The Uniform Information Density (UID) hypothesis proposes that speakers communicate by transmitting information close to a constant rate. When choosing between two syntactic variants, it claims that speakers prefer the variant distributing information most evenly, avoiding signal peaks and troughs. If speakers prefer transmitting information uniformly, then comprehenders should also prefer a uniform signal, experiencing difficulty whenever confronted with informational peaks. However, the literature investigating this hypothesis has focused mostly on production, with only a few studies considering comprehension. In this study, we investigate comprehension in two eye-tracking experiments. Participants read sentences of two different lengths, reflecting different degrees of density, containing either a dense structure (a nominal compound, NC) or a structure that spreads the information through more words (a noun followed by a prepositional phrase, PP). Favoring the UID hypothesis, participants gazed longer at text segments following the critical structure when it was an NC than when it was a PP. They also regressed more in sentences containing longer structures. However, the pattern of results was not as clear as expected, potentially reflecting participants’ experience with the denser structure or task differences between production and comprehension. These aspects should be taken into account in future research investigating the UID hypothesis for comprehension.

Generative approaches to syntactic control have traditionally viewed it as a distinct component of the grammar, one that governs the interpretation and distribution of the empty category (EC) PRO. However, the Movement Theory of Control (MTC) proposes that control should instead be conceived of as a form of raising, with both sentence types involving the EC DP/NP Trace. In addition to theoretical arguments, some behavioral research on antecedent reactivation has demonstrated that different ECs reactivate their antecedents to different degrees and at different points in the time course of comprehension. In this study, we used a cross-modal repetition priming paradigm to examine antecedent reactivation in Brazilian Portuguese. We found significantly greater activation at the gap position in raising sentences and in those with overt pronouns as compared to (exhaustive) control sentences, consistent with the standard account of raising and the traditional view of control as involving a distinct EC. Additionally, we found some evidence for a differentiation between exhaustive and partial control structures. Overall, our results suggest that 1) similar linguistic mechanisms are employed in the processing of sentences that involve overt pronouns and DP/NP traces, and 2) different mechanisms are employed in the processing of raising and control structures, a finding we view as inconsistent with the MTC.

A central finding of bilingual research is that cognates – words that share semantic, phonological, and orthographic characteristics across languages – are processed faster than non-cognate words. However, it remains unclear whether cognate facilitation effects are reliant on identical cognates, or whether facilitation simply varies along a continuum of cross-language orthographic and phonological similarity. In two experiments, German–English bilinguals read identical cognates, close cognates, and non-cognates in a lexical decision task and a sentence-reading task while their eye movements were recorded. Participants read the stimuli in their L1 German and L2 English. Converging results found comparable facilitation effects of identical and close cognates vs. non-cognates. Cognate facilitation could be described as a continuous linear effect of cross-language orthographic similarity on lexical decision accuracy and latency, as well as fixation durations. Cross-language phonological similarity modulated the continuous orthographic similarity effect in single word recognition, but not in sentence processing.

The present study investigates the interplay between proficiency and empathy in the development of second language (L2) prosody by analyzing the perception and processing of intonation in questions and statements in L2 Spanish. A total of 225 adult L2 Spanish learners (L1 English) from the Northeastern United States completed a two-alternative forced choice (2AFC) task in which they listened to four utterance types and categorized them as either questions or statements. We used Bayesian multilevel regression and drift diffusion modeling to analyze the 2AFC data as a function of proficiency level and empathy scores for each utterance type. We show that learner response accuracy and sensitivity to intonation are positively correlated with proficiency, and this association is affected by individual empathy levels in both response accuracy and sentence processing. Higher empathic individuals, in comparison with lower empathic individuals, appear to be more sensitive to intonation cues in the process of forming sound-meaning associations, though increased sensitivity does not necessarily imply increased processing speed. The results motivate the inclusion of measures of pragmatic skill, such as empathy, to better account for intonational meaning processing and sentence comprehension in second language acquisition.

We introduce the pair of special issues of Applied Psycolinguistics (this issue, next issue) titled “Towards a just and equitable applied psycholinguistics.” This paper motivates the need for this project, details the editorial process, and provides a brief summary of each article appearing in the special issues.

Language production is incremental in nature; we tend to plan linguistic chunks prior to articulating the first word of the utterance. Researchers have acquired knowledge about how far ahead sentences are generally planned, but mostly in monolinguals or the speaker's first language (Allum & Wheeldon, 2007; Martin, Crowther, Knight, Tamborello II, & Yang, 2010; Wagner, Jescheniak, & Schriefers, 2010). It is unclear whether the scope of planning is the same in bilinguals, or the speaker's second language. Here, we examined planning scope in Dutch–English bilinguals' sentence production using a paradigm that elicits descriptions of short animations. Analyses of speech onset times and articulation durations suggest that, on the surface, bilinguals have comparable planning scope in L1 and L2. However, in their L2, bilinguals extended their articulation duration, suggesting that they committed early to the initial noun phrase, but produced it more slowly to buy time to plan the next noun phrase.

How do native speakers process texts with anomalous learner syntax? Second-language learners of Norwegian, and other verb-second (V2) languages, frequently place the verb in third position (e.g., *Adverbial-Subject-Verb), although it is mandatory for the verb in these languages to appear in second position (Adverbial-Verb-Subject). In an eye-tracking study, native Norwegian speakers read sentences with either grammatical V2 or ungrammatical verb-third (V3) word order. Unlike previous eye-tracking studies of ungrammaticality, which have primarily addressed morphosyntactic anomalies, we exclusively manipulate word order with no morphological or semantic changes. We found that native speakers reacted immediately to ungrammatical V3 word order, indicated by increased fixation durations and more regressions out on the subject, and subsequently on the verb. Participants also recovered quickly, already on the following word. The effects of grammaticality were unaffected by the length of the initial adverbial. The study contributes to future models of sentence processing which should be able to accommodate various types of “noisy” input, that is, non-standard variation. Together with new studies of processing of other L2 anomalies in Norwegian, the current findings can help language instructors and students prioritize which aspects of grammar to focus on.

Sentences that have more than one possible meaning are said to be syntactically ambiguous (SA). Because the correct interpretation of these sentences can be unclear, resolving SA sentences can be cognitively demanding for children, particularly with regards to inhibitory control (IC). In this study we provide three lines of evidence supporting the importance of IC in SA resolution. First, we show that children with higher IC resolve more SA sentences correctly. Second, we show that SA resolution is worse on tasks that place higher demands on IC, even for children with high IC. Third, we show that children with higher IC make different types of SA errors than children with lower IC. This study expands understanding of the cognitive skills underlying language and suggests a need to consider task demands on IC when developing educational curriculums.

A long-standing question about bilingualism concerns which representations are shared across languages. Recent work has revealed a bilingual Sentence Superiority Effect (SSE) among French–English bilinguals reading mixed-language sentences: identification of target words is more accurate in syntactically grammatical than ungrammatical sentences. While this ability to connect words across the two languages has been attributed to a rapid parsing of shared syntactic representations, outstanding questions remain about the role of semantics. Here, we replicate the SSE in Spanish–English bilinguals (e.g., better identification of vacío in “my vaso is vacío” [my glass is empty] than “is vaso my vacío” [is glass my empty]). Importantly, we report evidence that semantics do contribute to word identification, but significantly less than syntax and only in the context of syntactically grammatical sentences. Moreover, the effect is moderated by language proficiency, further constraining the conditions under which shared cross-linguistic representations are rapidly accessed in the bilingual mind.

The task of finding a case type that, on average, enhances the processing of verbal material has yielded mixed results in the literature. This study tackled this issue with an eye to the issue of processing textual information on road signs and the additional consideration of readers’ attentive states. Participants (n = 104) completed three experiments, the first two of which made use of both short (i.e., attentive state) and long (i.e., nonattentive or mind-wandering state) inter-trial intervals (ITIs). Experiment I consisted of a living versus non-living category-decision task involving the presentation of single words. Experiment II consisted of a sensical versus nonsensical sentence-judgment task. Experiment III consisted of a recognition memory task for words presented during the category-decision task. No significant difference in letter-case-type effectiveness was found for either the semantic categorization of or memory for single words. On the other hand, sensical sentences were correctly judged more quickly in lower case (or, more precisely, sentence case with the first letter of the first word capitalized). Such results point to either a more fluent processing of or enhanced conceptual resonance for sentences presented in lower case.

This review provides an update on what we know about differences in prediction in a first and second language after several years of extensive research. It shows when L1/L2 differences are most likely to occur and provides an explanation as to why they occur. For example, L2 speakers may capitalize more on semantic information for prediction than L1 speakers, or possibly they do not make predictions due to differences in the weighting of cues. A different weighting of cues can be the result of prior experience from the L1 and/or the prior experience in an experiment which affects L1 and L2 processing to a different extent. Overall, prediction in L2 processing often emerges later and/or is weaker than in L1 processing. Because L2 processing is generally slower, L1/L2 differences are likely to occur at certain levels of prediction, most notably at the form level, in line with a prediction-by-production mechanism.

The present study investigated the effects of processing instruction (PI) on the acquisition of accusative case markers in German, focusing on whether PI influences learners’ online processing behaviors. Third and fourth semester L1 English-L2 German learners were divided into two groups: a traditional instruction (TI) group and a PI group. Participants completed offline sentence interpretation and production tasks, as well as a self-paced reading (SPR) task, which provides a detailed investigation of how PI alters processing strategies. Results showed that the PI group outperformed the TI group on the sentence interpretation task and matched their performance on the production task. The SPR task revealed that, in some conditions, the PI group showed increased attention to and processing of accusative case markers after training, while the TI group did not. The results provide some support for the claim that PI is effective because it alters learners’ processing strategies.

It is well-known that native English speakers sometimes erroneously accept subject-verb agreement violations when there is a number-matching attractor (e.g., *The key to the cabinets were…). Whether bilinguals whose L1 lacks number agreement are prone to such interference is unclear, given previous studies that report conflicting findings using different structures, participant groups, and experimental designs. To resolve the conflict, we examined highly proficient Korean–English bilinguals’ susceptibility to agreement attraction, comparing prepositional phrase (PP) and relative clause (RC) modifiers in a speeded acceptability judgment task and a speeded forced-choice comprehension task. The bilinguals’ judgments revealed attraction with RCs but not with PPs, while reaction times indicated attraction with both structures. The results therefore showed L2 attraction in all measures, with the consistent exception of judgments for PPs. We argue that this supports an overall native-like agreement processing mechanism, augmented by an additional monitoring mechanism that filters explicit judgments in simple structures.

An emergent debate surrounds the nature of language processing in bilingual children as an extension of broader questions about their morphosyntactic development in comparison to monolinguals, with the picture so far being nuanced. This paper adds to this debate by investigating the processing of morphosyntactically complex which–questions (e.g., Which bear is chasing the camel?) using the visual world paradigm and is the first study to examine the online processing of such questions in bilingual children. For both groups, object which-questions were more difficult than subject which-questions, due to an initial misinterpretation that needed to be reanalysed. Both groups were aided by number mismatch between the two nouns in the sentence, especially in object which-questions. Our findings are in line with previous studies that have shown a slower processing speed in bilingual children relative to monolinguals but qualitatively similar patterns.

As written language contains more complex syntax than spoken language, exposure to written language provides opportunities for children to experience language input different from everyday speech. We investigated the distribution and nature of relative clauses in three large developmental corpora: one of child-directed speech (targeted at pre-schoolers) and two of text written for children – namely, picture books targeted at pre-schoolers for shared reading and children’s own reading books. Relative clauses were more common in both types of book language. Within text, relative clause usage increased with intended age, and was more frequent in nonfiction than fiction. The types of relative clause structures in text co-occurred with specific lexical properties, such as noun animacy and pronoun use. Book language provides unique access to grammar not easily encountered in speech. This has implications for the distributional lexical-syntactic features and associated discourse functions that children experience and, from this, consequences for language development.

To assess the presence of cross-linguistic influence, this study compared the processing of Dutch sentences by English–Dutch and German–Dutch bilingual and Dutch monolingual children in a self-paced listening task. We combined insights from studies on child bilingualism and adult second language acquisition. Sentence structures showing partial overlap between languages were investigated (long passives), as well as structures with complete or no overlap (verb second and verb third sentences). We found evidence for syntactic co-activation of overlapping structures in the form of inhibition during listening. Syntactic, and possibly lexical, overlap between languages, and language dominance modulated effects. In particular, online cross-linguistic influence was visible only in the German–Dutch group. Furthermore, effects were most pronounced when structures partially overlapped and were absent in non-overlapping structures. Effects of online cross-linguistic influence became stronger the more German-dominant children were. Our results indicate that syntactic co-activation across languages affects sentence processing in bilingual children.

This study investigated the longitudinal relationship between children’s domain-general cognitive constraints underlying phonological and sentence processing development in a big sample of typically developing children. 104 children were tested on non-linguistic processing speed, phonological skills (phonological short term memory, phonological knowledge, phonological working memory), and sentence processing abilities (sentence repetition and receptive grammar) in 1st grade (aged 6 to 6.5) and one year later. A cross-lagged structural equation model showed that non-linguistic processing speed was a concurrent predictor of phonological skills, and that phonology had a powerful effect on the child’s sentence processing abilities concurrently and longitudinally, providing clear evidence for the role of domain-general processes in the developmental pathway of language. These findings support a cascaded cognitive view of language development and pose important challenges for evaluation and intervention strategies in childhood.