Slavic Psycholinguistics in the 21st Century

This article provides an update on research in Slavic psycholinguistics since 2000 following my first review (Sekerina 2006), published as a position paper for the workshop The Future of Slavic Linguistics in America (SLING2K). The focus remains on formal experimental psycholinguistics understood in the narrow sense, i.e., experimental studies conducted with monolingual healthy adults. I review five dimensions characteristic of Slavic psycholinguistics—populations, methods, domains, theoretical approaches, and specific languages—and summarize the experimental data from Slavic languages published in general non-Slavic psycholinguistic journals and proceedings from the leading two conferences on Slavic linguistics, FASL and FDSL, since 2000. I argue that the current research trends in Slavic psycholinguistics are (1) a shift from adult monolingual participants to special population groups, such as children, people with aphasia, and bilingual learners, (2) a continuing move in the direction of cognitive neuroscience, with more emphasis on online experimental techniques, such as eye-tracking and neuroimaging, and (3) a focus on Slavic-specific phenomena that contribute to the ongoing debates in general psycholinguistics. The current infrastructural trends are (1) development of psycholinguistic databases and resources for Slavic languages and (2) a rise of psycholinguistic research conducted in Eastern European countries and disseminated in Slavic languages

The processing of input with differential objectmarking by heritage Spanish speakers

Heritage Spanish speakers and adult immigrant bilinguals listened to wh-questions with the differential object marker a (quién/a quién ‘who/whoACC’) while their eye movements across four referent pictures were tracked. The heritage speakers were less accurate than the adult immigrants in their verbal responses to the questions, leaving objects unmarked for case at a rate of 18%, but eye movement data suggested that the two groups were similar in their comprehension, with both starting to look at the target picture at the same point in the question and identifying the target sooner with a quién ‘whoACC’ than with quién ‘who’ questions

Heritage speakers can actively shape not only their grammar but also their processing

In this commentary, we provide psycholinguistic evidence that supports Polinsky and Scontras’ idea of how important it is for psycholinguistics and the linguistic theory of heritage languages to feed each other. We show that (a) heritage speakers’ processing can diverge from the baseline in online but not offline measures, (b) transfer from the dominant language does not always happen, and (c) heritage speakers can actively shape their processing that can contribute to heritage language restructuring in a chain reaction fashion

Bilingualism, executive function, and beyond: Questions and insights

The papers in this volume continue the quest to investigate the moderating factors and understand the mechanisms underlying effects (or lack thereof) of bilingualism on cognition in children, adults, and the elderly. They grew out of a 2015 workshop organized by two of us (Irina Sekerina and Virginia Valian) at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, funded by NSF’s Developmental and Learning Sciences and Linguistics Programs (grant #1451631). The workshop’s goal was to bring together researchers whose fields did not always overlap and who could learn from each other’s insights. In attendance were linguists working on bilingualism, cognitive psychologists interested in executive function and working memory, and medical researchers studying executive function in the laboratory and in the field. Until our workshop, the conditions and factors instrumental to connecting bilingualism and executive function were primarily explored from within bilingualism, with less direct input from cognitive psychologists, linguists, and researchers on aging. Thus, our goal was to bring together experts from different disciplines – who rarely had the opportunity to interact at the same scientific venues – and facilitate inderdisciplinary conversation that could bridge the gaps between the fields

Eye-movement benchmarks in Heritage Language reading

This eye-tracking study establishes basic benchmarks of eye movements during reading in heritage language (HL) by Russian-speaking adults and adolescents of high (n = 21) and low proficiency (n = 27). Heritage speakers (HSs) read sentences in Cyrillic, and their eye movements were compared to those of Russian monolingual skilled adult readers, 8-yearold children and L2 learners. Reading patterns of HSs revealed longer mean fixation durations, lower skipping probabilities, and higher regressive saccade rates than in monolingual adults. High-proficient HSs were more similar to monolingual children, while low-proficient HSs performed on par with L2 learners. Low-proficient HSs differed from high-proficient HSs in exhibiting lower skipping probabilities, higher fixation counts, and larger frequency effects. Taken together, our findings are consistent with the weaker links account of bilingual language processing as well as the divergent attainment theory of HL

Quantifier spreading in child eye movements: A case of the Russian quantifier kazhdyj ‘every’

Extensive cross-linguistic work has documented that children up to the age of 9–10 make errors when performing a sentence-picture verification task that pairs spoken sentences with the universal quantifier every and pictures with entities in partial one-to-one correspondence. These errors stem from children’s difficulties in restricting the domain of a universal quantifier to the appropriate noun phrase and are referred in the literature as quantifier-spreading (q-spreading). We adapted the task to be performed in conjunction with eye-movement recordings using the Visual World Paradigm. Russian-speaking 5-to-6-year-old children (N = 31) listened to sentences like Kazhdyj alligator lezhit v vanne ‘Every alligator is lying in a bathtub’ and viewed pictures with three alligators, each in a bathtub, and two extra empty bathtubs. Non-spreader children (N = 12) were adult-like in their accuracy whereas q-spreading ones (N = 19) were only 43% correct in interpreting such sentences compared to the control sentences. Eye movements of q-spreading children revealed that more looks to the extra containers (two empty bathtubs) correlated with higher error rates reflecting the processing pattern of q-spreading. In contrast, more looks to the distractors in control sentences did not lead to errors in interpretation. We argue that q-spreading errors are caused by interference from the extra entities in the visual context, and our results support the processing difficulty account of acquisition of quantification. Interference results in cognitive overload as children have to integrate multiple sources of information, i.e., visual context with salient extra entities and the spoken sentence in which these entities are mentioned in real-time processing

Turkish-German heritage speakers' predictive use of case: webcam-based vs. in-lab eye-tracking

Recently, Özge et al. have argued that Turkish and German monolingual 4-year-old children can interpret case-marking predictively disregarding word order. Heritage speakers (HSs) acquire a heritage language at home and a majority societal language which usually becomes dominant after school enrollment. Our study directly compares two elicitation modes: in-lab and (remote) webcam-based eye-tracking data collection. We test the extent to which in-lab effects can be replicated in webcam-based eye-tracking using the exact same design. Previous research indicates that Turkish HSs vary more in the comprehension and production of case-marking compared to monolinguals. Data from 49 participants - 22 Turkish monolinguals and 27 HSs - were analyzed using a binomial generalized linear mixed-effects regression model. In the Accusative condition, participants looked for the suitable Agent before it is appeared in speech. In the Nominative condition, participants looked for the suitable Patient before it is appeared in speech. HSs were able to use morphosyntactic cues on NP1 to predict the thematic role of NP2. This study supports views in which core grammatical features of languages, such as case, remain robust in HSs, in line with the Interface Hypothesis. We were able to replicate the effect of the predictive use of case in monolinguals using webcam-based eye-tracking, but the replication with heritage speakers was not successful due to variability in data collection contexts. A by-participant analysis of the results revealed individual variation in that there were some speakers who do not use case-marking predictively in the same way as most monolinguals and most HSs do. These findings suggest that the predictive use of case in heritage speakers is influenced by different factors, which may differ across individuals and affect their language abilities. We argue that HSs should be placed on a native-speaker continuum to explain variability in language outcomes

Using the Visual World Paradigm to Study Retrieval Interference in Spoken Language Comprehension

The cue-based retrieval theory (Lewis et al., 2006) predicts that interference from similar distractors should create difficulty for argument integration, however this hypothesis has only been examined in the written modality. The current study uses the Visual World Paradigm (VWP) to assess its feasibility to study retrieval interference arising from distractors present in a visual display during spoken language comprehension. The study aims to extend findings from Van Dyke and McElree (2006), which utilized a dual-task paradigm with written sentences in which they manipulated the relationship between extra-sentential distractors and the semantic retrieval cues from a verb, to the spoken modality. Results indicate that retrieval interference effects do occur in the spoken modality, manifesting immediately upon encountering the verbal retrieval cue for inaccurate trials when the distractors are present in the visual field. We also observed indicators of repair processes in trials containing semantic distractors, which were ultimately answered correctly. We conclude that the VWP is a useful tool for investigating retrieval interference effects, including both the online effects of distractors and their after-effects, when repair is initiated. This work paves the way for further studies of retrieval interference in the spoken modality, which is especially significant for examining the phenomenon in pre-reading children, non-reading adults (e.g., people with aphasia), and spoken language bilinguals

Turkish-German heritage speakers’ predictive use of case: webcam-based vs. in-lab eye-tracking

Recently, Özge et al. have argued that Turkish and German monolingual 4-year- old children can interpret case-marking predictively disregarding word order. Heritage speakers (HSs) acquire a heritage language at home and a majority societal language which usually becomes dominant after school enrollment. Our study directly compares two elicitation modes: in-lab and (remote) webcam- based eye-tracking data collection. We test the extent to which in-lab eects can be replicated in webcam-based eye-tracking using the exact same design. Previous research indicates that Turkish HSs vary more in the comprehension and production of case-marking compared to monolinguals. Data from 49 participants–22 Turkishmonolinguals and 27 HSs–were analyzed using a binomial generalized linear mixed-eects regression model. In the Accusative condition, participants looked for the suitable Agent before it is appeared in speech. In the Nominative condition, participants looked for the suitable Patient before it is appeared in speech. HSs were able to usemorphosyntactic cues on NP1 to predict the thematic role of NP2. This study supports views in which core grammatical features of languages, such as case, remain robust in HSs, in line with the Interface Hypothesis. We were able to replicate the eect of the predictive use of case in monolinguals using webcam-based eye-tracking, but the replication with heritage speakers was not successful due to variability in data collection contexts. A by- participant analysis of the results revealed individual variation in that there were some speakers who do not use case-marking predictively in the same way asmost monolinguals and most HSs do. These findings suggest that the predictive use of case in heritage speakers is influenced by dierent factors, whichmay dier across individuals and aect their language abilities. We argue that HSs should be placed on a native-speaker continuum to explain variability in language outcomes