ARE BILINGUALS LIKE TWO MONOLINGUALS IN ONE PERSON? EVIDENCE FROM RESEARCH IN SENTENCE PROCESSING Eva M. Fernández [email protected] Queens College

ARE BILINGUALS LIKE TWO MONOLINGUALS IN ONE PERSON?

EVIDENCE FROM RESEARCHIN SENTENCE PROCESSING

Eva M. Ferná[email protected]

Queens College & Graduate Center ▪ CUNY

CUNY Academy ▪ Junior Faculty SeriesNovember 25 ▪ Rosenthal Library, Room 230 ▪ Queens College

COLLABORATION & SUPPORT

Dianne Bradley & Janet Fodor CUNY Graduate Center

Elaine KleinQueens College & Graduate Center, CUNY

Javier Sainz & Lola Oria-MerinoUniversidad Complutense de Madrid

RISLUS: Research Institute for the Study of Language in an Urban Society

CUNY Graduate Center

BILINGUAL PROCESSING

How do bilinguals process their two languages?

using strategies similar to those of monolinguals? with similar timing to that of monolinguals? with similar accuracy when the task involves it? with both written and acoustic stimuli?

¿ Bilingual (Lx, Ly) = Monolingual (Lx) + Monolingual (Ly) ?

A BILINGUAL IS…

a person who can communicate efficientlyin two codes, Lx & Ly

a person who has: underlying competence in Lx and Ly underlying differentiation of Lx and Ly

Lx

Ly

Who did you say that _ left?

Who did you say _ left?

¿Quién dijiste que _ se marchó?

¿Quién dijiste _ se marchó?

TWO COMPONENTS OR ONE?

TWO GRAMMARS

evidence: grammaticality judgments that differbetween Lx & Ly

requirement: grammaticality difference

rule in Lx rule in Ly

TWO PROCESSORS

evidence: processing preferences that differbetween Lx & Ly

requirement: processing difference

strategy in Lx strategy in Ly

MONOLINGUAL PERFORMANCE

Mary saw a gift for a boy …

WORDS

SENTENCES(parser)

PROPOSITIONS

Lx


SENTENCES(parser Lx)

Lx Ly

SENTENCES(parser Ly)

IF CROSS-LINGUISTICDIFFERENCES:

Mary saw a giftfor a boy …

María vio un regalo para un niño …

BILINGUAL PERFORMANCE


Lx Ly


TWO PARSERS?

STRATEGIES DEPEND ON THE LANGUAGE OF THE STIMULUS



BILINGUAL PERFORMANCE

Lx Ly

OR ONE?



UNIFORM STRATEGIES, WITH STIMULUS IN EITHER LANGUAGE;type of strategy depends on individual speaker variables



PARSING PRINCIPLES

MINIMAL ATTACHMENT(“Build the simplest structure”)

LATE CLOSURE / RECENCY PREFERENCE(“Attach locally”)

MINIMAL ATTACHMENT

Mary saw… Mary saw a gift for a boy…S

VP

V

saw

NP

a gift for a boy

NP

Mary

Mary saw a gift for a boy would be a good idea.

VP

would be a good idea

S

building complex structure = processing cost

LATE CLOSURE, in English

Mary saw a gift for a boy…

NP

PP

P

for

NP

a boy

NP

a gift

Mary saw a gift for a boy in a box.

PP

in a box

attaching non-locally = processing cost

LATE CLOSURE in English… y en español

María vio un regalo para un niño…

NP

PP

P

para

NP

un niño

NP

un regalo

María vio un regalo para un niño en una caja.

PP

en una caja

attaching non-locally = processing cost

LATE CLOSURE, RECENCY PREFERENCE

ATTACH LOCALLY

... a gift to a boy in a box

in many languages with many constructions

no interesting predictions for bilinguals:• bilinguals and monolinguals will all

prefer local attachments

EXCEPTION: N1 of N2 RC

… N1 of N2 RC

the relative clause (RC) attachment ambiguity structurally ambiguous: RC could attach to N1 or N2

An assassin shot the maid of the actress …

who was on the balcony.

Un asesino disparó a la criada de la actriz …

que estaba en el balcón.

EN:

SP:

N1 N2

N1 N2

QUESTIONNAIRE STUDIES

An assassin shot the maid of the actress who was on the balcony.

Who was on the balcony? the maid the actress

low attachment(N2) preference

high attachment(N1) preference

AMBIGUOUS TARGETS:

QUESTIONNAIRE STUDIES

Mary lent her favorite sweater to her best friend Susanne.

Who borrowed a sweater? Mary Susanne

An assassin shot the maid of the actress who was on the balcony.

Who was on the balcony? the maid the actress

AMBIGUOUS TARGETS:

UNAMBIGUOUS FILLERS:

SPANISH [high] ≠ ENGLISH [low]

LOW ATTACHMENT

ENGLISH, et a few al. Arabic Norwegian Romanian Swedish ??

Un asesino disparó a la criada de la actriz que estaba en el balcón.

An assassin shot the maid of the actress who was on the balcony. MONOLINGUALS…

HIGH ATTACHMENT

SPANISH, et al. Afrikaans, Dutch Brazilian Portuguese Bulgarian, Russian Croatian French German Greek ??

Un asesino disparó a la criada de la actriz que... HIGH in SP

An assassin shot the maid of the actress who… LOW in EN

BILINGUAL SENTENCE PROCESSING

BILINGUALS…

HIGH ATTACHMENT LOW ATTACHMENT

Babble babble in either language N1 P N2 RC… HIGH if SDOM

Babble babble in either language N1 P N2 RC… LOW if EDOM

LANGUAGE DEPENDENT PROCESSING:depending on the language of the stimulus?

LANGUAGE INDEPENDENT PROCESSING:same strategies, no matter the language;

type of strategy based on individual speaker variables?

HIGH ATTACHMENTin Spanish

LOW ATTACHMENTin English

HIGH ATTACHMENTif Spanish-dominant

LOW ATTACHMENTif English-dominant

CROSS-LINGUISTIC DIFFERENCES:

Ultimate preferences are the result ofinitial attachments Spanish parser English parser

Ultimate preferences are the result ofpost-syntactic processing Spanish parser = English parser departure from (early) low attachment due to semantics

(meaning), pragmatics (use), prosody (segmentation)…

WHY?


… la criada de la actriz que …


POST-SYNTAXPROCESSING(pragmatics,prosody? Lx)

… the maid of the actress that …


POST-SYNTAXPROCESSING(pragmatics,prosody? Ly)

(universal parser)

(universal parser)

the maid (N1) was on the balcony! the actress (N2) was on the balcony!

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

SUBJECTS monolingual & bilingual

MATERIALS English & Spanish

TASKS speeded “on-line” task (early processing) &

unspeeded “off-line” task (later processing)

SUBJECTS

Monolingual Speakers of…

American English

(USENG)

Castillian Spanish(CSPA)

N = 64 N = 64

Bilingual Speakers (from NYC)…

Dominant in English (EDOM)

Dominant in Spanish (SDOM)

N = 40 N = 40

Self-Rated Proficiencydifference Eng – Spa,

listening/speaking reading/writing

– 0.75– 1.15

+ 0.72+ 0.77

The journalist interviewed the coach of the gymnast…

… the coach of the gymnasts that was …

… the coaches of the gymnast that was …

… the coach of the gymnast that was …

MATERIALS

Ambiguous, questionnaire:

Disambiguated, self-paced reading:

Matrix with N of/de N in post-verbal position:

Ambiguous, questionnaire:

Disambiguated, self-paced reading:

Matrix with N of/de N in post-verbal position:El periodista entrevistó al entrenador del gimnasta…

… el entrenador de los gimnastas que estaba ...

… los entrenadores del gimnasta que estaba …

… el entrenador del gimnasta que estaba …

MATERIALS

SELF-PACED READING TASK

EARLY PROCESSING Read DISAMBIGUATED sentences

presented in 2 frames followed by comprehension questions INDIRECT measure of preferences which is faster, a forced low or a forced high

attachment?

… the coaches of the gymnast / that was …

… the coach of the gymnasts / that was …

The journalist interviewed the coach of the gymnaststhat was signing autographs during the competition.

forced high

forced low

Was the coach signing autographs during the competition?

QUESTIONNAIRE TASK

LATER PROCESSING Read AMBIGUOUS sentences

typed on one line followed by question about the attachment DIRECT measure of preferences which is chosen more frequently,

N2 or N1?

The journalist interviewed the coach of the gymnast that was sick.

Who was sick? the coach the gymnast

The dog bit the mailman and barked at the cat.

Who bit the mailman? the dog the cat

… the coach of the gymnasts

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

USENG CSPA

ON-LINE READING TIMES: MONOLINGUALS

that was signing autographs during the competition.FRAME 2FRAME 1The journalist interviewed the coaches of the

gymnast

… the coaches of the gymnast

low attachmentpreference:low faster

high attachmentpreference: high faster

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

USENG CSPA

ON-LINE READING TIMES: MONOLINGUALS

main effect of Site:F1 (1,72) = 7.77, p < .01F2 (1,20) = 6.15, p < .05

Language Site n/s

25

50

75

USENG CSPA

OFF-LINE PREFERENCES:MONOLINGUALS

… the coach of the gymnast that was signing autographs…

Who was signing autographs? the coach the gymnastthe coach the gymnast

low attachmentpreference

high attachmentpreference

25

50

75

USENG CSPA

OFF-LINE PREFERENCES:MONOLINGUALS

main effect of Language:F1 (1,44) = 5.48, p < .025

F2 (1,10) = 56.05, p < .001

ON-LINE READING TIMES:BILINGUALS

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

ENG SPA

EDOM SDOM

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

ENG SPA

EDOM SDOM

main effect of Site n/s:F1, F2 < 1

Site Language n/sSite Dominance n/s

Site Dominance Language n/s

MONOLINGUALS

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

USENG CSPA

ON-LINE READING TIMES:MONOLINGUALS & BILINGUALS

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

English Materials

Spanish Materials

Rel

ativ

e C

laus

e, O

vera

ll R

Ts

(mse

c)

USENG & CSPA EDOM SDOM

SUBJECTS

Monolingual Speakers of…

American English

(USENG)

Castillian Spanish(CSPA)

N = 64 N = 64

Bilingual Speakers (from NYC)…

Dominant in English (EDOM)

Dominant in Spanish (SDOM)

N = 40 N = 40

Self-Rated Proficiencydifference Eng – Spa,

listening/speaking reading/writing

– 0.75– 1.15

+ 0.72+ 0.77

25

50

75

ENG SPA

EDOM SDOM

25

50

75

ENG SPA

EDOM SDOM

OFF-LINE PREFERENCES: BILINGUALS

MONOLINGUALS

25

50

75

USENG CSPA

Dominance Language n/s

main effect of Dominance:F1 (1,40) = 9.04, p < .005

F2 (1,20) = 59.36, p < .001

EARLY PROCESSING Low attachment in English and Spanish monolinguals

Bilinguals slower than monolinguals

No attachment preferences in English/Spanish bilinguals

LATER PROCESSING Differences in monolingual English (low) and Spanish

(high)

Language independent processing in bilinguals

Strategies associated with those of monolinguals in the bilinguals’ dominant language

BILINGUAL SENTENCE PROCESSING:1 + 1 = 1

Do bilinguals process input as if they were monolinguals of each of their languages?

NO

BILINGUAL SENTENCE PROCESSING

BILINGUALS…

HIGH ATTACHMENT LOW ATTACHMENT

Babble babble in either language N1 P N2 RC… HIGH if SDOM

Babble babble in either language N1 P N2 RC… LOW if EDOM

LANGUAGE DEPENDENT PROCESSING:depending on the language of the stimulus?X X X X

LANGUAGE INDEPENDENT PROCESSING:same strategies, no matter the language;

type of strategy based on language dominance

HIGH ATTACHMENTif Spanish-dominant

LOW ATTACHMENTif English-dominant

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

CONVERGING EVIDENCE?

Brazilian Portuguese & English bilinguals

off-line questionnaire BP L1 or EN L1

BP L1 bilinguals: high in both languages EN L1 bilinguals: low in both languages

(Maia & Maia, 2001)

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS


Spanish & English bilinguals

off-line questionnaire early acquirers of Lx & Ly;

late acquirers of EN L2 or SP L2

early acquirers: no preference late acquirers:

• EN L2: low in EN, high in SP• SP L2: low in EN & SP

(Dussias, 2001)

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS


Spanish & English bilinguals

on-line self-paced reading, materials only in SP early acquirers of Lx & Ly;

late acquirers of EN L2 or SP L2

early acquirers: no preference late acquirers:

• EN L2: high in SP• SP L2: trend to high in SP

(Dussias, 2001)

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS


speakers of Greek as L2

on-line self-paced reading, materials only in GK late acquirers of GK, L1 speakers of SP, GE, RU

all L2 learner groups: no preference

(Papadopoulou, 2002)

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

Relative Clause Attachment Preferences Similarity between English and Spanish in

early processing Departure from low attachment preference in

later phases of processing

Bilingual sentence processing Evidence of language-independent strategy

use Strategies resemble those of monolingual

speakers of a bilingual’s dominant language

REMAINING PROBLEMS

insensitive “on-line” task did we miss the early low attachment preference in the bilinguals? or do bilinguals not engage in structurally-based processing strategies?

a mystery, what drives cross-linguistic differences grammar? (unlikely, given these results) person-based variable: lexical frequencies? tuning? prosody?

circumstantial idiosyncrasies of bilinguals corroborate with evidence from other bilingual populations

focus on language dominance: other variables? manner and age of acquisition frequency of language use literacy, primary language of education etc.

THANK YOU!

Please send questions and comments to:

Eva Ferná[email protected]

download a copy of this presentation at:

http://www.qc.edu/~efernand/papers/emf_25nov02.ppt

Documents

ARE BILINGUALS LIKE TWO MONOLINGUALS IN ONE PERSON? EVIDENCE FROM RESEARCH IN SENTENCE PROCESSING Eva M. Fernández [email protected] Queens College