • 7.Discussion
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 9 August 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.16023.ber
References (93)
References
Abutalebi, J., Cappa, S., & Perani, D. (2009). What can functional neuroimaging tell us about the bilingual brain? In J. Kroll, & A. M. B. De Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism (pp. 479–515). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Achard, M. (2002). Causation, constructions, and language ecology: An example from French. In M. Shibatani (Ed.), The Grammar of Causation and Causative Manipulation (pp. 127–156). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aissen, J. (2003). Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21(3), 435–483. Available from DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, A., & Schäfer, F. (2006). Instrument subjects are agents or causers. In D. Baumer, D. Montero, & M. Scanlon (Eds.), 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp 44–48). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Available from [URL]
Altmann, L. J. P., & Kemper, S. (2006). Age differences in sensitivity to animacy and order of activation in sentence production. Language and Cognitive Process, 21(1–3), 322–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Antonijević, S., & Berthaud, S. (2009). Verbs of motion and sentence production in second language. Proceedings of Fechner Day, 25(1), 487–492.Google Scholar
Baayen, H., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H. (1993). The CELEX Lexical Database (CD-ROM). Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia, Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Barac, R., & Bialystok, E. (2012). Bilingual effects on cognitive and linguistic development: Role of language, cultural background, and education. Child Development, 83(2), 413–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar. In E. Wanner, & L. R. Gleitman (Eds.), Language Acquisition: The State of the Art (pp. 173–218). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E., et al. (1984). A cross-linguistic study of the development of sentence interpretation strategies. Child Development, 55(2), 341–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beavers, J., Levin, B., & Tham, S. W. (2010). The typology of motion expressions revisited. Journal of linguistics, 46(02), 331–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berthaud, S. and Antonijević, S. (2012). L2 acquisition of verbal constructions: expressing motion in L2 French and English. In M. Bouveret and D. Legallois (Eds.), French constructions in discourse and development (pp. 155–174). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1999). Cognitive complexity and attentional control in the bilingual. Child Development, 70(3), 636–644. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Feng, X. (2011). Language proficiency and its implications for monolingual and bilingual children. In A. Y. Durgunoğlu, & C. Goldenberg (Eds.), Language and Literacy Development in Bilingual Settings (pp. 121–138). New York: The Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Bock, J., Loebell, H., & Morey, R. (1992). From conceptual roles to structural relations: Bridging the syntactic fcleft. Psychological Review, 99(1), 150–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1973). Early syntactic development: A cross-linguistic study with special reference to Finnish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Branigan, H., Pickering, M., & Tanaka, M. (2008). Contributions of animacy to grammatical function assignment and word order during production. Lingua, 118(2), 172–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. (1970). Psycholinguistics: Selected Papers by Roger Brown. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Brown, R., Cazden, C., & Bellugi, U. (1973). The child’s grammar from I to III. In C. A. Ferguson, & D. I. Slobin (Eds.), Studies of Child Language Development (pp. 295–333). New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Bylund, E., & Athanasopoulos, P. (2015). Introduction: Cognition, motion events, and SLA. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1–13. Available from DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, S. (2013). Translation into the second language (2nd ed.). New York:Routledge.Google Scholar
Chapman, R., & Miller, J. (1975). Word order in early two and three word utterances: Does production precede comprehension? Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 181, 346–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1973). What’s in a word? On the child’s acquisition of semantics in his first language. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 65–110). New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, H., & Begun, J. (1971). Semantics of sentence subjects. Language and Speech, 14(1), 34–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B. (1989). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology: Syntax and Morphology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL quarterly, 33(2), 185–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costa, A., & Caramazza, A. (1999). Is the lexical selection in bilingual speech production language-specific? Further evidence from Spanish-English and English-Spanish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2(3), 231–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costa, A., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2014). How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(5), 336–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cruse, D. (1973). Some thoughts on agentivity. Journal of Linguistics, 9(1), 11–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, P., & de Villiers, J. (1974). On this, that and the other: Non-egocentrism in very young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 18(3), 438–447. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Devescovi, A., D’Amico, S., & Gentille, P. (1999). The development of sentence comprehension in Italian: A reaction time study. First Language, 19(56), 129–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dong, Y., Gui, S., & Macwhinney, B. (2005). Shared and separate meanings in the bilingual mental lexicon. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8(3), 221–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 164–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, F. (1994). Choice of passive voice is affected by verb type and animacy. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(6), 715–736. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Folli, R., & Harley, H. (2005). Flavours of v: Consuming results in Italian and English. In P. Kempchinsky, & R. Slabakova (Eds.), Aspectual Enquiries (pp. 95–120). Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Causation, obligation and argument structure: On the nature of little v. Linguistic Inquiry, 38(2), 197–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Teleology and animacy in external arguments. Lingua, 118(2), 190–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (1987). The resolution of conflicts among competing systems: A bidirectional perspective. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8(4), 329–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gennari, S., Mirkovic, J., & MacDonald, M. (2012). Animacy and competition in relative clause production: A cross-linguistic investigation. Cognitive Psychology, 65(2), 141–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, D. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1(2), 67–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grimm, S. (2007). The bounds of subjecthood: Evidence from instruments. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 33(1), 178–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language, 36(1), 3–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F., & Li, P. (2012). The Psycholinguistics of Bilingualism. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hatim, B. (2014). Teaching and Researching Translation (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, A., & Bates, E., & Avila, L. (1996). Processing across the language boundary: a cross-modal priming study of Spanish-English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22(4), 846–864.Google Scholar
Hervey, S. G., & Higgins, I. (2002). Thinking French translation: a course in translation method: French to English (2nd ed). Psychology Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M. (2007). Static and dynamic location in French: Developmental and cross-linguistic perspectives. In M. Aurnague, M. Hickmann, & L. Vieu (Eds.), The Categorization of Spatial Entities in Language and Cognition (pp. 205–231). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M., & Hendriks, H. (2010). Typological constraints on the acquisition of spatial language in French and English. Cognitive Linguistics, 21(2), 189–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hurford, J. (1994). Grammar: A Student’s Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2003). What translation tells us about motion: A contrastive study of typologically different languages. IJES, International Journal of English Studies, 3(2), 151–175.Google Scholar
Itagaki, N., & Prideaux, G. (1985). Nominal properties as determinants of subject selection. Lingua, 66(23), 125–149.Google Scholar
Kail, M. (1999). Linguistic variations and cognitive constraints in the processing and the acquisition of language. In C. Fuchs, & S. Robert (Eds.), Language Diversity and Cognitive Representations (pp. 179–195). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M., & Charvillat, A. (1986). Linguistic cues in sentence processing in French children and adults from a cross-linguistic perspective. Advances in Psychology, 391, 349–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interferences in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connection between bilingual memory representation. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(2), 149–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, H., Bates, E., & Li, P. (1992). Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Chinese. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13(4), 451–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2005). A unified model of language acquisition. In J. F. Kroll, & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 49–67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (1989). The Crosslinguistic Study of Sentence Processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McDonald, J., Bock, J., & Kelly, M. (1993). Word and world order: semantic, phonological and metrical determinants of serial position. Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 188–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDonald, J., & Heilenman, L. (1991). Determinants of cue strength in adult first and second language speakers of French. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12(3), 313–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morett, L., & MacWhinney, B. (2013). Syntactic transfer in English-speaking Spanish learners 132–151.. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(1), 132–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L. (2004). Lexique 2: A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computer, 36(3), 516–524. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
New, B., Pallier, C., Ferrand, L., & Matos, R. (2001). Une base de données lexicales du français contemporain sur Internet: LEXIQUE. L’Année Psychologique, 1011, 447–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ochsenbauer, A., & Engemann, H. (2011). The impact of typological factors in monolingual and bilingual first language acquisition: Caused motion expressions in English and French. Language, Interaction and Acquisition/Langage, Interaction et Acquisition, 2(1), 101–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A. (2009). Conceptual representation in the bilingual lexicon and second language vocabulary learning. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), The Bilingual Mental Lexicon: Interdisciplinary Approaches (pp. 125–160). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C., & Gleitman, L. (2005). When English proposes what Greek presupposes: The cross-linguistic encoding of motion events. Cognition, 98(3), 75–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pearson, J., Stevenson, R., & Poesio, M. (2001). The effects of animacy, thematic role, and surface position on the focusing of entities in discourse. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Pham, G., & Ebert, K. D. (2016). A longitudinal analysis of sentence interpretation in bilingual children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(2), 461–485. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pham, G., & Kohnert, K. (2010). Sentence interpretation by typically developing Vietnamese – English bilingual children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31(3), 507–529. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pourcel, S., & Kopecka, A. (2005). Motion expression in French: Typological diversity. Durham & Newcastle working papers in linguistics, 111, 139–153.Google Scholar
Prat Sala, M. (1997). The Production of Different Word Orders: A Psycholinguistic and Developmental Approach. PhD Dissertation. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh. Available from [URL]
Rakison, D. H., & Poulin-Dubois, D. (2001). Developmental origin of the animate – inanimate distinction. Psychological Bulletin, 127(2), 209–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P., & Ellis, N. (2008). Conclusion: Cognitive Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition and L2 Instruction – Issues for Research. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 489–545). London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosenbach, A. (2005). Animacy versus weight as determinants of grammatical variation in English. Language, 81(3), 613–644. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, Y. (1991). English and Japanese interlanguage comprehension strategies – An analysis based on the Competition Model. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12(1), 47–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scholfield, P. (1995). Quantifying Language: A Researcher’s Guide to Gathering Language Data and Reducing it to Figures. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (1968). Imitation and grammatical development in children. In N. Endler, S. Boulter, & H. Osser (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Developmental Psychology (pp. 437–443). New York: Holt.Google Scholar
(1996). Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In M. Shibatani, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical Constructions. Their From and Meaning (pp. 195–219). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan I. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist, & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–258). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (2005). Relating narrative events in translation. In D. Ravid & H. B. Shyldkrot (Eds.), Perspectives on language and language development (pp. 115–129). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stosic, D., & Sarda, L. (2009). The many ways to be located: the expression of fictive motion in French and Serbian. In M. B. Vukanović, & L. G. Grmuša (Eds.), Space and Time in Language and Literature (pp. 39–60). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Su, I. -R. (2001). Transfer of sentence processing strategies: A comparison of L2 learners of Chinese and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22(1), 83–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics (Vol. 1 & 21). MIT press.Google Scholar
Tremoulet, P. D., & Feldman, J. (2000). Perception of animacy from the motion of a single object. Perception, 29(8), 943–951. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Nice, K. & Dietrich, R. (2003). Task sensitivity of animacy effects: from German picture descpritions. Linguistics, 41(5), 825–849.Google Scholar
Vinay, J. P., & Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative stylistics of French and English: a methodology for translation (Vol. 111). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, J., & Xu, C. (2015). Cue Competition between Animacy and Word Order: Acquisition of Chinese Notional Passives by L2 Learners. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 5(2), 213–224. Available from DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolff, P., Geon, G., & Li, Y. (2009). Causers in English, Korean and Chinese and the individuation of events. Language and Cognition, 1(2), 165–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolff, P., Jeon, G., Klettle, B., & Li, Y. (2010). Force creation and possible causers across languages. In B. Malt, P. Wolff (Eds.), Words and the Mind: How Words Capture Human Experience (pp. 93–110). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woods, A., Fletcher, P., & Hughes, A. (1986). Statistics in Language Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wust, V. (2010). L2 French learners’ processing of object clitics: Data from the classroom. L2 Journal, 2(1), 45–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Batardière, Marie-Thérèse, Sarah Berthaud, Bronagh Ćatibušić & Colin J. Flynn
2023. Language teaching and learning in Ireland: 2012–2021. Language Teaching 56:1 ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.