We investigated the comprehension of subject-verb agreement in Turkish-German bilinguals using two tasks. The first task elicited speeded judgments to verb number violations in sentences that contained plural genitive modifiers. We addressed whether these modifiers elicited attraction errors, which have supported the use of a memory retrieval mechanism in monolingual comprehension studies. The second task examined the comprehension of a language-specific constraint of Turkish against plural-marked verbs with overt plural subjects. Bilinguals showed a reduced application of this constraint, as compared to Turkish monolinguals. Critically, both groups showed similar rates of attraction, but the bilingual group accepted ungrammatical sentences more often. We propose that the similarity in attraction rates supports the use of the same retrieval mechanism, but that bilinguals have more problems than monolinguals in the mapping of morphological to abstract agreement features during speeded comprehension, which results in increased acceptability of ungrammatical sentences.
(2005) Making syntax of sense: Number agreement in sentence production. Psychological Review, 1121, 531–559.
(2000) The affectedness of the verbal complex in American Hungarian. In A. Fenyvesi & K. Sándor (Eds.), Language contact and the verbal complex of Dutch and Hungarian. Working papers from the 1st Bilingual Language Use Theme Meeting of the Study Centre on Language Contact, November11–13 1999, Szeged, Hungary, 94–107. Szeged: JGyTF Press.
(1993) Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika, 801, 27–38.
(2011) Integrated knowledge of agreement in early and late English-Spanish bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 321, 187–220.
Franck, J., Vigliocco, G., & Nicol, J.
(2002) Attraction in sentence production: The role of syntactic structure. Language and Cognitive Processes, 171, 371–404.
Gelman, A., Jakulin, A., Pittau, M. G. & Su, T. S.
(2008) A weakly informative default prior distribution for logistic and other regression models. Annals of Applied Statistics, 21, 1360–383.
Gibson, E., Piantadosi, S., & Fedorenko, K.
(2011) Using Mechanical Turk to obtain and analyze English acceptability judgments. Language and Linguistic Compass, 51, 509–524.
(1987) Distance restrictions on syntactic processes. In H. E. Boeschoten & L. T. Verhoeven (Eds.), Studies on Modern Turkish: Proceedings of the Third Conference on Turkish Linguistics (pp. 69–81). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C.
(2005) Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. New York: Routledge.
Hartsuiker, R. J., Antón-Méndez, I., & van Zee, M.
(2001) Object attraction in subject-verb agreement construction. Journal of Memory and Language, 451, 546–572.
(2012) The emergence of attraction errors during sentence comprehension. Doctoral Dissertation, Universität Konstanz.
Jaeger, T. F.
(2008) Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 591, 434–446.
Jäger, L., Engelmann, F., & Vasishth, S.
(2017) Similarity-based interference in sentence comprehension: Literature review and Bayesian meta-analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 941, 316–339.
(1997) Turkish. London, New York: Routledge.
Kupisch, T. & Rothman, J.
(2016) Terminology matters! Why difference is not incompleteness and how early child bilinguals are heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 1–9.
Kuznetsova, A., Bruun Brockhoff, P., & Haubo Bojesen Christensen, R.
(2014) lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package). R package version 2.0–11. [URL].
Lago, S., Shalom, D., Sigman, M., Lau, E., & Phillips, C.
(2015) Agreement attraction in Spanish comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 821, 133–149.
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M.
(2012) Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 441, 325–343.
Lorimor, H., Bock, J. K., Zalkind, E., Sheyman, A., & Beard, R.
(2008) Number Agreement and Attraction in Russian. Language and Cognitive Processes, 231, 769–799.
Lorimor, H., Jackson, C. N., & Foote, R.
(2015) How gender affects number: Cue-based retrieval in agreement production. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 301, 947–954.
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H., & Kaushanskaya, M.
(2007) The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 4, 940–967.
(2016) Minimal Interference from Possessor Phrases in the Production of Subject-Verb Agreement. Frontiers in Psychology.
Nicol, J. L., Forster, K. I., & Veres, C.
(1997) Subject – verb agreement processes in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 361, 569–587.
Nicol, J., & Wilson, R.
(1999) “Agreement and case-marking in Russian: a psycholinguistic investigation of agreement errors in production,” in The Eight Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Languages. The Philadelphia Meeting (Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications), 314–327.
Pearlmutter, N. J., Garnsey, S. M., & Bock, K.
(1999) Agreement processes in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 411, 427–456.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 april 2022. 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.