Native and Non-native Speakers’ Brain Responses to Filled Indirect Object Gaps
We examined native and non-native English speakers’ processing of indirect object wh -dependencies using a filled-gap paradigm while recording event-related potentials (ERPs). The non-native group was comprised of native German-speaking, proficient non-native speakers of English. Both participant gr...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of psycholinguistic research 2017-10, Vol.46 (5), p.1319-1338 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1338 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 1319 |
| container_title | Journal of psycholinguistic research |
| container_volume | 46 |
| creator | Jessen, Anna Festman, Julia Boxell, Oliver Felser, Claudia |
| description | We examined native and non-native English speakers’ processing of indirect object
wh
-dependencies using a filled-gap paradigm while recording event-related potentials (ERPs). The non-native group was comprised of native German-speaking, proficient non-native speakers of English. Both participant groups showed evidence of linking fronted indirect objects to the subcategorizing verb when this was encountered, reflected in an N400 component. Evidence for continued filler activation beyond the verb was seen only in the non-native group, in the shape of a prolonged left-anterior negativity. Both participant groups showed sensitivity to filled indirect object gaps reflected in a P600 response, which was more pronounced and more globally distributed in our non-native group. Taken together, our results indicate that resolving indirect object dependencies is a two-step process in both native and non-native sentence comprehension, with greater processing cost incurred in non-native compared to native comprehension. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10936-017-9496-9 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1899405835</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1155666</ericid><sourcerecordid>1942513171</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-dd27ed79f2551fa75ee97337f437e5da7b624ea2a48603a374fc7172be71c9493</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtKxTAQhoMoerw8gAul4MZNNNM0SbNU8YqoeFmHnHYqPfakNekR3Pkavp5PYg5VEcHVMPzfzPzzE7IJbA8YU_sBmOaSMlBUZ1pSvUBGIBSnUgixSEaMaUalZmKFrIYwYbHPc1gmK2kuWM4FjMjNle3rF0ysK5Or1lE3tHcd2if04ePtPTn0tnbJLYaudQFD0rfJSd00WCbnrqw9Fn1yPZ7My6ntwjpZqmwTcOOrrpGHk-P7ozN6eX16fnRwSQuus56WZaqwVLpKhYDKKoGoFeeqyrhCUVo1lmmGNrVZLhm3XGVVoUClY1RQxGf5Gtkd9na-fZ5h6M20DgU2jXXYzoKBXOuMifhlRHf-oJN25l10Z0BnqQAOCiIFA1X4NgSPlel8PbX-1QAz87jNELeJcZt53GZuYvtr82w8xfJn4jvfCGwNAPq6-JGPLwCEkFJGPR30EDX3iP6XtX-vfgJ_7JMF</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1942513171</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Native and Non-native Speakers’ Brain Responses to Filled Indirect Object Gaps</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Jessen, Anna ; Festman, Julia ; Boxell, Oliver ; Felser, Claudia</creator><creatorcontrib>Jessen, Anna ; Festman, Julia ; Boxell, Oliver ; Felser, Claudia</creatorcontrib><description>We examined native and non-native English speakers’ processing of indirect object
wh
-dependencies using a filled-gap paradigm while recording event-related potentials (ERPs). The non-native group was comprised of native German-speaking, proficient non-native speakers of English. Both participant groups showed evidence of linking fronted indirect objects to the subcategorizing verb when this was encountered, reflected in an N400 component. Evidence for continued filler activation beyond the verb was seen only in the non-native group, in the shape of a prolonged left-anterior negativity. Both participant groups showed sensitivity to filled indirect object gaps reflected in a P600 response, which was more pronounced and more globally distributed in our non-native group. Taken together, our results indicate that resolving indirect object dependencies is a two-step process in both native and non-native sentence comprehension, with greater processing cost incurred in non-native compared to native comprehension.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-6905</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-6555</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10936-017-9496-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28508351</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adult ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Brain ; Brain Hemisphere Functions ; Cognitive Processes ; Cognitive Psychology ; Comparative Analysis ; Comprehension ; Comprehension - physiology ; Electroencephalography ; English ; English language ; Event-related potentials ; Evoked Potentials - physiology ; Evoked responses ; Female ; German ; German language ; Humans ; Language ; Male ; Multilingualism ; Native Speakers ; Non English Speaking ; Nonnative speakers ; Psycholinguistics ; Psychology ; Responses ; Second language learning ; Semantics ; Sentences ; Verbs</subject><ispartof>Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2017-10, Vol.46 (5), p.1319-1338</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017</rights><rights>Journal of Psycholinguistic Research is a copyright of Springer, 2017.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-dd27ed79f2551fa75ee97337f437e5da7b624ea2a48603a374fc7172be71c9493</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-dd27ed79f2551fa75ee97337f437e5da7b624ea2a48603a374fc7172be71c9493</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9424-0950</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10936-017-9496-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10936-017-9496-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1155666$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28508351$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jessen, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Festman, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boxell, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Felser, Claudia</creatorcontrib><title>Native and Non-native Speakers’ Brain Responses to Filled Indirect Object Gaps</title><title>Journal of psycholinguistic research</title><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><description>We examined native and non-native English speakers’ processing of indirect object
wh
-dependencies using a filled-gap paradigm while recording event-related potentials (ERPs). The non-native group was comprised of native German-speaking, proficient non-native speakers of English. Both participant groups showed evidence of linking fronted indirect objects to the subcategorizing verb when this was encountered, reflected in an N400 component. Evidence for continued filler activation beyond the verb was seen only in the non-native group, in the shape of a prolonged left-anterior negativity. Both participant groups showed sensitivity to filled indirect object gaps reflected in a P600 response, which was more pronounced and more globally distributed in our non-native group. Taken together, our results indicate that resolving indirect object dependencies is a two-step process in both native and non-native sentence comprehension, with greater processing cost incurred in non-native compared to native comprehension.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Brain</subject><subject>Brain Hemisphere Functions</subject><subject>Cognitive Processes</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Comprehension</subject><subject>Comprehension - physiology</subject><subject>Electroencephalography</subject><subject>English</subject><subject>English language</subject><subject>Event-related potentials</subject><subject>Evoked Potentials - physiology</subject><subject>Evoked responses</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>German</subject><subject>German language</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Multilingualism</subject><subject>Native Speakers</subject><subject>Non English Speaking</subject><subject>Nonnative speakers</subject><subject>Psycholinguistics</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Responses</subject><subject>Second language learning</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Sentences</subject><subject>Verbs</subject><issn>0090-6905</issn><issn>1573-6555</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kMtKxTAQhoMoerw8gAul4MZNNNM0SbNU8YqoeFmHnHYqPfakNekR3Pkavp5PYg5VEcHVMPzfzPzzE7IJbA8YU_sBmOaSMlBUZ1pSvUBGIBSnUgixSEaMaUalZmKFrIYwYbHPc1gmK2kuWM4FjMjNle3rF0ysK5Or1lE3tHcd2if04ePtPTn0tnbJLYaudQFD0rfJSd00WCbnrqw9Fn1yPZ7My6ntwjpZqmwTcOOrrpGHk-P7ozN6eX16fnRwSQuus56WZaqwVLpKhYDKKoGoFeeqyrhCUVo1lmmGNrVZLhm3XGVVoUClY1RQxGf5Gtkd9na-fZ5h6M20DgU2jXXYzoKBXOuMifhlRHf-oJN25l10Z0BnqQAOCiIFA1X4NgSPlel8PbX-1QAz87jNELeJcZt53GZuYvtr82w8xfJn4jvfCGwNAPq6-JGPLwCEkFJGPR30EDX3iP6XtX-vfgJ_7JMF</recordid><startdate>20171001</startdate><enddate>20171001</enddate><creator>Jessen, Anna</creator><creator>Festman, Julia</creator><creator>Boxell, Oliver</creator><creator>Felser, Claudia</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9424-0950</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20171001</creationdate><title>Native and Non-native Speakers’ Brain Responses to Filled Indirect Object Gaps</title><author>Jessen, Anna ; Festman, Julia ; Boxell, Oliver ; Felser, Claudia</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-dd27ed79f2551fa75ee97337f437e5da7b624ea2a48603a374fc7172be71c9493</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Brain</topic><topic>Brain Hemisphere Functions</topic><topic>Cognitive Processes</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Comprehension</topic><topic>Comprehension - physiology</topic><topic>Electroencephalography</topic><topic>English</topic><topic>English language</topic><topic>Event-related potentials</topic><topic>Evoked Potentials - physiology</topic><topic>Evoked responses</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>German</topic><topic>German language</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Multilingualism</topic><topic>Native Speakers</topic><topic>Non English Speaking</topic><topic>Nonnative speakers</topic><topic>Psycholinguistics</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Responses</topic><topic>Second language learning</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Sentences</topic><topic>Verbs</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jessen, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Festman, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boxell, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Felser, Claudia</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of psycholinguistic research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jessen, Anna</au><au>Festman, Julia</au><au>Boxell, Oliver</au><au>Felser, Claudia</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1155666</ericid><atitle>Native and Non-native Speakers’ Brain Responses to Filled Indirect Object Gaps</atitle><jtitle>Journal of psycholinguistic research</jtitle><stitle>J Psycholinguist Res</stitle><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><date>2017-10-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>46</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1319</spage><epage>1338</epage><pages>1319-1338</pages><issn>0090-6905</issn><eissn>1573-6555</eissn><abstract>We examined native and non-native English speakers’ processing of indirect object
wh
-dependencies using a filled-gap paradigm while recording event-related potentials (ERPs). The non-native group was comprised of native German-speaking, proficient non-native speakers of English. Both participant groups showed evidence of linking fronted indirect objects to the subcategorizing verb when this was encountered, reflected in an N400 component. Evidence for continued filler activation beyond the verb was seen only in the non-native group, in the shape of a prolonged left-anterior negativity. Both participant groups showed sensitivity to filled indirect object gaps reflected in a P600 response, which was more pronounced and more globally distributed in our non-native group. Taken together, our results indicate that resolving indirect object dependencies is a two-step process in both native and non-native sentence comprehension, with greater processing cost incurred in non-native compared to native comprehension.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>28508351</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10936-017-9496-9</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9424-0950</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0090-6905 |
| ispartof | Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2017-10, Vol.46 (5), p.1319-1338 |
| issn | 0090-6905 1573-6555 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1899405835 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
| subjects | Adult Behavioral Science and Psychology Brain Brain Hemisphere Functions Cognitive Processes Cognitive Psychology Comparative Analysis Comprehension Comprehension - physiology Electroencephalography English English language Event-related potentials Evoked Potentials - physiology Evoked responses Female German German language Humans Language Male Multilingualism Native Speakers Non English Speaking Nonnative speakers Psycholinguistics Psychology Responses Second language learning Semantics Sentences Verbs |
| title | Native and Non-native Speakers’ Brain Responses to Filled Indirect Object Gaps |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T09%3A02%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Native%20and%20Non-native%20Speakers%E2%80%99%20Brain%20Responses%20to%20Filled%20Indirect%20Object%20Gaps&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20psycholinguistic%20research&rft.au=Jessen,%20Anna&rft.date=2017-10-01&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1319&rft.epage=1338&rft.pages=1319-1338&rft.issn=0090-6905&rft.eissn=1573-6555&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10936-017-9496-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1942513171%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1942513171&rft_id=info:pmid/28508351&rft_ericid=EJ1155666&rfr_iscdi=true |