Number Specification in L2 processing of Norwegian adult L2 English speakers: Time-frequency representation (TFR) analysis

Abstract

This thesis investigates the processing of non-local agreement violations and whether they are affected by double marking from a determiner-number specification in Norwegian L2 speakers of English. We tested non-local subject-verb agreement, a mismatch between Norwegian and English, and the double marking on the number of the noun that is a common feature of the two languages by using online Grammaticality Judgement test (GJT) during EEG (electroencephalogram) recording. There were four conditions to test the participants’ sensitivity towards determiner number specification: (1) Grammatical unspecified, (2) ungrammatical unspecified, (3) grammatical specified, (4) ungrammatical specified. The EEG data were analyzed with TFRs (time-frequency references) to observe the changes in different frequency bands of neural oscillations. Behavioural and neural responses to the sentences were compared to understand the neural mechanisms regarding the interaction between non-local agreement violations and determiner-number specification. The results showed no evidence for an interaction between specificity and grammaticality. The specificity did not seem to affect participants’ judgment of the grammaticality. That is, we did not see any change in the theta band (4-8 Hz); however, a relative decrease in the activation for the ungrammatical items vs grammatical items in the alpha band (8-12 Hz) and a relative decrease in the activation for the number-specified items vs number-unspecified items in alpha bands (8-12 Hz) was observed.

The alpha band reactivity observed during language comprehension does not necessarily reflect the linguistic analyses but the attention. Alpha band decrease is explained as the engagement of the additional attentional resources to explain a faulty representation. The results of the behavioural data showed that the participants were better when judging the grammatical sentences than the ungrammatical sentences, and the unspecified grammatical sentences were judged more accurately than the other three conditions. The findings of the current study suggest that the agreement violation in GJT led the participants to have increased attentional process demands as they needed to judge the mismatching property between their L1 Norwegian and L2 English.