Interference and filler-gap dependency formation in native and non-native language comprehension.

Area of Science:

• Psycholinguistics
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Second Language Acquisition

Background:

• Debate exists on differences between native (L1) and non-native (L2) sentence processing.
• One theory posits L2 processing underuses syntax, relying more on semantics and surface cues.
• An alternative theory suggests L1/L2 differences stem from memory retrieval interference susceptibility.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate filler-gap dependency formation in L1 and L2 language comprehension.
• To test susceptibility to similarity-based interference in L1 and L2 speakers.
• To evaluate two competing accounts of L1/L2 processing differences.

Main Methods:

• Investigated filler-gap dependency formation during sentence comprehension.
• Assessed similarity-based interference effects in both L1 and L2 speakers.
• Compared retrieval mechanisms between native and non-native language processing.

Main Results:

• Both L1 and L2 speakers successfully recovered filler information upon encountering a gap.
• Both groups exhibited susceptibility to similarity-based interference during dependency formation.
• No significant differences were found between L1 and L2 speakers regarding interference.

Conclusions:

• L1 and L2 speakers engage in comparable cue-based memory retrieval during sentence processing.
• Findings challenge the notion that L2 speakers underutilize syntactic information.
• The study supports a unified model of memory retrieval mechanisms across L1 and L2 comprehension.