Open Access
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 138, 2022
8e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française
Article Number 09009
Number of page(s) 15
Section Psycholinguistique et acquisition
Published online 11 May 2022
  1. Andersen, R. W., & Shirai, Y. (1994). Discourse motivations for some cognitive acquisition principles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16,, 133–156. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ayoun, D. & Salaberry, R. M. (2008). Acquisition of English tense-aspect morphology by advanced French instructed learners. Language Learning, 58(3), 555–595. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Baayen R. (2008).Analyzing Linguistic Data: A practical introduction to statistics. Cambridge University Press. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bergström, A. (1997). L’influence des distinctions aspectuelles sur l’acquisition des temps en français langue étrangère. Acquisition et interaction en langue étrangère, 9, 51–82. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2007). Shared syntactic representations in bilinguals: Evidence for the role of word-order repetition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 931–949. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. New York: Holt. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bock, J. K. (1986). Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 355–387. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Coltheart, M. (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G. Underwood (Ed.),Strategies of information processing (pp. 151–216). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  10. Collins, L. (1999). Marking time: the acquisition of tense and grammatical aspect by French-speaking learners of English [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Concordia University. [Google Scholar]
  11. Collins, L. (2002). The roles of L1 influence and lexical aspect in the acquisition of temporal morphology. Language Learning, 52(1), 43–94. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Collins, L. (2004). The particulars on universals: A comparison of the acquisition of tense-aspect morphology among Japanese- and French-speaking learners of English. La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 61(2), 251–274. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Comrie, B. (1976) Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  14. Conseil de l’Europe. (2001).Cadre européen commun de référence pour les langues: apprendre, enseigner, évaluer. Cambridge, Royaume-Uni: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. [Google Scholar]
  15. De Bot, K. (1992). A bilingual production model: Levelt’s ‘Speaking’ model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13, 1–24. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. De Groot, A. M. B. & Hagoort, P. (2018). Research methods in psycholinguistics and the neurobiology of language: A practical guide. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. [Google Scholar]
  17. Deshors, S. C. (2018). Does the passé composé influence L2 learners’ use English past tenses? A semantic exploration of the present perfect in French-English interlanguage. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 4(1), 23–53. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Desmet, T. & Declercq, M. (2006). Cross-linguistic priming of syntactic hierarchical configuration information. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(4), 610–632. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Elmiger, D. (2000). Définir le bilinguisme. Catalogue des critères retenus pour la définition discursive du bilinguisme. Travaux neuchâtelois de linguistique, 32, 55–76. [Google Scholar]
  20. Grosjean, F. (1982).Life with two languages: An introduction to bilingualism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  21. Hakuta, K. (1986).Mirror of language: The debate on bilingualism. New York: Basic Books. [Google Scholar]
  22. Hartsuiker, R. J., Pickering, M. J., & Veltkamp, E. (2004). Is syntax separate or shared between languages? Cross linguistic syntactic priming in Spanish-English bilinguals. Psychological Science, 15, 409–414. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hartsuiker, R. J., & Bernolet, S. (2017). The development of shared syntax in second language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(2), 219–234. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Hatzidaki, A., Branigan, H. & Pickering, M. (2011). Co-activation of syntax in bilingual language production. Cognitive Psychology, 62, 123–150. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Haugen, E. (1953).The Norwegian language in America: A study in bilingual behavior. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. Kamin, L. J. (1969). Predictability, surprise, attention and conditioning. In B. A. Campbell, & R. M. Church (Eds.), Punishment and aversive behavior (pp. 279–296). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. [Google Scholar]
  27. Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59,, 434–446. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. Jakubíček, M., Kilgarriff, A., Kovář, V., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2013). The TenTen corpus family. In 7th International Corpus Linguistics Conference CL (pp. 125–127). [Google Scholar]
  29. Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 325–343. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. Loebell, H. & Bock, J. K. (2003). Structural priming across languages, Linguistics, 41, 791–824. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. Macizo, P., & Bajo, M. T. (2006). Reading for repetition and reading for translation: Do they involve the same processes? Cognition, 99, 1–34. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. Mackey, W. F. (1962). The description of bilingualism. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 7, 51–85. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. Maier, R. M., Pickering, M. J., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2016). Does translation involve structural priming? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(8), 1–31. [Google Scholar]
  34. Muylle, M., Bernolet, S., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2021). On the limits of shared syntactic representations: When word order variation blocks priming between an artificial language and Dutch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(9), 1471–1493. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. Payre-Ficout, C. & Chevrot, P. (2004). La forme contre l’usage: étude exploratoire de l’acquisition du prétérit anglais par des apprenants français. Lidil, 30, 101–115. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  36. Pickering, M. J. & Branigan, H. P. (1998). The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 633–651. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  37. Potter, M. C., & Lombardi, L. (1998). Syntactic Priming in Immediate Recall of Sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 265-282. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. R Development Core Team (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software manual]. Vienna: Austria. [Google Scholar]
  39. Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement BT. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Clasical conditioning II: current research and theory (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton Century Crofts. [Google Scholar]
  40. Roberts, L. & Liszka, S. (2013) Processing tense/aspect agreement violations on line in the second language: A self paced reading study with French and German L2 learners of English. Second Language Research, 29(4), 413–439. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  41. Ruiz, C., Paredes, N., Macizo, P., & Bajo, M. T. (2008). Activation of lexical and syntactic target language properties in translation. Acta Psychologica, 128,, 490–500. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. Salamoura, A. & Williams, J. N. (2006). Lexical activation of cross-language syntactic priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9, 299–307. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  43. Schoonbaert, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2007). The representation of lexical and syntactic information in bilinguals: Evidence from syntactic priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(2), 153–171. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  44. Seleskovitch, D. (1976). Interpretation: A psychological approach to translating. In R. W. Brislin (Ed.), Translation: Applications and research (pp. 92–116). New York, NY: Gardner. [Google Scholar]
  45. Shin, J.-A. & Christianson, K. (2009). Syntactic processing in Korean–English bilingual production: Evidence from cross-linguistic structural priming. Cognition, 112(1), 175–180. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. Stout, S. C., & Miller, R. R. (2007). Sometimes-competing retrieval (SOCR): A formalization of the comparator hypothesis. Psychological Review, 114(3), 759–783. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  47. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  48. Ullman, M. T. (2001). The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 105–122. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  49. Warren, P. (2013). Introducing psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.