Cover not available

Article published In: Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 13:6 (2023) ► pp.767–800

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

L2 processing of filled gaps

Non-native brain activity not modulated by proficiency and working memory

 | University of Delaware
 | University of Delaware
 | University of Delaware
 | University of Delaware
Published online: 2 March 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.20058.don
Abstract
This paper investigates how late L2 learners resolve filler-gap dependencies (FGD) in real-time and how proficiency and working memory (WM) modulate their brain responses in an event-related potential (ERP) experiment. A group of intermediate to highly proficient Mandarin Chinese learners of English listened to sentences such as “The zebra that the hippo kissed *the camel on the nose ran far away,” in which the extra noun phrase “the camel” created a ‘filled-gap’ effect. The results show that although L2 behavioral responses are comparable to native speakers and are positively correlated with proficiency and WM span, the brain responses to the filled gap are qualitatively different. Importantly, L2 processing patterns did not become more nativelike with higher proficiency levels or greater WM capacity. Specifically, while the native speakers exhibited a P600 typically observed for syntactic violations and repair, the L2 group produced a prefrontal-central positivity. Similar ERPs have previously been reported to reflect domain-general attentional and non-structural-based processes, suggesting that the L2 group has a reduced sensitivity to structural requirements for gap positing in the online resolution of FGDs. Our findings are discussed in light of various proposals accounting for L1-L2 processing differences, including the Shallow Structure Hypothesis.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1L2 processing of FGD: Is structural information underused in gap positing?
    • 1.2ERP studies on the filled-gap effect and the present study
  • 2.Method
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Paper-and-pencil grammaticality judgment test
    • 2.3ERP experimental materials
    • 2.4Procedures
      • 2.4.1EEG acquisition
      • 2.4.2PCA-constrained derivation of time windows and electrode regions
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Paper-and-pencil grammaticality judgment test results
    • 3.2Comprehension questions results
    • 3.3ERP results
      • 3.3.1Comparison of L1 and L2 speakers’ brain responses
      • 3.3.2L1 participants’ brain responses to filled gaps: P600
      • 3.3.3L2 participants’ brain responses to filled gaps: Prefrontal-central positivity
  • 4.Discussion
  • Notes
  • References
References (75)
References
Andersson, A., Sayehli, S., & Gullberg, M. (2019). Language background affects online word order processing in a second language but not offline. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22(4), 802–825. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bernstein, J. & De Jong, J. H. A. L. (2001). An experiment in predicting proficiency within the Common Europe Framework Level Descriptors. In Y. N. Leung et al. (Eds.), Selected Papers from the Tenth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 8–14). Crane Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bernstein, J. & Cheng, J. (2007). Logic and validation of fully automatic spoken English test. In M. Holland & F. P. Fisher. (Eds.), The path of speech technologies in computer assisted language learning: From research toward practice (pp. 174–194). Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowden, H. W., Steinhauer, K., Sanz, C., & Ullman, M. T. (2013). Native-like brain processing of syntax can be attained by university foreign language learners. Neuropsychologia, 51(13), 2492–2511. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caffarra, S., Mendoza, M., & Davidson, D. (2019). Is the LAN effect in morphosyntactic processing an ERP artifact? Brain and Language, 1911, 9–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origins, and use. Greenwood Publishing Group.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christensen, R. H. B. (2019). Regression Models for Ordinal Data [R package ordinal version 2019.12-10].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cunnings, I. (2012). An overview of mixed-effects statistical models for second language researchers. Second Language Research, 28(3), 369–382. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Interference in Native and Non-Native Sentence Processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(04), 712–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 3–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Some notes on the shallow structure hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(3), 693–706. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clifton, C., & Frazier, L. (1989). Comprehending sentences with long distance dependencies. In G. M. Carlson & M. K. Tanenhaus. (Eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing (pp. 273–317). Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dallas, A., DeDe, G., & Nicol, J. (2013). An Event-Related Potential (ERP) Investigation of Filler-Gap Processing in Native and Second Language Speakers. Language Learning, 63(4), 766–799. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Daneman, M. & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19(4), 450–466. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeLong, K. A., & Kutas, M. (2020). Comprehending surprising sentences: sensitivity of post-N400 positivities to contextual congruity and semantic relatedness. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 1–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: an open-source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics, Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 1341, 9–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dien, J. (2010). The ERP PCA Toolkit: An open source program for advanced statistical analysis of event-related potential data. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 187(1), 138–145. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Applying principal components analysis to event-related potentials: a tutorial. Developmental Neuropsychology, 37(6), 497–517. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dong, Z., Rhodes, R., & Hestvik, A. (2021). Active Gap Filling and Island Constraint in Processing the Mandarin ‘Gap-Type’ Topic Structure. Frontiers in Communication 61: 650659. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dowens, M. G., Guo, T., Guo, J., Barber, H., & Carreiras, M. (2011). Gender and number processing in Chinese learners of Spanish–Evidence from event related potentials. Neuropsychologia, 49(7), 1651–1659. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dussias, P. E., & Piñar, P. (2010). Effects of reading span and plausibility in the reanalysis of wh-gaps by Chinese-English second language speakers. Second Language Research, 26(4), 443–472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Felser, C. (2019). Structure-sensitive constraints in non-native sentence processing. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 3(1), 12–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Felser, C., & Roberts, L. (2007). Processing wh-dependencies in a second language: A cross-modal priming study. Second Language Research, 23(1), 9–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foucart, A., Martin, C. D., Moreno, E. M., & Costa, A. (2014). Can bilinguals see it coming? Word anticipation in L2 sentence reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 40(5), 1461–1469.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(2), 78–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friederici, A. D., Hahne, A., & Saddy, D. (2002). Distinct neurophysiological patterns reflecting aspects of syntactic complexity and syntactic repair. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 311, 45–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frisch, S., Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (2004). Word category and verb–argument structure information in the dynamics of parsing. Cognition, 91(3), 191–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gouvea, A. C., Phillips, C., Kazanina, N., & Poeppel, D. (2010). The linguistic processes underlying the P600. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(2), 149–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gregg, K. (2003). SLA theory construction and assessment. In C. Doughty & M. Long. (Eds.). Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 831–865). Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hagoort, P., Brown, C. M., & Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8(4), 439–483. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (1999). Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic analysis: Early automatic and late controlled processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11(2), 194–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14(1), 25–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Chan, C. Y. (1997). The partial availability of universal grammar in second language acquisition: The “Failed functional features hypothesis.” Second Language Research, 13(3), 187–226. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hestvik, A., Maxfield, N., Schwartz, R. G., & Shafer, V. L. (2007). Brain responses to filled gaps. Brain and Language, 100(3), 301–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hestvik, A., Bradley, E., & Bradley, C. (2012). Working Memory Effects of Gap-Predictions in Normal Adults: An Event-Related Potentials Study. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 41(6), 425–438. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2017). Individual differences in L2 parsing and lexical representations. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(4), 689–690. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hsu, C. -C. N. (2008). Revisit relative clause islands in Chinese, Language and Linguistics, 9(1), 23–48.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, J., Li, Y. A., & Li, Y. (2009). The Syntax of Chinese. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jessen, A., Festman, J., Boxell, O., & Felser, C. (2017). Native and non-native speakers’ brain responses to filled indirect object gaps. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 46(5), 1319–1338. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, A., Fiorentino, R., & Gabriele, A. (2016). Syntactic constraints and individual differences in native and non-native processing of wh-movement. Frontiers in psychology, 71, 549. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Juffs, A. (2006). Grammar and parsing and a transition theory. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 69–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaan, E. (2014). Predictive sentence processing in L2 and L1: What is different?. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4(2), 257–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaan, E., & Swaab, T. Y. (2003). Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15(1), 98–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, A., & Osterhout, L. (2005). The independence of combinatory semantic processing: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 52(2), 205–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kizach, J. (2014). Analyzing Likert-scale data with mixed-effects linear models: a simulation study. Poster Presented at Linguistic Evidence. Tübingen, Germany.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuperberg, G. R., Kreher, D. A., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D. N., & Holcomb, P. J. (2007). The role of animacy and thematic relationships in processing active English sentences: Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain and Language, 100(3), 223–237. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 621, 621–647. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liang, L., & Chen, B. (2014). Processing morphologically complex words in second-language learners: The effect of proficiency. Acta Psychologica, 1501, 69–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, Y., & Garnsey, S. M. (2010). Animacy and the resolution of temporary ambiguity in relative clause comprehension in Mandarin. In Processing and producing head-final structures (pp. 241–275). Springer, Dordrecht. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luck, S. J., & Gaspelin, N. (2017). How to get statistically significant effects in any ERP experiment (and why you shouldn’t). Psychophysiology, 54(1), 146–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 53–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, K. I., & Ellis, N. C. (2012). The roles of phonological short-term memory and working memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 379–413. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (2006). Beyond the critical period: Processing-based explanations for poor grammaticality judgment performance by late second language learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(3), 381–401. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, A. K. (2015). Intermediate Traces and Intermediate Learners: Evidence for the Use of Intermediate Structure during Sentence Processing in Second Language French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37(3), 487–516. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morgan-Short, K., Steinhauer, K., Sanz, C., & Ullman, M. T. (2012). Explicit and implicit second language training differentially affect the achievement of native-like brain activation patterns. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(4), 933–947. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nakano, Y., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2002). Antecedent priming at trace positions in Japanese long-distance scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31(5), 531–571. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nicenboim, B., Vasishth, S., Gattei, C., Sigman, M., & Kliegl, R. (2015). Working memory differences in long-distance dependency resolution. Frontiers in Psychology, 61, Article 312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ojima, S., Nakata, H., & Kakigi, R. (2005). An ERP study of second language learning after childhood: Effects of proficiency. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(8), 1212–1228. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Omaki, A., & Schulz, B. (2011). Filler-gap dependencies and island constraints in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33(4), 563–588. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pakulak, E., & Neville, H. J. (2011). Maturational constraints on the recruitment of early processes for syntactic processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(10), 2752–2765. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Phillips, C., & Lewis, S. (2013). Derivational order in syntax: Evidence and architectural consequences. Studies in Linguistics, 61, 11–47.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sabourin, L., & Stowe, L. A. (2008). Second language processing: When are first and second languages processed similarly? Second Language Research, 24(3), 397–430. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime Reference Guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shyu, S. I. (1995). The syntax of focus and topic in Mandarian Chinese. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California.
Sprouse, J., & Almeida, D. (2012). Assessing the reliability of textbook data in syntax: Adger’s Core Syntax. Journal of Linguistics, 48(3), 609–652. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steinhauer, K., & Drury, J. E. (2012). On the early left-anterior negativity (ELAN) in syntax studies. Brain and Language, 120(2), 135–162. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stowe, L. A. (1986). Parsing WH-constructions: Evidence for on-line gap location. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1(3), 227–245. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thornhill, D. E., & Van Petten, C. (2012). Lexical versus conceptual anticipation during sentence processing: frontal positivity and N400 ERP components. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83(3), 382–392. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tolentino, L. C., & Tokowicz, N. (2011). Across Language, space and time. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33(1), 91–125. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Hell, J. G., & Tokowicz, N. (2010). Event-related brain potentials and second language learning: Syntactic processing in late L2 learners at different L2 proficiency levels. Second Language Research, 26(1), 43–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weber, A., & Cutler, A. (2004). Lexical competition in non-native spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 50(1), 1–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, J., Möbius, P., & Kim, C. (2001). Native and non-native processing of English wh-questions: Parsing strategies and plausibility constraints. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22(4), 509–540. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Cunnings, Ian
2025. Group level and individual differences in second language sentence processing. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism DOI logo
Trifonova, Aleksandra & Claudia Felser
2025. Sensitivity to Filler–Gap Dependency Violations in the L1 vs. L2: Evidence from Speeded Judgement Tasks. Languages 10:2 ► pp. 21 ff. DOI logo
van Hell, Janet G.
2023. The Neurocognitive Underpinnings of Second Language Processing: Knowledge Gains From the Past and Future Outlook. Language Learning 73:S2 ► pp. 95 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue