VOlUME 06 ISSUE 03 MARCH 2023
Nada Al Jamal
Faculty of Arts, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i3-56Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
Several studies mostly focus on a specific area of research, the current paper’s aim is to bring together the various research in a single volume, indicating their particularities as well as demonstrate their inter-relations. Phonological, lexical and syntactic processing Second Language Processing (SLP) are discussed as SLP is a cognitive form of acquisition, and is debated o be bottom-up processes, up-down processes, or a combination of both resulting in integrated interactive processes. SLP faces more complicated issues and involves more factors in comparison with L1 processing as L2 reading comprehension observes the effect of higher-order processes and chances of crosslinguistic transfer in relation to the reader’s L2 linguistic knowledge, L2 proficiency levels, or other language-general reading processes. Furthermore, the major reading process models are mentioned in categories of word identification, syntactic parsing and discourse processing, as well as text and reader related variables are reviewed. Finally, some of the main pedagogical associations with teaching reading comprehension are examined.
KEYWORDS:Second Language Processing, Reading Processes, Cognitive Processes, Reading Comprehension, Psycholinguistics, Cognitive Linguistics.
REFERENCES
1) Alderson, J. C. (1984). Reading in a foreign language: A reading problem or a language problem.
2) Anderson, R. C., & Pichert, J. W. (1978). Recall of previously unrecallable information following a shift in perspective. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 17(1), 1-12.
3) Ans, B., Carbonnel, S., & Valdois, S. (1998). A connectionist multiple-trace memory model for polysyllabic word reading. Psychological review, 105(4), 678.
4) Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. Mechanisms of language acquisition, 157-193.
5) Bernhardt, E. B., & Kamil, M. L. (1995). Interpreting relationships between L1 and L2 reading: Consolidating the linguistic threshold and the linguistic interdependence hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 15-34.
6) Brisbois, J. E. (1995). Connections between first-and second-language reading. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27(4), 565-584.
7) Camarota, S. A., & Zeigler, K. (2015). One in five US residents speaks foreign language at home. Center for Immigration Studies. October.
8) Carr, T. H., & Levy, B. A. E. (1990). Reading and its development: Component skills approaches: Academic Press.
9) Cassidy, M. F., & Knowlton, J. Q. (1983). Visual literacy: A failed metaphor? ECTJ, 31(2), 67-90.
10) Chen, H.-C., & Leung, Y.-S. (1989). Patterns of lexical processing in a nonnative language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(2), 316.
11) Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological review, 108(1), 204.
12) Corder, S. P. (1975). Error analysis, interlanguage and second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 8(4), 201-218.
13) Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire (Vol. 23): Multilingual Matters.
14) Dechert, H.-W., & Raupach, M. (1989). Transfer in language production: Praeger Pub Text.
15) Diependaele, K., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J. (2010). Fast phonology and the bimodal interactive activation model. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22(5), 764-778.
16) Dowens, M. G., & Carreiras, M. (2006). The shallow structure hypothesis of second language sentence processing: What is restricted and why? Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 49-52.
17) Dussias, P. E. (2003). Spanish-English code mixing at the Auxiliary Phrase: evidence from eye-movement data. Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberoamericana, 1(2 (2), 7-34.
18) Elman, J. L. (1991). Distributed representations, simple recurrent networks, and grammatical structure. Machine learning, 7(2-3), 195-225.
19) Eurobarometer, S. (2006). Europeans and their Languages. European Commission.
20) Ferreira, F., & Clifton Jr, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(3), 348-368.
21) Frank, S. L., Koppen, M., Noordman, L. G., & Vonk, W. (2003). Modeling knowledge‐based inferences in story comprehension. Cognitive Science, 27(6), 875-910.
22) Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (1996). Construal: Mit Press.
23) Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6(4), 291-325.
24) Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive psychology, 14(2), 178-210.
25) Frith, U. (1995). Dyslexia: Can we have a shared theoretical framework? Educational and Child Psychology.
26) Gernsbacher, M. A. (2013). Language comprehension as structure building: Psychology Press.
27) Golden, R. M., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1993). A parallel distributed processing model of story comprehension and recall. Discourse processes, 16(3), 203-237.
28) Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. Visible Language, 6(4), 291-320.
29) Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: a multiple read-out model. Psychological review, 103(3), 518.
30) Grellet, F. (1981). Developing Reading Skills Grellet: A Practical Guide to Reading Comprehension Exercises: Cambridge University Press.
31) Hacquebord, H. (1989). Reading comprehension of Turkish and Dutch students attending secondary schools. Groningen, the Netherlands: RUG.
32) Heng Hartse, J. & Jiang, D. (2015). Perspectives on teaching English at colleges and Universities in China. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Press.
33) Holtgraves, T. (2007). Second language learners and speech act comprehension. Language Learning, 57(4), 595-610.
34) Jeon, E. H., & Yamashita, J. (2014). L2 reading comprehension and its correlates: A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 64(1), 160-212.
35) Jiang, N. (2018). Second Language Processing: An Introduction: Routledge.
36) Jurafsky, D. (1996). A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive Science, 20(2), 137-194.
37) Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological review, 85(5), 363.
38) Koda, K. (2000). Cross-linguistic variations in L2 morphological awareness. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21(3), 297-320.
39) Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach: Cambridge University Press.
40) Koda, K. (2007). Reading and language learning: Crosslinguistic constraints on second language reading development. Language Learning, 57, 1-44.
41) MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological review, 101(4), 676.
42) MacWhinney, B. (1987). Applying the competition model to bilingualism. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8(4), 315-327.
43) Mayo, L. H., Florentine, M., & Buus, S. (1997). Age of second-language acquisition and perception of speech in noise. Journal of speech, language, and hearing research, 40(3), 686-693.
44) McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological review, 88(5), 375.
45) McClelland, J. L., St. John, M., & Taraban, R. (1989). Sentence comprehension: A parallel distributed processing approach. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4(3-4), SI287-SI335.
46) McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38(3), 283-312.
47) Meador, D., Flege, J. E., & MacKay, I. R. (2000). Factors affecting the recognition of words in a second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3(1), 55-67.
48) Mitchell, D. C., & Brysbaert, M. (1998). Challenges to recent theories of crosslinguistic variation in parsing: Evidence from Dutch. Syntax and semantics: A crosslinguistic perspective, 313-335.
49) Munby, J. (1978). 1978: Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
50) Myers, J. L., & O'Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse processes, 26(2-3), 131-157.
51) Neely, J. H. (2012). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In Basic processes in reading (pp. 272-344): Routledge.
52) Norris, D. (1994). A quantitative multiple-levels model of reading aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(6), 1212.
53) Norris, D. (2006). The Bayesian Reader: Explaining word recognition as an optimal Bayesian decision process. Psychological review, 113(2), 327.
54) Norris, D. (2013). Models of visual word recognition. Trends in cognitive sciences, 17(10), 517-524.
55) Norris, D., & Kinoshita, S. (2012). Reading through a noisy channel: Why there's nothing special about the perception of orthography. Psychological review, 119(3), 517.
56) Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching & Learning: ERIC.
57) Paap, K. R., Newsome, S. L., McDonald, J. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1982). An activation–verification model for letter and word recognition: The word-superiority effect. Psychological review, 89(5), 573.
58) Park, J. C., Kim, H. S., & Kim, J. J. (2000). Bidirectional incremental parsing for automatic pathway identification with combinatory categorial grammar. In Biocomputing 2001 (pp. 396-407): World Scientific.
59) Proulx, J. (1985). Effect of levels of processing and controlled processes in second language performance. Concordia University,
60) Rastle, K. (2015). Visual word recognition. In Neurobiology of Language (pp. 255-264): Elsevier.
61) Rayner, K., Carlson, M., & Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 22(3), 358.
62) Rayner, K., & Reichle, E. D. (2010). Models of the reading process. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(6), 787-799.
63) Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2012). Using EZ Reader to simulate eye movements in nonreading tasks: A unified framework for understanding the eye–mind link. Psychological review, 119(1), 155.
64) Richards, J. C., & Kennedy, G. (1977). Interlanguage: A review and a preview. RELC Journal, 8(1), 13-28.
65) Roberts, L., Gullberg, M., & Indefrey, P. (2008). Online pronoun resolution in L2 discourse: L1 influence and general learner effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(3), 333-357.
66) Rumelhart, D. E. (1994). Toward an interactive model of reading: International Reading Association.
67) Sajavaara, K. (1984). Psycholinguistic models, second language acquisition, and contrastive analysis'. Contrastive Linguistics: Prospects and Problems. Berlin: Mouton, 379-408.
68) Samuels, S. J., & Kamil, M. L. (1984). Models of the reading process. Handbook of reading research, 1, 185-224.
69) Schwartz, B. D. (1986). The epistemological status of second language acquisition. Interlanguage studies bulletin (Utrecht), 2(2), 120-159.
70) Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological review, 96(4), 523.
71) Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1-4), 209-232.
72) Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension: Rand Corporation.
73) Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading research quarterly, 32-71.
74) Tabor, W., Juliano, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1997). Parsing in a dynamical system: An attractor-based account of the interaction of lexical and structural constraints in sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12(2-3), 211-271.
75) Tanenhaus, M. K., & Trueswell, J. C. (1995). Sentence comprehension.
76) Van den Broek, P., Risden, K., Fletcher, C. R., & Thurlow, R. (1996). A “landscape” view of reading: Fluctuating patterns of activation and the construction of a stable memory representation. Models of understanding text, 165-187.
77) 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.
78) Wagner, D. A., Spratt, J. E., & Ezzaki, A. (1989). Does learning to read in a second language always put the child at a disadvantage? Some counterevidence from Morocco. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10(1), 31-48.
79) Whitney, C., & Cornelissen, P. (2008). SERIOL reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(1), 143-164.
80) Winn, W. (2013). Cognitive perspectives in psychology. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 90-123): Routledge.
81) Wolff, D. (1989). Identification of Text-type as a Strategic Device in L2 Comprehension. Interlingual processes, 1, 137.
82) Wurr, A. J. (2003). Reading in a second language: A reading problem or a language problem? Journal of college reading and learning, 33(2), 157-169.
83) Yamashita, J. (2004). Reading Attitudes in L1 and L2, and Their Influence on L2 Extensive Reading. Reading in a foreign language, 16(1), 1-19.
84) Zorzi, M., Houghton, G., & Butterworth, B. (1998). Two routes or one in reading aloud? A connectionist dual-process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(4), 1131.