Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-rvbq7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T07:43:39.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

22 - Processes in L2 Japanese sentence production

from Language acquisition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Noriko Iwasaki
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor of Japanese, University of California, Davis
Mineharu Nakayama
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Reiko Mazuka
Affiliation:
Duke University, North Carolina
Yasuhiro Shirai
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Ping Li
Affiliation:
University of Richmond, Virginia
Get access

Summary

Overview

Though psycholinguists have made significant progress in understanding how first-language (L1) speakers produce sentences in speech, little is known about second-language (L2) sentence production processing (Heredia, 2003) and its development. This is partly because L2 research has focused upon the development of L2 knowledge, rather than real-time processing of that knowledge in performance (e.g. speaking). Paradoxically, however, most methods commonly adopted to study L2 knowledge often rely upon performance data (e.g. written/spoken). Analysis of such data to uncover L2 competence could benefit substantially from further research into L2 sentence processing.

Currently, research on L2 processing focuses almost exclusively on Indo-European languages, and few studies on L2 Japanese sentence production incorporate L1 psycholinguistic models. To situate L2 Japanese studies in a wider context, I will first review previous L2 sentence production research: L2 studies incorporating L1 sentence production models and L2 speech error studies referring to L1 speech error research. I will then briefly review studies on L1 Japanese speech errors involving case particles before discussing L2 Japanese production studies involving case particles.

Approaches in early L2 production research

Much early L2 production research primarily investigated temporal variables such as speaking rate and pause length (e.g. Dechert, Möhle & Raupach, 1984). These studies provided important observations about factors including automatization, but were primarily descriptive, rather than hypothesis-testing (e.g. Crookes, 1991).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×