Effects of Long-Term Language Use Experience in Sentence Processing: Evidence from Korean
- PDF / 757,292 Bytes
- 19 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 46 Downloads / 172 Views
Effects of Long‑Term Language Use Experience in Sentence Processing: Evidence from Korean Hyunwoo Kim1 · Gyu‑Ho Shin2 Accepted: 1 October 2020 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract Attraction effects arise when a comprehender erroneously retrieves a distractor instead of a target item during memory retrieval operations. In Korean, considerable processing difficulties occur in the agreement relation checking between a subject and an honorific-marked predicate when an intervening distractor carries a non-honorific feature. We investigate how attraction effects are managed during the processing of Korean subject-predicate honorific agreement by two Korean-speaking groups with different language use experience backgrounds: college students and airline workers. Results showed that both groups demonstrated stable knowledge of the honorific agreement in the acceptability judgment task. In the self-paced reading task, the airline group, who used honorifics extensively in their workplace, was less affected by the attraction effect than the student group. Our findings suggest that long-term language use experience can modulate how language users manage potential influence from attraction effects in real-time sentence processing. Keywords Language use experience · Sentence processing · Attraction effect · Korean subject-predicate honorific agreement
Introduction Sentence processing is a memory-consuming cognitive process that calls upon a constant and incremental integration of multiple linguistic and non-linguistic cues for comprehension (Pickering 1999). Although adult monolingual processing is highly automatized and spontaneous (e.g., Frazier 1999; Phillips 2006; Traxler and Pickering 1996), several factors can affect a speaker’s incremental integration of linguistic representations during online comprehension. For example, adult processing may be influenced by an individual’s working memory (e.g., Baddeley 2000; Lewis et al. 2006), relative frequencies of lexical items (e.g., Wilson and Garnsey 2009), degrees of lexical difficulties of incoming language input (e.g., Gibson 1998; Levy 2008), and an individual’s relative experience with target * Gyu‑Ho Shin [email protected] 1
Department of English Language and Literature, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea
2
Department of Asian Studies, Palacký University Olomouc, Křížkovského 512/10, 771 80 Olomouc, Czech Republic
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
structures (e.g., Wells et al. 2009). These factors are known to work in consort in shaping one’s cognitive architecture required for processing a sentence (Lewis et al. 2006). Importantly, these contributing factors may vary across speakers as well as within a person, as one’s computational capacity can change over time through his or her language use experience (e.g., MacDonald and Christiansen 2002; Wells et al. 2009). This study focuses on long-term language use experience among various components contributing to one’s cognitive capacity, t
Data Loading...
