Native speakers and task performance: comparing effects on complexity, fluency, and lexical diversity

This article argues that a native-speaker baseline is a neglected dimension of studies into second language (L2) performance. If we investigate how learners perform language tasks, we should distinguish what performance features are due to their processing an L2 and which are due to their performing a particular task. Having defined what we mean by “native speaker,” we present the background to a research study into task features on nonnative task performance, designed to include native-speaker data as a baseline for interpreting nonnative-speaker performance. The nonnative results, published in this journal (Tavakoli & Foster, 2008) are recapitulated and then the native-speaker results are presented and discussed in the light of them. The study is guided by the assumption that limited attentional resources impact on L2 performance and explores how narrative design features—namely complexity of storyline and tightness of narrative structure— affect complexity, fluency, accuracy, and lexical diversity in language. The results show that both native and nonnative speakers are prompted by storyline complexity to use more subordinated language, but narrative structure had different effects on native and nonnative fluency. The learners, who were based in either London or Tehran, did not differ in their performance when compared to each other, except in lexical diversity, where the learners in London were close to native-speaker levels. The implications of the results for the applicability of Levelt’s model of speaking to an L2 are discussed, as is the potential for further L2 research using native speakers as a baseline.

Mediating between hearer's and speaker's views in the generation of adaptive explanations

In this article, we examine the case of a system that cooperates with a “direct” user to plan an activity that some “indirect” user, not interacting with the system, should perform. The specific application we consider is the prescription of drugs. In this case, the direct user is the prescriber and the indirect user is the person who is responsible for performing the therapy. Relevant characteristics of the two users are represented in two user models. Explanation strategies are represented in planning operators whose preconditions encode the cognitive state of the indirect user; this allows tailoring the message to the indirect user's characteristics. Expansion of optional subgoals and selection among candidate operators is made by applying decision criteria represented as metarules, that negotiate between direct and indirect users' views also taking into account the context where explanation is provided. After the message has been generated, the direct user may ask to add or remove some items, or change the message style. The system defends the indirect user's needs as far as possible by mentioning the rationale behind the generated message. If needed, the plan is repaired and the direct user model is revised accordingly, so that the system learns progressively to generate messages suited to the preferences of people with whom it interacts.

Gaps in second language sentence processing

Four groups of second language (L2) learners of English from different language backgrounds (Chinese, Japanese, German, and Greek) and a group of native speaker controls participated in an online reading time experiment with sentences involving long-distance whdependencies. Although the native speakers showed evidence of making use of intermediate syntactic gaps during processing, the L2 learners appeared to associate the fronted wh-phrase directly with its lexical subcategorizer, regardless of whether the subjacency constraint was operative in their native language. This finding is argued to support the hypothesis that nonnative comprehenders underuse syntactic information in L2 processing.

The (il)logical problem of heritage speaker bilingualism and incomplete acquisition

This Forum challenges and problematizes the term incomplete acquisition, which has been widely used to describe the state of competence of heritage speaker (HS) bilinguals for well over a decade (see, e.g., Montrul, 2008). It is suggested and defended that HS competence, while often different from monolingual peers, is in fact not incomplete (given any reasonable definition by the word incomplete), but simply distinct for reasons related to the realities of their environment.

Heritage speaker competence differences, language change and input type: inflected infinitives in Heritage Brazilian Portuguese

It has been argued that colloquial dialects of Brazilian Portuguese (BP) have undergone significant linguistic change resulting in the loss of inflected infinitives (e.g., Pires, 2002, 2006). Since BP adults, at least educated ones, have complete knowledge of inflected infinitives, the implicit claim is that they are transmitted via formal education in the standard dialect. In the present article, I test one of the latent predictions of such claims; namely, the fact that heritage speakers of BP who lack formal education in the standard dialect should never develop native-like knowledge of inflected infinitives. In doing so, I highlight two significant implications (a) that heritage speaker grammars are a good source for testing dialectal variation and language change proposals and (b) incomplete acquisition and/or attrition are not the only sources of heritage language competence differences. Employing the syntactic and semantic tests of Rothman and Iverson (2007), I compare heritage speakers' knowledge to Rothman and Iverson's advanced adult L2 learners and educated native controls. Unlike the latter groups, the data for heritage speakers indicate that they do not have target knowledge of inflected infinitives, lending support to Pires' claims, suggesting that literacy plays a significant role in the acquisition of this grammatical property in BP.

The timing of island effects in nonnative sentence processing

Using the eye-movement monitoring technique in two reading comprehension experiments, we investigated the timing of constraints on wh-dependencies (so-called ‘island’ constraints) in native and nonnative sentence processing. Our results show that both native and nonnative speakers of English are sensitive to extraction islands during processing, suggesting that memory storage limitations affect native and nonnative comprehenders in essentially the same way. Furthermore, our results show that the timing of island effects in native compared to nonnative sentence comprehension is affected differently by the type of cue (semantic fit versus filled gaps) signalling whether dependency formation is possible at a potential gap site. Whereas English native speakers showed immediate sensitivity to filled gaps but not to lack of semantic fit, proficient German-speaking learners of L2 English showed the opposite sensitivity pattern. This indicates that initial wh-dependency formation in nonnative processing is based on semantic feature-matching rather than being structurally mediated as in native comprehension.

Processing reflexives in a second language: the timing of structural and discourse-level information

We report the results from two eye-movement monitoring experiments examining the processing of reflexive pronouns by proficient German-speaking learners of second language (L2) English. Our results show that the nonnative speakers initially tried to link English argument reflexives to a discourse-prominent but structurally inaccessible antecedent, thereby violating binding condition A. Our native speaker controls, in contrast, showed evidence of applying condition A immediately during processing. Together, our findings show that L2 learners’ initial focusing on a structurally inaccessible antecedent cannot be due to first language influence and is also independent of whether the inaccessible antecedent c-commands the reflexive. This suggests that unlike native speakers, nonnative speakers of English initially attempt to interpret reflexives through discourse-based coreference assignment rather than syntactic binding.

A prolegomenon to the construct of the native speaker: heritage speaker bilinguals are natives too!

This Forum challenges the generally accepted position in the linguistic sciences—conscious or not—that monolingualism and nativeness are essentially synonymous in an exclusive way. We discuss two consequences of our position that naturalistic bilinguals and multilinguals exposed to a language in early childhood are also native speakers: (i) that bi-/multilinguals have multiple native languages;and (ii) nativeness can be applicable to a state of linguistic knowledge that is characterized by significant differences to the monolingual baseline.

Exploring the source of differences and similarities in L1 attrition and heritage speaker competence: evidence from pronominal resolution

Several studies of different bilingual groups including L2 learners, child bilinguals, heritage speakers and L1 attriters reveal similar performance on syntax-discourse interface properties such as anaphora resolution (Sorace, 2011 and references therein). Specifically, bilinguals seem to allow more optionality in the interpretation of overt subject pronouns in null subject languages, such as Greek, Italian and Spanish while the interpretation of null subject pronouns is indistinguishable from monolingual natives. Nevertheless, there is some evidence pointing to bilingualism effects on the interpretation of null subject pronouns too in heritage speakers’ grammars (Montrul, 2004) due to some form of ‘arrested’ development in this group of bilinguals. The present study seeks to investigate similarities and differences between two Greek–Swedish bilingual groups, heritage speakers and L1 attriters, in anaphora resolution of null and overt subject pronouns in Greek using a self-paced listening with a sentence-picture matching decision task at the end of each sentence. The two groups differ in crucial ways: heritage speakers were simultaneous or early bilinguals while the L1 attriters were adult learners of the second language, Swedish. Our findings reveal differences from monolingual preferences in the interpretation of the overt pronoun for both heritage and attrited speakers while the differences attested between the two groups in the interpretation of null subject pronouns affect only response times with heritage being faster than attrited speakers. We argue that our results do not support an age of onset or differential input effects on bilingual performance in pronoun resolution.

Eventive and stative passives and copula selection in Canadian and American heritage speaker Spanish

Spanish captures the difference between eventive and stative passives via an obligatory choice between two copula; verbal passives take the copula ser and adjectival passives take the copula estar. In this study, we compare and contrast US and Canadian heritage speakers of Spanish on their knowledge of this difference in relation to copula choice in Spanish. The backgrounds of the target groups differ significantly from each other in that only one of them, the Canadian group, has grown up in a societal multilingual environment. We discuss the results as being supportive of two non-mutually exclusive explanation factors: (a) French facilitates (bootstraps) the acquisition of eventive and stative passives and/or (b) the US/Canadian HS differences (e.g. status of bilingualism and the languages at stake) is a reflection of the uniqueness of the language contact situations and the effects this has on the input HSS receive.