Chapter published in:
Sources of Variation in First Language Acquisition: Languages, contexts, and learnersEdited by Maya Hickmann †, Edy Veneziano and Harriet Jisa
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 22] 2018
► pp. 313–338
Chapter 15Online sentence processing in simultaneous French/Swedish bilinguals
Michèle Kail | Laboratoire Structures Formelles du Langage, CNRS & Université Paris 8
Maria Kihlstedt | Laboratoire Modèles, Dynamique, Corpus, Université Paris Nanterre & CNRS
Philippe Bonnet | Laboratoire de Psychologie et Neuropsychologie Cognitive, CNRS & Université Paris Descartes
Within the Competition Model, cue validity and cue cost can serve to make predictions about real-time sentence processing in a cross-linguistic perspective. Previous research with monolingual children and adults in French (Kail 2004) and Swedish (Kail et al. 2012) proposed that cue cost is determined by contextual and structural information, word order and morphology. On the basis of online grammaticality judgments, we investigated whether these cue cost constraints are equally efficient and follow the same hierarchy in simultaneous French/Swedish bilinguals and in their monolingual counterparts. Although bilinguals were slower and less accurate, the weight of each cue cost component was similar for both groups. Bilinguals’ longer detection times are linked to specific interactions between cue cost components not observed in monolinguals. This result is compatible with the cognitive cost implied by the need to inhibit the non-relevant language during bilingual processing.
Keywords: Competition Model, cue cost, online grammaticality judgment, simultaneous bilinguals, French, Swedish, bilingual processing, detection times
Article outline
- Introduction
- 1.Sentence processing in the Competition Model
- 2.Selected characteristics of French and Swedish
- 2.1Word order
- French
- Swedish
- 2.2Verbal and nominal agreement
- French
- Swedish
- 2.1Word order
- 3.Main factors of cue cost
- 3.1Violation Position: Early vs. late
- 3.2Violation Span: Intraphrasal vs. interphrasal
- 3.3Violation Type: Agreement vs. word order
- 4.Previous results on cue cost in French and Swedish monolinguals
- 5.Method
- 5.1Participants
- 5.2Linguistic material
- 5.3Experimental apparatus
- 6.Cue cost in simultaneous French /Swedish bilinguals
- 6.1Are simultaneous bilinguals less efficient than monolinguals?
- 6.1.1Accuracy of online grammaticality judgments
- 6.1.2Detection times
- 6.2Similar patterns of cue cost in bilinguals and monolinguals
- 6.2.1Contextual information: Violation Position (early vs. late)
- French
- Swedish
- 6.2.2Structural information: Violation Span (intraphrasal vs. interphrasal)
- French
- Swedish
- 6.2.3Violation Type (agreement vs. word order)
- French
- Swedish
- 6.2.1Contextual information: Violation Position (early vs. late)
- 6.3Interactions of factors specific to bilinguals
- 6.3.1Interaction of Violation Position and Violation Type in French
- 6.3.2Interaction of Violation Position and Violation Span in Swedish
- 6.4Specific cue cost hierarchies in bilinguals
- 6.1Are simultaneous bilinguals less efficient than monolinguals?
- 7.Discussion and concluding remarks
- What global performances tell us about bilinguals
- Cue cost factors in bilinguals and monolinguals
-
Acknowledgements -
References
Published online: 22 February 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.22.16kai
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.22.16kai
References
Allen, S.
Ammon, M. & Slobin, D. I.
Bates, E., Devescovi, A. & Wulfeck, B.
Bialystok, E.
Blackwell, A., Bates, E. & Fisher, D.
Charvillat, A. & Kail, M.
Cohen, J., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M. & Provost, J.
de Groot, A. M. B.
De Houwer, A.
Devescovi, A. & D'Amico, S.
Devescovi, A., D’Amico, S. & Gentille, P.
Dussias, P. E.
Frenck-Mestre, C.
Genesee, F.
Grosjean, F.
Heredia, R. R. & Stewart, M. T.
Jörgensen, N.
Kail, M.
Kail, M. & Bassano, D.
Kail, M. & Diakogiorgi, K.
Kail, M., Costa, A. & Hub Faria, I.
Kail, M., Kihlstedt, M. & Bonnet, P.
Kempe, V. & MacWhinney, B.
Kilborn, K.
Lambert, L. & Kail, M.
Lindner, K.
Liu, H., Bates, E. & Li, P.
MacWhinney, B.
MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E.
Sekerina, I. A., Fernandez, E. M. & Clahsen, H.
Staron, M., Bokus, B. & Kail, M.
Teleman, U., Hellberg, S. & Andersson, E.
Tucker, G. R., Lambert, W. E. & Rigault, A. A.
Trueswell, J. C.
Wulfeck, B.
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Kail, Michèle
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 march 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.