The Effects of L2 Progressive Aspect Saliency on L1 Motion Event Processing: Evidence from Chinese Learners of English and German.

IF 2 2区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Renhui Hou, Shifa Chen, Dongdong Qi
{"title":"The Effects of L2 Progressive Aspect Saliency on L1 Motion Event Processing: Evidence from Chinese Learners of English and German.","authors":"Renhui Hou, Shifa Chen, Dongdong Qi","doi":"10.1007/s10936-026-10308-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cross-linguistic influence (CLI) is widely acknowledged to be bidirectional; however, empirical evidence concerning L2-to-L1 effects on cognitive processing remains limited. Drawing on the notion of progressive aspect saliency, which distinguishes languages by the degree of grammaticalization of ongoingness, the present study investigated whether the saliency of progressive aspect in a second language (L2) affects motion event processing in the first language (L1) with two psycholinguistic experiments. Experiment 1 employed a video description task to assess lexicalization preferences. Compared with Chinese monolinguals, learners of German mentioned endpoints more frequently, whereas learners of English showed an increased focus on trajectories, which indicated that the saliency of progressive aspects in L2 would influence the lexicalization of the motion events in L1. Experiment 2 used a matching decision task with and without verbal interference. In the verbal-interference condition where a digit-rehearsal task was involved, no group differences were found. However, the no-interference condition showed that group differences emerged when the digit-rehearsal task was removed: learners of English were more likely than those of German to falsely accept trajectory-matching targets, whereas learners of German were more likely than those of English to falsely accept endpoint-matching targets. The findings demonstrated that the saliency of progressive aspects in L2 would not influence the non-linguistic perceptual representations of the motion events in L1. Taken together, the acquisition of progressive aspects in L2 would influence the processing of motion events in L1 at the linguistic level rather than the cognitive level.</p>","PeriodicalId":47689,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psycholinguistic Research","volume":"55 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psycholinguistic Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-026-10308-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cross-linguistic influence (CLI) is widely acknowledged to be bidirectional; however, empirical evidence concerning L2-to-L1 effects on cognitive processing remains limited. Drawing on the notion of progressive aspect saliency, which distinguishes languages by the degree of grammaticalization of ongoingness, the present study investigated whether the saliency of progressive aspect in a second language (L2) affects motion event processing in the first language (L1) with two psycholinguistic experiments. Experiment 1 employed a video description task to assess lexicalization preferences. Compared with Chinese monolinguals, learners of German mentioned endpoints more frequently, whereas learners of English showed an increased focus on trajectories, which indicated that the saliency of progressive aspects in L2 would influence the lexicalization of the motion events in L1. Experiment 2 used a matching decision task with and without verbal interference. In the verbal-interference condition where a digit-rehearsal task was involved, no group differences were found. However, the no-interference condition showed that group differences emerged when the digit-rehearsal task was removed: learners of English were more likely than those of German to falsely accept trajectory-matching targets, whereas learners of German were more likely than those of English to falsely accept endpoint-matching targets. The findings demonstrated that the saliency of progressive aspects in L2 would not influence the non-linguistic perceptual representations of the motion events in L1. Taken together, the acquisition of progressive aspects in L2 would influence the processing of motion events in L1 at the linguistic level rather than the cognitive level.

第二语言进展方面显著性对第一语言运动事件加工的影响:来自中国英语和德语学习者的证据。
跨语言影响(CLI)被广泛认为是双向的;然而,关于l2到l1对认知加工的影响的经验证据仍然有限。基于以持续性的语法化程度来区分语言的递进性显著性概念,本研究通过两个心理语言学实验研究了第二语言(L2)递进性显著性是否会影响第一语言(L1)的运动事件加工。实验1采用视频描述任务评估词汇化偏好。与汉语单语学习者相比,德语学习者更频繁地提到终点,而英语学习者更关注轨迹,这表明第二语言中进展方面的显著性会影响第一语言中运动事件的词汇化。实验2采用有和无言语干扰的匹配决策任务。在涉及数字排练任务的语言干扰条件下,没有发现组间差异。然而,无干扰条件显示,当数字彩排任务被移除时,组差异出现了:英语学习者比德语学习者更容易错误地接受轨迹匹配目标,而德语学习者比英语学习者更容易错误地接受终点匹配目标。研究结果表明,第二语言中进步方面的显著性不会影响第一语言中运动事件的非语言知觉表征。综上所述,第二语言进展方面的习得会在语言层面而非认知层面影响第一语言运动事件的加工。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.00%
发文量
92
期刊介绍: Journal of Psycholinguistic Research publishes carefully selected papers from the several disciplines engaged in psycholinguistic research, providing a single, recognized medium for communications among linguists, psychologists, biologists, sociologists, and others. The journal covers a broad range of approaches to the study of the communicative process, including: the social and anthropological bases of communication; development of speech and language; semantics (problems in linguistic meaning); and biological foundations. Papers dealing with the psychopathology of language and cognition, and the neuropsychology of language and cognition, are also included.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书