Abstract
Based on a detailed review of existing studies of high-proficiency second-language (L2) learners who acquired the L2 in adolescence/adulthood, Cunnings (Cunnings, 2016) argues that Sorace's (2011) Interface Hypothesis (IH) and Clahsen and Felser's (2006) Shallow Structure Hypothesis (SSH) do not explain the existing data as well as his memory-based approach which posits that memory-retrieval processes in the L1 and L2 do not pattern alike. Cunnings proposes that L1 and L2 processing differ in terms of comprehenders’ ability to retrieve from memory information constructed during sentence processing. He concludes that L2 processing is more susceptible to interference effects during retrieval, and, most relevantly for this commentary, that discourse-based cues to memory retrieval are more heavily weighted in L2 than L1 processing.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics,Education
Reference8 articles.
1. Structural and semantic constraints on the resolution of pronouns and reflexives
2. Parsing and working memory in bilingual sentence processing;Cunnings;Bilingualism: Language and Cognition,2016
3. Schumacher P. , Roberts L. , & Järvikivi J. (in press). Agentivity drives real-time pronoun resolution: Evidence from German er and der. In press for Lingua.
4. Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism
5. Focusing on pronouns: Consequences of subjecthood, pronominalisation, and contrastive focus
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献