VERBAL MORPHOLOGY IN L2 SPANISH: MORPHOLOGICAL DEFICITS AND
PROCESSING STRATEGIES
By
Suzanne Johnston

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Second Language Studies—Doctor of Philosophy
2017

ABSTRACT
VERBAL MORPHOLOGY IN L2 SPANISH: MORPHOLOGICAL DEFICITS AND
PROCESSING STRATEGIES
By
Suzanne Johnston
One of the fundamental questions in second language (L2) research asks whether L2
learners can access inflectional morphology in real time to process sentences in a native-like
manner. More recently, research has indicated that the L2 parser is less efficient than the native
parser, and only near native learners may be capable of processing sentences like native speakers
(Hopp, 2010; Keating, 2009). Furthermore, L2 learners may continue to rely on nonnative-like
processing strategies to make up for processing deficits in L2 comprehension, even after
inflectional morphology has been acquired (Ellis & Sagarra, 2010; LoCoco, 1987; VanPatten,
1984, 1990, 1996). The current dissertation examines such behavior by examining the
development and processing of subject/verb agreement in L2 Spanish. L1 English/L2 Spanish
speakers completed two self-paced reading tasks that tested whether they perceived errors in
morphological inflection, and whether they could reliably use morpho-syntactic cues during real
time processing. A third self-paced reading task examined whether L2 learners’ processing was
facilitated by the presence of overt subjects. Results suggest that while L2 learners showed
sensitivity to some errors, the parser did not regularly process inflection during on-line
comprehension. Furthermore, L2 learner processing was facilitated by the presence of an overt
subject. These results are compatible with the prediction that L2 parsers are less efficient than L1
parsers, and that L2 learners may continue to rely on L1 or universal processing measures after
morphological inflection has been acquired.

Copyright by
SUZANNE JOHNSTON
2017

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Nearly six years ago, I came to Michigan State University immediately after earning my
Bachelor’s degree in Spanish. Perhaps like others who decide to pursue a Master’s degree, I did
not have a clear career path upon entering the Applied Spanish Linguistics Program. It was
during this time that I was fortunate to meet Dr. Bill VanPatten, who has guided me to become
the teacher and researcher that I am today. Over the years, he has answered countless questions,
provided copious amounts of advice, and has provided me with many opportunities to learn. For
this, I am immensely grateful, and feel incredibly fortunate to have worked with Dr. VanPatten
over the course of my six years at MSU. It is truly my privilege to be able to say that he is my
mentor.
I would also like to thank Dr. Patti Spinner and Dr. Aline Godfroid for their support,
encouragement, and advice throughout these last four years. I have always appreciated their
willingness to assist me with projects theoretically and statistically. I would also like to thank Dr.
Paula Winke, who, despite this not being her area of expertise, agreed to serve on this committee,
and provided valuable assistance in choosing materials for the proficiency test used in this
dissertation.
Andrew Dennhardt from the Center for Statistical Training and Consulting at MSU was
also a source of immense help during the final stages of this dissertation. Without his help, the
analyses of this study would not be as fine-tuned or as thorough. I thank him not only for sharing
his knowledge with me, but also for being patient and kind throughout the process.
I would also like to thank my colleagues and the other faculty in the Second Language
Studies Program. The SLS program at MSU has been nothing but supportive over the course of

iv

the last four years, and I cannot imagine a more supportive group of colleagues. This being said,
there were several friends who were my primary sources of support over the years. Changchang
Yao’s friendship has made my time at MSU enjoyable, and it is my honor to call her one of my
best friends. I have enjoyed our office conversations, movie nights, and puppy playdates
immensely, and even in the craziest of times, she has been one of my dearest friends. I will miss
seeing her every day when I move away. I will also miss Irina Zaykovskaya, who has also been
an invaluable friend throughout this journey. Her support and staunch determination provided me
with a rock when I needed it most. It is not often that someone—let alone another incredibly
busy Ph.D. student—offers to come to your home to help organize and clean your bedroom, and
Irina would not take no for an answer. It is for these small, yet significant, deeds that I feel
honored to call Irina a friend. I would also like to thank all the Teaching Assistants in the thirdfloor Linguistics and Languages office. All of them have made working the long and tedious
days enjoyable. I look forward to seeing all of them every day, and will miss them immensely.
Finally, I would like to thank my family. My parents have always taught me the value of
perseverance, and have believed in me even when I didn’t believe in myself. Their
encouragement over the years has brought me to this point, and without it, I never would have
succeeded. Nevertheless, the primary source of support throughout this journey is a family
member, who came to my home only one year before I started my doctoral journey. Purchased
on a whim, my slightly chunky French Bulldog, Moo, has been an integral source of support. He
has sat by my side (quite literally) through sickness, exhaustion, frustration, and happiness. Our
daily walks are a stern reminder of the value of slowing down, and taking time to (again,
literally) sniff the flowers. Every single one. Just in case.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... xiv
CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
Morpho-syntactic Features and Syntax ..................................................................................... 1
L2 Processing ............................................................................................................................ 6
L1 English/L2 Spanish as a Test Case ...................................................................................... 9
The Current Dissertation ......................................................................................................... 11
Overview of Dissertation ........................................................................................................ 12
CHAPTER TWO .......................................................................................................................... 13
EXPERIMENT ONE .................................................................................................................... 13
Background and Motivation ................................................................................................... 13
Spanish Verbal Morphology ............................................................................................. 13
Predictions about L2 Learner Behavior on L2 Verbal Morphology ................................. 16
VanPatten, Keating, and Leeser (2012) ............................................................................ 17
The Present Study ................................................................................................................... 20
Method and Procedure ............................................................................................................ 21
Participants........................................................................................................................ 21
Nonnative Speakers .................................................................................................... 21
Native Speakers .......................................................................................................... 21
Materials ........................................................................................................................... 22
Stimuli ......................................................................................................................... 22
Proficiency Test .......................................................................................................... 25
Procedure .......................................................................................................................... 26
Scoring and Analysis ........................................................................................................ 28
Results ..................................................................................................................................... 32
Native Speakers ................................................................................................................ 32
1sg/3sg Condition ....................................................................................................... 32
2sg/3pl Condition ........................................................................................................ 36
3sg/3pl Condition ........................................................................................................ 40
Summary of Results for the Native Control Group. ................................................... 44
Nonnative Speakers .......................................................................................................... 44
1sg/3sg Condition ....................................................................................................... 44
2sg/3pl Condition ........................................................................................................ 47
3sg/3pl Condition ........................................................................................................ 51
Summary of Results for the Nonnative Group ........................................................... 55
Discussion for Experiment One .............................................................................................. 56
Conclusion to Experiment One ............................................................................................... 60

vi

CHAPTER THREE ...................................................................................................................... 61
EXPERIMENT TWO ................................................................................................................... 61
Background and Motivation ................................................................................................... 62
Sentence Processing in SLA ............................................................................................. 62
Topic/Subject Shifts in Spanish ........................................................................................ 66
Research Question for Experiment Two ........................................................................... 70
Method and Procedure ............................................................................................................ 71
Participants........................................................................................................................ 71
Nonnative Speakers .................................................................................................... 71
Native Speakers .......................................................................................................... 72
Materials ........................................................................................................................... 72
Stimuli ......................................................................................................................... 72
Procedure .......................................................................................................................... 74
Scoring and Analysis ........................................................................................................ 75
Results ..................................................................................................................................... 77
Native Speakers ................................................................................................................ 77
1sg/3sg Condition ....................................................................................................... 77
2sg/3pl Condition ........................................................................................................ 80
Summary of Results for the Native Speakers. ............................................................ 84
Nonnative Speakers .......................................................................................................... 85
1sg/3sg Condition ....................................................................................................... 85
2sg/3pl Condition ........................................................................................................ 88
Summary of Results for the Nonnative Speakers ....................................................... 92
Discussion of Experiment Two............................................................................................... 93
Conclusion of Experiment Two .............................................................................................. 94
CHAPTER FOUR......................................................................................................................... 95
EXPERIMENT THREE ............................................................................................................... 95
Background and Motivation ................................................................................................... 95
Summary of Results of Experiment Two.......................................................................... 95
Research Question for Experiment Three ......................................................................... 96
Method and Procedure ............................................................................................................ 97
Participants........................................................................................................................ 97
Nonnative Speakers .................................................................................................... 97
Native Speakers .......................................................................................................... 97
Materials ........................................................................................................................... 97
Stimuli ......................................................................................................................... 97
Procedure ........................................................................................................................ 100
Scoring and Analysis ...................................................................................................... 101
Results ................................................................................................................................... 102
Native Speakers .............................................................................................................. 102
1sg/3sg Condition ..................................................................................................... 102
2sg/3pl Condition ...................................................................................................... 107
Summary of Native Speaker Results ........................................................................ 112
Nonnative Speakers ........................................................................................................ 113
1sg/3sg Condition ..................................................................................................... 113
vii

2sg/3pl Condition ...................................................................................................... 117
Summary of Nonnative Speaker Results .................................................................. 122
Discussion of Experiment Three ........................................................................................... 123
Conclusion to Experiment Three .......................................................................................... 124
CHAPTER FIVE ........................................................................................................................ 126
GENERAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 126
Summary of Findings of the Three Experiments .................................................................. 127
Experiment One. ............................................................................................................. 127
Experiment Two.............................................................................................................. 127
Experiment Three............................................................................................................ 128
Significance of Findings ....................................................................................................... 128
Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 132
Future Research .................................................................................................................... 133
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 134
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................ 136
APPENDIX A: Experiment One Stimuli and Instructions ................................................... 137
APPENDIX B: Experiment Two Stimuli ............................................................................. 164
APPENDIX C: Experiment Three Stimuli ........................................................................... 181
APPENDIX D: Nonnative Background Questionnaire ........................................................ 201
APPENDIX E: Native Background Questionnaire .............................................................. 203
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 205

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Example of Spanish Verbal Paradigm for –ar Verbs in the Present Tense .................... 3
Table 1.2 Example of English Verbal Paradigm in the Present Tense ........................................... 3
Table 1.3 Example of English Verbal Paradigm in the Past Tense ................................................ 4
Table 1.4 Example of Spanish Verbal Paradigm for –ar Verbs in the Past Tense ......................... 5
Table 2.1 Summary of Person/Number (Participant/Individuation) Features in Spanish ............ 14
Table 2.2 Descriptive Statistics of Native Speakers for 1sg/3sg in Milliseconds ........................ 32
Table 2.3 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region 1sg/3sg ........................... 33
Table 2.4 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region 1sg/3sg .............. 34
Table 2.5 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region 1sg/3sg .......... 35
Table 2.6 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region 1sg/3sg ............. 35
Table 2.7 Descriptive Statistics of Native Speakers for 2sg/3pl in Milliseconds ......................... 36
Table 2.8 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region 2sg/3pl ........................... 37
Table 2.9 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region 2sg/3pl ............... 38
Table 2.10 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region 2sg/3pl ........ 39
Table 2.11 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region 2sg/3pl ........... 40
Table 2.12 Descriptive Statistics of Native Speakers for 3sg/3pl in Milliseconds ....................... 40
Table 2.13 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for 3sg/3pl .................... 41
Table 2.14 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl ....... 42
Table 2.15 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl ....... 43
Table 2.16 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl ...... 43
Table 2.17 Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Speakers for 1sg/3sg in Milliseconds ................ 44

ix

Table 2.18 Model Results Analyses of Nonnative Speakers for Target Region for 1sg/3sg ....... 45
Table 2.19 Model Results Analyses of Nonnative Speakers for First Spillover Region 1sg/3sg. 46
Table 2.20 Model Results Analyses of Nonnative Speakers for Second Spillover Region 1sg/3sg
....................................................................................................................................................... 46
Table 2.21 Model Results Analyses of Nonnative Speakers for Third Spillover Region 1sg/3sg 47
Table 2.22 Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Speakers for 2sg/3pl in Milliseconds ................. 47
Table 2.23 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region 2sg/3pl.................... 48
Table 2.24 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region 2sg/3pl ....... 49
Table 2.25 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region 2sg/3pl... 50
Table 2.26 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Third Spillover Region 2sg/3pl ..... 51
Table 2.27 Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Speakers for 3sg/3pl in Milliseconds ................. 51
Table 2.28 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for 3sg/3pl .............. 52
Table 2.29 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl . 53
Table 2.30 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl
....................................................................................................................................................... 54
Table 2.31 Post-Hoc Pairwise Comparisons of Morpheme/Grammaticality Interaction in
Nonnative First Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl ............................................................................... 54
Table 2.32 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Third Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl 55
Table 2.33 Review of Summary of Person/Number (Participant/Individuation) Features in
Spanish .......................................................................................................................................... 57
Table 3.1 Descriptive Statistics of Native Reading Times for 1sg/3sg Condition in Milliseconds
....................................................................................................................................................... 77
Table 3.2 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition78
Table 3.3 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition ...................................................................................................................................... 79
Table 3.4 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition ...................................................................................................................................... 80
x

Table 3.5 Descriptive Statistics of Native Reading Times for 2sg/3pl Condition in Milliseconds
....................................................................................................................................................... 81
Table 3.6 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
....................................................................................................................................................... 82
Table 3.7 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition ...................................................................................................................................... 83
Table 3.8 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Region Second Spillover Region for the
2sg/3pl Condition .......................................................................................................................... 84
Table 3.9 Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Reading Times for 1sg/3sg Condition in
Milliseconds .................................................................................................................................. 85
Table 3.10 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition ...................................................................................................................................... 86
Table 3.11 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition ...................................................................................................................................... 87
Table 3.12 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for the
1sg/3sg Condition ......................................................................................................................... 88
Table 3.13 Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Reading Times for 2sg/3pl Condition in
Milliseconds .................................................................................................................................. 89
Table 3.14 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition ...................................................................................................................................... 90
Table 3.15 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition ...................................................................................................................................... 91
Table 3.16 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for the
2sg/3pl Condition .......................................................................................................................... 92
Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of Native Reading Times for 1sg/3sg Condition in Milliseconds
..................................................................................................................................................... 103
Table 4.2 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
..................................................................................................................................................... 104
Table 4.3 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 105

xi

Table 4.4 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 106
Table 4.5 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 107
Table 4.6 Descriptive Statistics of Native Reading Times for 2sg/3pl Condition in Milliseconds
..................................................................................................................................................... 108
Table 4.7 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
..................................................................................................................................................... 109
Table 4.8 Post-Hoc Pairwise Comparisons of Morpheme/Match Interaction in Native Target
Region for 2sg/3pl....................................................................................................................... 110
Table 4.9 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 110
Table 4.10 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 111
Table 4.11 Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 112
Table 4.12 Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Reading Times for 1sg/3sg Condition in
Milliseconds ................................................................................................................................ 113
Table 4.13 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 114
Table 4.14 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 115
Table 4.15 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for the
1sg/3sg Condition ....................................................................................................................... 116
Table 4.16 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Third Spillover Region for the
1sg/3sg Condition ....................................................................................................................... 117
Table 4.17 Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Reading Times for 2sg/3pl Condition in
Milliseconds ................................................................................................................................ 118
Table 4.18 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 119

xii

Table 4.19 Post-Hoc Pairwise Comparisons of Morpheme/Match Interaction in Nonnative Target
Region for 2sg/3pl ...................................................................................................................... 120
Table 4.20 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition .................................................................................................................................... 120
Table 4.21 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for the
2sg/3pl Condition ........................................................................................................................ 121
Table 4.22 Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Third Spillover Region for the
2sg/3pl Condition ........................................................................................................................ 122

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 Sample Plot of Residuals for Nonnative Target Region ............................................. 31
Figure 2.2 Sample Log-Transformed Residuals for Nonnative First Person Singular/Third Person
Singular Target Region ................................................................................................................. 32

xiv

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
One of the fundamental questions in second language acquisition (SLA) is how second
language (L2) learners acquire and process inflectional morphology in the L2. Various
hypotheses have been proposed that range from proposing that L2 learners are unable to acquire
inflectional morphology that does not exist in the L1 (see Hawkins, 2005; Hawkins & Chan,
1997) to proposing that inflectional morphology is completely acquirable, and that any apparent
deficits are due to either processing failures, poor instruction, or lack of access to input (Hopp,
2010; Roberts, Gullberg, & Indefrey, 2008; Schwartz & Sprouse, 1994; 1996). The current
dissertation’s purpose is three-fold. The first is to examine the extent to which L2 subject/verb
agreement morphology has been acquired by B1 level L2 Spanish/L1 English speakers.
Subject/verb agreement was chosen, because according to current hypotheses, this inflectional
morphology should be acquirable for the targeted language learners. The second purpose is to
examine whether L2 learners process morphological inflection reliably within a sentence by
testing their ability to detect topic/subject shifts when a shift is indicated by morphological
inflection. The third is to examine the extent to which L1 English/L2 Spanish processing is
facilitated by overt subjects in the context of a topic/subject shift.
Morpho-syntactic Features and Syntax
Universal Grammar (UG) posits that languages mark lexical items with a certain set of
linguistic properties called features. Traditionally, features have been divided into phonological,
semantic, and morpho-syntactic features. The current dissertation is concerned with morphosyntactic features only, which are features that are realized through the syntax and can determine
the shape that a word or phrase takes (Adger, 2003). Features can be further divided into

1

interpretable or uninterpretable features. Interpretable features are features that are assigned
contextually or are inherent to lexical items (e.g., person, number, gender on nouns), while
uninterpretable features appear through an agreement processes (e.g., subject verb agreement on
verbs). Within this categorization, features can also be considered strong or weak. Strong
features trigger syntactic operations, while weak features do not (Adger, 2003). For example,
both English and Spanish have some form of verb agreement. However, Spanish is considered to
have a strong V feature, which means that there is perceivable verb movement, which can be
seen through the placement of adverbs. In (4), the verb and its object are separated by the adverb
‘often’, because the verb has risen to a position above the adverb.
(4)

[CP[CJuani][TP[Tbebej][VP[ADVa menudo][V’[Vtj][NPcafé]]]]
Juan

bebe

a menudo

Juan

drink.3rd.sg. often

café.
coffee.

‘Juan drinks coffee often.’
This can be contrasted with English, which has a weak V feature for lexical verbs, and
demonstrates no perceivable verb movement. Because of this, example (5) is ungrammatical in
English.
(5)

*Juan drinks often coffee.

For auxiliary verbs and copulas, however, English exhibits some strong V features and shows
signs of verb movement (see (6a-6c)).
(6) a. Juan is really active.
b. Juan doesn’t really have a choice.
c. Juan has actually done the homework.

2

In addition to Spanish and English differing syntactically between strong and weak V
movement, they also differ in richness of their morphological inflections on verbs. To be
considered morphologically rich, a language must mark more than one feature on the same
lexical item (e.g., person, number, tense) (Bobaljik, 2006). For example, the Spanish verb hablas
(‘You speak’) in Table 1.1 carries a verb class marker (-a), a marker for second person and
singular (-s), and is marked for the present tense (null). Because all Spanish verbs are marked for
person, number, and tense, Spanish is considered morphologically rich.
Table 1.1
Example of Spanish Verbal Paradigm for –ar Verbs in the Present Tense
Singular
First person
hablo
speak.1sg

Plural
hablamos
speak.3pl

Second person

hablas
speak.2sg

habláis
speak.2pl

Third person

habla
speak.3sg

hablan
speak.3pl

In contrast, English is considered morphologically poor. One such way of seeing this is that,
except for the copula be, English does not mark verbs for more than one feature, and, absent the
third person singular, has no other inflection for lexical verbs in the present tense (Table 1.2).
Table 1.2
Example of English Verbal Paradigm in the Present Tense
Singular
First person
I speak
Second person
Third person

Plural
We speak

You speak

You all speak

He/She speaks

They speak

3

Furthermore, for lexical verbs, tense and person/number agreement are also in complementary
distribution (see 7a-7b). In (7a), the verb walks is marked with third person singular -s, and is not
marked for tense. In the past tense (7b), however, it is marked for tense (-ed), but is not marked
for person or number.
(7a) John walks to school.
(7b) John walked to school.
This pattern is also true for auxiliary verbs do and have (see 8a-9b).
(8a) He does go to school.
(8b) He did go to school.
(9a) He has a car.
(9b) He had a car.
In each of these cases, when the verb is in the past tense, it no longer marks for person/number
agreement as it does in the present tense. Thus, apart from the copula be, English does not show
any signs of subject/verb agreement outside of the present tense (Table 1.3).
Table 1.3
Example of English Verbal Paradigm in the Past Tense
Singular
First person
I spoke
Second person
Third person

Plural
We spoke

You spoke

You all spoke

He/She spoke

They spoke

This can be contrasted with Spanish, which maintains subject/verb agreement across tenses.
Table 1.4, for example, demonstrates subject/verb agreement in the preterit tense. As shown,

4

despite the change in tense from present (Table 1.2) to past, Spanish maintains distinct
person/number morphemes, while English does not (1.3).
Table 1.4
Example of Spanish Verbal Paradigm for –ar Verbs in the Past Tense
Singular
First person
hablé
speak.1sg.past

Plural
hablamos
speak.3pl.past

Second person

hablaste
speak.2sg.past

hablasteis
speak.2pl.past

Third person

habló
speak.3sg.past

hablaron
speak.3pl.past

Because English does mark for person and number for third person singular subjects,
English carries remnants of subject/verb agreement on lexical verbs. However, it is unlikely that
the syntactic processes through which it is realized mirrors Spanish morphologically or
syntactically. For example, because English does not mark person and number on any lexical
verbs other than for third person singular subjects in the present tense, Bobaljik (2006) proposes
that English has only one for lexical verbs under which either tense or aspect is assigned, but
never both. Spanish, on the other hand, has two syntactic nodes under which tense and aspect are
assigned respectively, and is the reason why Spanish exhibits such rich morphological inflection.
Thus, it cannot be said that English lacks subject/verb agreement and Spanish has subject/verb
agreement, as this analysis is overly simplistic. Instead, it should be argued that the way that
English marks subject/verb agreement differs from the way it is marked in Spanish. For this
reason, Lardiere (2008, 2009) proposes that features that are shared across languages, however
minimally, must be reconstructed, rather than acquired in L2 acquisition. This process occurs as
nonnatives are exposed to meaningful and comprehensible input, and build mental
representations of the morphophonological units that encompass the features of a given
5

language. At any point, nonnative speakers may run into difficulty acquiring morphemes for
various reasons, such as features being represented on different types of lexical items (prefix,
suffix, infix), numerous features being accounted for on one morphological item versus there
being only one feature per morphological item, or the failure to appropriately parse morphosyntax (Spinner, 2013), etc. During this process, nonnative speakers may show sensitivity to
some features, but not to others, depending on the features encoded and where learners are in the
reconstruction process (Dekydtspotter & Renaud, 2009). Thus, nonnative-like performance is
predicted at lower-levels of acquisition, as features are reassembled. In the case of L1 English/L2
Spanish subject/verb agreement, nonnative speakers must not only reassemble individual
morphological features for person and number (Lardiere, 1998, 2000, 2007, 2008), they also
must acquire additional syntactic structures to allow verb movement and for these features to be
realized (VanPatten, Keating, & Leeser, 2012). Thus, at different points in acquisition, L2
learners may demonstrate knowledge of some morphological features and syntactic structures
while simultaneously showing a lack of knowledge of others (Dekydtspotter & Renaud, 2009;
McCarthy, 2008, 2012; VanPatten et al., 2012).
L2 Processing
In addition to acquiring the individual morphemes for subject/verb agreement, L2
learners must also be able to access these morphemes in real time. This is often referred to as
linguistic performance, which is the ability to draw on linguistic competence during real-time
processing. If learners have not acquired or reconstructed a morpheme, or it is not robustly
represented in the morpho-lexical store, it is unlikely that L2 learners will demonstrate the ability
to process this morpheme during linguistic performance. Processing can be defined as the
moment by moment computation of language that allows speakers to make connections between

6

meaning and form during real time comprehension (VanPatten, 2012). However, the reverse may
also occur: L2 learners may not process inflection during comprehension despite having a robust
representation within the morpho-lexical store. This observation has been made in several L2
studies that have investigated L2 mental representation and processing behavior (Hopp, 2010;
Keating, 2009; Prévost & White, 2000; Rothman & Iverson, 2007; Rothman, 2009; White, 2003;
White, Valenzuela, Kozlowska-MacGregor, & Leung, 2004). Such studies have hypothesized
that L2 learners may not process inflection because they cannot access these inflections in realtime. That is, L2 learners may have native- or near-native-like morphemes available to them, but
the linguistic mechanism responsible for accessing these representations (the parser) does not
have enough time or resources to do so during on-line tasks. One hypothesis that was derived
from early research regarding this behavior was the Missing Surface Inflection Hypothesis
(MSIH) (Prévost & White, 2000). The MSIH posited that the pressures of on-line production
cause L2 learners to have difficulty accessing appropriate inflectional morphology in real time
(Herschensohn, 2001; Prévost & White, 2000; White, 2003). Because the parser cannot access
the appropriate inflection in real time, L2 learners were prone to what is called defaulting
behavior, or the placement of underspecified forms where more specified forms are called for
(McCarthy, 2008; Lopez Prego, 2012). While the MSIH seemingly holds promise in its
predictions, it may only be able to account for the behavior of advanced-level nonnative
(VanPatten et al., 2012). Because the MSIH was originally argued to be applied only to L2
production, it is speculative whether the predictions it makes can also be applied to L2
comprehension. The reason for this is that more recent studies have tended to find that L2
learners are also display the behaviors predicted by the MSIH in on-line comprehension. Hopp
(2010), for example, found that L2 German speakers were more likely to fail to process case cues

7

when the task or sentence was more complex. This was also affected by the L1 of the
participants (English, Dutch, or Russian), and their proficiency level. As such, Hopp concludes
that the L2 parser is less capable of integrating syntactic, lexical, and morpho-syntactic
information simultaneously, but does not predict defaulting behavior. Similarly, Keating (2009)
found that nonnative speakers showed evidence of having acquired new features (in this case
grammatical gender), but they were not sensitive to errors in gender agreement outside of the
local domain (i.e. the noun phrase). Keating therefore argued that linguistic competence was not
impaired, but rather linguistic performance, or the processing of the stimuli presented to the L2
learners during comprehension, had failed to compute grammatical gender agreement in some
conditions. McCarthy (2008) also examined grammatical gender, and found that during on-line
comprehension, L2 learners also demonstrated defaulting behavior on feminine-marked clitics.
The results of these studies are also echoed in others, such as McCarthy (2012) and Lopez Prego
(2012), suggesting that while the predictions of the MSIH may explain L2 learner behavior, it
may extend also to on-line comprehension. As an extension to the MSIH, current research has
posited that L2 learners may be affected by cognitive factors, such as working memory (e.g.,
McDonald, 2006) or slower processing mechanisms (e.g., Hopp, 2010; Scherag, Demuth, Rösler,
Neville, & Roder, 2004; McDonald, 2000), that affect their ability to access the inflectional
morphology, despite having a native-like L2 mental representations of inflectional morphology.
In cases where the parser fails to access inflection during on-line comprehension,
nonnative speakers may turn to L1 and/or universal default processing strategies to comprehend
aural or written stimuli. One such strategy is that L2 learners may show a reliance on adverbs for
determining tense, as was observed in Ellis and Sagarra (2010). The authors for this study argued
that influence from the L1—in this case Chinese—blocked the cues from the L2 (Latin), because

8

the Chinese-speaking participants had learned to pay attention to lexical items in their L1 instead
of inflectional morphology. However, other researchers argue that the concept of blocking or
learned attention (Ellis & Sagarra, 2010) are inaccurate, because L2 learners are relying on
universal default processing strategies that allow them to comprehend sentences in real time with
a parser that is limited by the amount of information it can take in (VanPatten, 2012). For
example, one such strategies called the First Noun Principle argue that nonnatives may assign the
role of subject to the first noun that appears in the sentence, regardless of its actual role and
regardless of L1 influence (see LoCoco, 1987; VanPatten, 1984, 1990, 1996, 2003). Another
universal processing strategy, the Lexical Primacy Principle, argues that L2 learners may rely on
lexical items rather than inflectional morphology. That is, between these two principles,
nonnative speakers may show a preference for attaching a verb to the nearest overt reference
despite the cues provided by morphological inflections (Mandell, 2013). For example, in (10)
(Mandell, 2013, p. 22), the verb is marked with 2sg, which indicates that a new subject (i.e. not
‘Franco’) has been introduced. However, if the processing of inflection of ‘hablas’ does not
occur, the verb may be automatically co-referenced with ‘Franco’, because it is the nearest
available overt referent.
(10)

Franco dice

que

hablas

bien

el

español.

Franco says

that

speak.2sg.

well

the

Spanish.

‘Franco says you speak Spanish well.’
L1 English/L2 Spanish as a Test Case
L1 English/L2 Spanish participants provide the opportunity to examine the development
of morpho-syntax and processing behavior in several ways. First, L1 English learners must
reassemble features that are minimally present in their L1 to match the expected features of L2

9

Spanish, as well as the necessary syntactic structures (not tested in the current dissertation)
(McCarthy, 2012; VanPatten et al., 2012). This is required for Spanish not only because Spanish
is morphologically rich, but also because Spanish is a null subject language that permits subjects
to be represented with an unspoken pro. This means both native speakers and L2 learners must
rely on verbal morphology to reliably ascertain subjects. For example, in sentence (11), the only
indication that the verb in the second clause is 2sg is the morpheme –s.
(11)

Franco dice

que

hablas

bien

el

español.

Franco says

that

speak.2sg.

well

the

Spanish.

‘Franco says you speak Spanish well.’
Second, L1 English/L2 Spanish learners must also be able to access this information
during real time processing by developing native-like processing heuristics. However, the
research investigating L2 development has tended to indicate that even after inflection has been
acquired, L2 learners may not reliably process inflection in real time due to cognitive constraints
(McDonald, 2000, 2006; Hopp, 2010; LoCoco, 1987; VanPatten, 1984, 1990, 1996, 2003).
Finally, due to a failure to acquire L2 processing heuristics or limited processing capabilities, L1
English/L2 Spanish participants may revert to L1 or universal processing strategies, even if a
robust representation of morphological items has developed (Hopp, 2010; Roberts et al., 2008).
In the case of subject/verb agreement, this may take the form of reliance on or a preference for
overt subjects over null subjects. Thus, the examination of L1 English/L2 Spanish allows me to
investigate various aspects of morphosyntactic and processing development.

10

The Current Dissertation
The current dissertation has three purposes. The first is to establish the extent to which
intermediate-level L1 English/L2 Spanish learners have developed robust mental representations
of inflectional morphology in L2 Spanish. This is necessary before addressing the second
purpose, which is to examine whether L2 learners can reliably access mental representations
within the morpho-lexical store while processing sentences. The third purpose is to examine the
extent to which L1 English/L2 Spanish processing is facilitated by overt subjects.
To address the first purpose, L1 English/L2 Spanish learners read Spanish sentences with
grammatical and ungrammatical subject/verb agreement, and their reading times were collected.
Reading times on grammatical and ungrammatical sentences were compared to examine whether
participants showed sensitivity to errors in subject/verb agreement by reading ungrammatical
sentences longer than grammatical sentences. This portion of the dissertation is a partial
replication of VanPatten et al. (2012), and tests learners’ sensitivity to errors in person and
number. VanPatten et al. (2012) also tested learner sensitivity to verb raising and adverb
placement, which is omitted in the present study. If learners have morphemes robustly
represented within the morpho-lexical store, they should slow down while reading sentences that
contain errors in subject-verb agreement.
A second set of bi-clausal sentences was created to test whether L2 learners can reliably
access these morphemes while processing sentences, when they have robust representations
within the morpho-lexical store. In these sentences, the first clause contained an overt subject,
and the second clause contained a null subject that either matched the subject in the first clause
or did not. These sentences examined whether L2 learners had the ability to process verbal
morphology reliably, as they should slow down when a new subject is introduced in mismatched

11

clauses. If L2 learners cannot reliably access morphemes within the morpho-lexical store, they
should read both sets of sentences for approximately the same amount of time. Such behavior
may also indicate a reliance on overt subjects for determining the subject of a sentence and for
feature checking procedures. Finally, the third set of stimuli that tested L2 learner reliance on
overt pronouns to process subject/verb agreement was the same as the second set, but with overt
pronouns in both clauses. In this case, L2 learners may demonstrate more native-like behavior
when an overt subject marks a topic/subject shift compared to their behavior on sentences in
which a topic/subject shift is marked only by morphological inflection.
Overview of Dissertation
This dissertation is structured in the following way. Chapter Two presents the results of
an experiment designed to test whether L1 English/L2 Spanish had developed robust enough
representations of individual morphemes to show sensitivity to errors in subject/verb agreement
in L2 Spanish. Chapter Three presents the results of an experiment designed to the examine
whether L1 English/L2 Spanish participants could reliably access those representations to
process topic/subject shifts in Spanish. Chapter Four presents the results of an experiment
designed to test whether overt subjects facilitated L2 learners’ processing of topic/subject shifts.
The final chapter presents a general discussion and conclusion based on the three experiments.

12

CHAPTER TWO
EXPERIMENT ONE
The purpose of the present experiment is to determine L1 English/B1-level L2 Spanish
speakers have acquired the necessary morphological inflections to process subject/verb
agreement in Spanish. In a partial replication of VanPatten et al. (2012), the current experiment
uses self-paced reading experimental methodology to examine whether L2 learners detect errors
in 1sg, 2sg, 3sg, and 3pl inflectional morphology during self-paced reading task. When features
are shared across languages, however minimally, these features must be reassembled over time
to match the expectations of the L2 (Lardiere, 2008, 2009). However, this process is slow, and
occurs as learners are exposed to meaningful and comprehensible input in the L2. Furthermore,
this process may be subject to parsing errors (Spinner, 2013), and prone to errors as reassembly
occurs (Dekydtspotter & Renaud, 2009). Thus, the current experiment establishes a baseline for
what present-tense morphemes have been reassembled by L1 English/L2 Spanish learners at the
CEFR B1-level of acquisition. The current study also examines whether the acquisition of these
features follows proposed feature specification hierarchies proposed by Harley & Ritter (2000,
2002) that seem to predict L1 acquisition of inflection morphology.
Background and Motivation
Spanish Verbal Morphology
In Spanish, each verbal morpheme carries features that mark it for person, number, tense,
and how it attaches to verbs (_V) (Table 2.1). For example, the verb hablo (‘I speak’) is marked
with the morpheme (-o), which carries features for first person [-addressee] and singular
[-group]. It is also attached to the end of the verb (habl-), fulfilling the (_V) placement of the
morpheme. Although one morpheme may be marked for several features, each feature operates

13

independently of the others (Bejar, 2003). The targeted features for this dissertation are the phifeatures person and number on present tense verbal morphology.
Each morpheme carries a degree of specification (or underspecification), which is both
independent of and relative to other inflectional morphemes (Hanson, 2000; Harley & Ritter,
2000, 2002). Crucial to the current dissertation are two nodes proposed by Harley and Ritter
(2000, 2002): Participant and Individuation. Person features are encoded under Participant, and
Number features are encoded under Individuation. Under this analysis, third person features
(Table 2.1) are the absence of a person (Participant) feature, and is marked only with marker of
number (Individuation) (Harley & Ritter, 2002). First person, on the other hand, is represented
by a bare, underspecified Participant node, and receives the default interpretation of Speaker
[-addressee]. It is also marked with a [-group] feature specification. Second person also contains
a Participant node, although this node is specified, and receives the marked interpretation of
Addressee. Thus, the implicational hierarchy for person is argued to be 3sg/1sg < 2sg (Austin,
2015; Hanson, 2000; Harley & Ritter, 2002). Number is similarly constructed with singular
forms being marked with a bare Individuation node, whereas plural’s Individuation node is
encoded with the feature for [+group]. Again, as singular is the bare Individuation node, the
implicational hierarchy of these forms is singular < plural (Harley & Ritter, 2002).
Table 2.1
Summary of Person/Number (Participant/Individuation) Features in Spanish
Singular
Plural
First person
-o
-mos
[-addressee, -group]
[-addressee, +group]
Second person
Third person

-s
[+addressee, -group]
-Ø
[-group]

14

-is
[+addressee, +group]
-n
[+group]

Due to these geometries, Hanson (2000) and Harley and Ritter (2002) propose that 1sg
and 3sg will emerge simultaneously in first language production as default forms of their specific
categories: Participant and Individuation respectively. They are followed by second person
forms. Similarly, singular forms are expected to be acquired before plural forms. A summary of
these features, along with their respective inflections can be seen in Table 2.1. Features marked
with a + value are considered specified in that category.
The geometries proposed by Harley and Ritter (2000, 2002) are of interest to the current
study, because it has been shown to predict the order of emergence of inflectional morphology in
L1 Spanish acquisition. For example, Austin (2015) found that in adult L1 Spanish, verbal
morphemes tended to be used with the following relative frequencies when speaking with
children: 3rd sg > 2nd sg > 3rd pl > 1st sg > 1st pl > 2nd pl. However, beyond 3rd singular emerging
first, there was no other correlation between the adults’ and children’s speech. 1sg emerged
nearly simultaneously with 3sg, and was subsequently followed by 2sg (e.g., 3sg/1sg > 2sg).
These findings suggest that L1 acquisition primarily occurs along the lines of Harley & Ritter’s
(2000; 2002) proposed feature geometries, rather than input frequency (Clahsen, Aveledo, &
Roca, 2002; Aguado-Orea & Pine, 2015). Such results suggest that in L1 acquisition, children
choose a “base” or “default” morpheme that serves as a base for determining the structure of the
linguistic paradigm (Bybee, 1985; Albright, 2002). 1sg serves as default Participant node and 3sg
serves as the default Individuation node.
The construction of a morphological paradigm in L1 acquisition is important to consider
when examining the acquisition of verbal morphology in the L2, as it may serve as blueprint for
what can be expected. If L2 acquisition is not fundamentally different from L1 acquisition, and if

15

the hypotheses of Bybee (1985) and Albright (2002) are correct, then L2 learners’ behavior
should mimic the behavior of L1 learners.
Predictions about L2 Learner Behavior on L2 Verbal Morphology
Based on the feature hierarchies proposed by Harley and Ritter (2000) and L1 Spanish
speaker data, L2 learners can be expected to make two types of errors if incomplete acquisition is
observed. The first type of error is called feature clash, and occurs when an over-specified
morpheme is used where a less-specified form is required (McCarthy, 2006, 2008) (1).
(1)

*El

chico hablas

español.

The

boy

Spanish.

speak.2sg

‘The boy speaks Spanish.’
In the given example, the 2sg form (-s) is used where 3sg (-a) is required. Because third person
singular subjects only are marked only with [-group] features, the specified [+addressee] feature
of 2sg clashes with features of third person singular. This is an error of feature clash. Feature
default errors, on the other hand, are errors that occur when a less-specified morpheme is used in
place of a more specified morpheme (Lopez Prego, 2012; McCarthy, 2008) (see example 2).
(2)

*Tú

habla

con

tus

amigos.

You

speak.3sg

with

your

friends.

‘You are speaking with my friends.’
In example (2), the third person singular null morpheme [-group] is used in a context that
requires the second person singular morpheme (-s) [+addressee, -group]. This type of error is
called a default error, because the verb (habla) does not carry any features that clash with the
features present on the subject.

16

Of the two different error types, L2 learners tend to commit defaulting errors with more
frequency than feature clash errors (Bartning, 2000; Lopez-Prego, 2012; McCarthy, 2008, 2012;
Prévost & White, 2000; Renaud, 2010, 2014; White, 2003; White et al., 2004). There are several
possible reasons that default errors are more common than feature clash errors. The first reason is
that classroom-based L2 learners may be exposed to default morphology more frequently in the
input (VanPatten et al., 2012). As such, L2 learners may use default forms instead of more
marked forms, simply because these forms are the most robustly represented in the input. A
second reason is based on what is seen in L1 child acquisition, and related to the feature
hierarchy (Harley & Ritter, 2000). As mentioned previously, L1 Spanish children choose the
morpheme with the least amount of specification as a “base” to build representations of features
present in their language (Albright, 2002; Austin, 2015; Bybee, 1985). Because of this, L1
children tend to make errors of underspecification, and produce not specified or underspecified
inflections in contexts where more specified inflections are called for. L2 learners may make
similar errors of underspecification, and may also routinely use such inflections as a default
when no other forms are either readily available or known (McCarthy, 2008; 2012). Each of
these explanations is mutually compatible with the observation that L2 learners may not show
sensitivity to errors like those in (2), because they are not sensitive to feature default errors.
VanPatten, Keating, and Leeser (2012)
To test whether L2 learners show sensitivity to errors in subject-verb agreement and thus
some underlying knowledge of the relationship between subjects and verbal inflection in
Spanish, the current study partially replicates VanPatten et al. (2012). The experiment conducted
in this study addressed two aspects of L2 Spanish acquisition: the acquisition of syntax and the
acquisition of morphology. Specifically, the researchers asked whether intermediate level

17

learners’ behavior was the result of representation of verbal morphemes in the morpho-lexical
store (i.e., mental representation) or whether problematic processing behavior, caused by
difficulties with real-time access. The participants in their study were L1 English/L2 Spanish
learners, whose Spanish proficiency was described as non-advanced. Furthermore, the
participants were primarily classroom-based learners of Spanish, as they had not studied abroad
or had extensive contact with the L2 outside of the classroom. To test whether L2 learners had
acquired L2 Spanish inflectional morphology, and to ensure that representation was not the cause
of nonnative-like performance, the researchers created a set of segmented experimental
quadruplets that tested for sensitivity to errors in subject/verb agreement on present tense -ar
verbs (3) (VanPatten et al., 2012, p. 120)
(3) a. Ahora Pedro
now

Pedro.3sg

b. *Ahora Pedro
now

Pedro.3sg

c. Ahora yo
now

I.1sg

d. *Ahora yo
now

I.1sg

toma

el refresco

en el salón.

drinks.3sg

the soft drink in the living room

tomo

el refresco

drinks.1sg

the soft drink in the living room

en el salón.

tomo

el refresco

en el salón.

drinks.1sg

the soft drink in the living room

toma

el refresco

drinks.3sg

the soft drink in the living room

en el salón.

‘Right now, Pedro/I drinks/drink the soft drink in the living room.’
In example (3), sentences A and C are correct, because the verb is marked with the inflectional
morphology that matches the sentence subject. Sentences B and D are incorrect, because the verb
is incorrectly conjugated for the sentences’ subjects. The authors created quadruplets that
alternated 1sg (-o) and 3sg (-Ø) and 2sg (-s) with 3pl (-n) inflectional morphology so that the

18

length of the verb was maintained. The experimental quadruplets were segmented as shown
above, and presented in a non-cumulative, self-paced reading procedure. Participants read each
sentence at their own pace before being presented with a comprehension check in English to
ensure that participants understood the sentences.
The results of this study indicated that L2 Spanish learners had not yet acquired robust
enough representations within the morpho-lexical store to process inflection reliably. The
nonnative participants did not show any sensitivity to any error in morphological inflection. They
also did not show any sign of defaulting behavior (the placement of a less specified form in a
context where a more specified form is called for), which would also be predicted if a processing
issue were taking place. Thus, VanPatten et al. (2012) concluded that intermediate L2 learners
may not yet have had enough L2 exposure to build robust representations of the morphology
itself.
There are several benefits to a replication of VanPatten et al. (2012) for the current
dissertation. First, this study deviates from traditional measures (e.g., paper and pencil-based
tests) of measuring the acquisition of verbal morphology by using an on-line processing measure
(i.e., self-paced reading). As such, it is more likely address the issue of mental representation
than off-line tasks that invite reflection and explicit knowledge (e.g., Bruhn de Garavito, 2003;
McCarthy, 2008). Second, although the nonnative participants did not show sensitivity to errors
in VanPatten et al. (2012), the same methodology used with a more advanced group with
controlled proficiency may demonstrate different results. Finally, replicating this study allows
for the examination of inflectional morphology across similar conditions. That is, through a
replication of this study, it is possible to the examine whether L2 learners show sensitivity to

19

errors in a simple, on-line context, before asking whether L2 learners can reliably process
morphology in the discourse.
The Present Study
The present study partially replicates VanPatten et al. (2012) by replicating the portion of
their study that examined inflectional verbal morphology, and examined whether L2 learners
demonstrate sensitivity to errors in the present tense. The present student does not replicate a
portion of the study by VanPatten et al. that examines verb raising and adverb placement.
Specifically, the research question for this section is:
1. Do L2 Spanish speakers at B1 proficiency show sensitivity to errors on present tense
verbal morphology on regular –ar verbs as measured by a self-paced reading task for the
following morphemes:
a. 1st person singular –o
b. 2nd person singular –s
c. 3rd person singular –Ø
d. 3rd person plural –n?
If L1 English/L2 Spanish learners have built robust enough mental representations of
inflectional verbal morphology, this should show up as a slowing down in reading when
encountering a mismatch between subject and verbal inflection. If they have not, then L2
learners should not slow down when encountering such mismatches. It is also equally possible
that L2 learners will show robust representations of some morphemes, but not others. In other
words, they may show incomplete acquisition of person-number morphology due to their
proficiency level.

20

Method and Procedure
Participants
Nonnative Speakers. Thirty-nine nonnative Spanish speakers were recruited from upperlevel Spanish language classes at Michigan State University. All participants spoke English as a
first language. Participants who spoke heritage languages that had rich verbal morphology or that
allowed for the use of null subjects were excluded, which lead to one participant being removed.
Each participant was given a reading proficiency test in Spanish to ensure that they could read at
the B1 proficiency level. Only participants who score more than 60% (significantly above and
different from chance) on the test were included in the final analyses. Based on the reading
proficiency test, sixteen additional participants were removed from the analyses, leaving a total
of n = 22 L1 English/L2 Spanish speakers.
The remaining 22 participants had to score above 75% accuracy on comprehension
questions during the self-paced reading task to be included in the final data set. This ensured that
participants were not only reading each stimulus sentence for meaning, but also that they
understood what they were reading. All 22 remaining participants scored above this threshold.
There were 19 females and 3 males in the final 22 participants. They were an average of M =
20.67 years old (SD = 1.63 years), and 11 of them had studied abroad for six weeks or more.
Native Speakers. Seventeen native speaking participants were recruited from Michigan
State University. Two participants were eliminated, because they were heritage speakers of
Spanish, and had been raised in the United States. The remaining fifteen participants had all
grown up in a Spanish-speaking country until age 12, and all had Spanish as an L1 with no
childhood bilingualism. They were an average of M = 32.60 years old (SD = 5.93 years). The

21

average age of arrival in the United States for participants was M = 24.20 years (SD = 7.06
years). Other than English, five participants claimed to speak an additional L2.
Materials
As part of this dissertation, participants completed a self-paced reading task, and took one
proficiency measure. Each of these will be discussed in turn.
Stimuli. One-hundred and twenty experimental quadruplets were created for this
experiment (see Appendix A), and were created based on VanPatten et al.’s (2012) stimuli. All
sentences were segmented for a non-cumulative, moving-window, self-paced reading procedure
in SuperLab 5.0. Forty of these stimuli were created to test participants’ sensitivity to errors in
person (1st person singular-3rd person singular) as below:
(4)

A. Ahora \ yo \ limpio \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
B. *Ahora \ yo \ limpia \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
C. Ahora \ la criada \ limpia \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
D. *Ahora \ la criada \ limpio \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
‘Right now, I/the maid am/is cleaning the client’s house.’

1sg (-o) and 3sg (-Ø) were contained in one experimental quadruplet (example (4)) to maintain
the length of the verb in the target region (bolded for demonstrative purposes in example (4)). In
other words, whenever a 1sg subject was presented with an ungrammatical verb, the verb was
always marked with 3sg morphology, as in sentence B in example (4). Whenever a 3sg subject
was presented with an ungrammatical verb, as in sentence D in (4), this verb was always marked
with 1sg morphology.
Another forty sentences were created to test participants’ sensitivity to errors in person
and number agreement (2sg-3pl) as below:

22

(5)

A. Ahora \ tú \ preparas \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños.
B. *Ahora \ tú \ preparan \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños.
C. Ahora \ las madres \ preparan \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños

.

D. *Ahora \ las madres \ preparas \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños.
‘Right now, you/the mothers are preparing dinner for the children.’
2sg-marked verbs (-s) alternated with 3pl-marked verbs (-n) to maintain the length of the verb in
the target region (bolded for demonstrative purposes in example (4)). Whenever a 2sg subject
was presented with an ungrammatical verb, that verbal was always marked with 3pl morphology,
as in sentence B in example (5). Whenever a 3pl subject was presented with an ungrammatical
verb, that verb was always marked with 2sg morphology, as in sentence D in example (5).
The remaining forty sentences were created to test participants’ sensitivity to errors in
number agreement (3rd singular-3rd person plural) as below:
(6)

A. Ahora \ el cliente \ considera \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
B. *Ahora \ el cliente \ consideran \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
C. Ahora \ los clientes \ consideran \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
D. *Ahora \ los clientes \ considera \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
‘Right now the client/the clients considers/consider the bosses’ offer.’

In these sentences, whenever a 3sg subject was presented in an ungrammatical sentence, as in
sentence B in (6), the verb was marked with 3pl morphology. Similarly, whenever a 3pl subject
was presented in an ungrammatical sentence, as in sentence D in (6), the verb was marked with
3sg morphology.
Each stimulus consisted of seven separate regions. Following VanPatten et al. (2012), the
first region always contained an adverb (Ahora ‘now’) or phrase (En este momento ‘at this

23

moment’) that indicated that the sentence in the present tense. This was done so that participants
had to interpret the sentence as being in the present tense, and to avoid ambiguity with the
morphological inflection -ó (3sg, past) in the case of the 1st person singular/3rd person singular
alternations in example (4). The second region always contained an overt pronoun or noun
phrase that was the subject of the sentence. The sentences with 3sg or 3pl subjects all consisted
of noun phrases, such as el chico/los chicos (‘the boy’/‘the boys’), to eliminate any issues with
the ambiguity of subjects such as él/ellos (‘he’/‘they’), given that these pronouns do not normally
occur in the discourse without a referent. The third, bolded region is the target region. This
region contains the verb, which is correctly conjugated in sentences A and C, and incorrectly
conjugated in sentences B and D in each of the experimental quadruplets. If L2 learners are
sensitive to errors in subject-verb agreement, reading times for sentences B and D are predicted
to be longer than A and C. This is because the ungrammaticality of B and D should force longer
processing times as participants’ parsers are forced to reconcile the ungrammaticality. These
quadruplets were blocked to create a total of four participant groups. Finally, only -ar verbs with
regular endings were used to avoid any possible confounds between -ar and -er/-ir verbs. Each
target region was followed by three spillover regions that consisted of a determiner or
preposition in the fourth region, and a noun in the fifth region. The sixth region contained
another preposition. The final region was not controlled, and various phrases appeared in this
position.
Each sentence was followed by a comprehension check in English (7). English was
chosen as the language of the comprehension checks to avoid giving participants additional cues
related to Spanish verbal morphology. Each comprehension check was in the form of a statement
that participants decided was true or false based on the sentence they just read. All sentences

24

targeted the context of the sentence, and did not directly address the issue of the subject. These
questions were made so that half of the comprehension checks were true (correct answer: ‘A’)
and half of the comprehension checks were false (correct answer: ‘B’). In (7), the answer is
‘True’.
(7)

Ahora \ las madres \ preparan \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños.
‘Right now, the mothers prepare dinner for the children.’
Somebody in this sentence is cooking for someone else.
A. True
B. False

Finally, the stimuli from experiments two and three served as distractors for Experiment One.
These stimuli will be discussed in their appropriate chapter.
Proficiency Test. As part of the experiment, all native and nonnative participants were
also asked to take a proficiency test. The test was a subsection of example materials from the
reading portion of the Diploma de Español Como Lengua Extranjera (DELE) exam, taken from
the Instituto de Cervantes DELE exam website (https://examenes.cervantes.es/es/dele/prepararprueba). The test consisted of total of 18 questions from three separate tasks. The first task
consisted of six questions that asked learners to read descriptions and match movie-goers to the
movie that best suited their wants. The second task consisted of six questions and asked
participants to read the profiles of three athletes, and to subsequently check which question
applied to which athlete. The final task was a cloze test, and consisted of six questions. This task
asked participants to read an email sent to the director of a company about an error that occurred
online. The test contained blank spaces and participants had to choose the word that best filled in
the blank from three possible options. These subsections of the test targeted reading at the B1

25

Spanish proficiency level, and were chosen based on the piloting of the exam with a subset of
twelve Spanish language students from upper-level language courses. This B1 level, as described
by the Common European Framework, consists of learners who able to understand the ideas of
clear texts that are related to hobbies with which participants are familiar. These learners can also
handle most everyday interactions that can occur during travel in Spanish-speaking countries
(Instituto Cervantes, 2016). This reading test was chosen, because the task that participants were
asked to complete was a relatively simple reading task. Additionally, only three subsections were
chosen to limit the amount of time that participants spent in the lab to a 90-minute maximum.
The proficiency test was found to be reliable with a Chronbach’s alpha of a = .938,
indicating that the test was reliable. In general, the native control group scored higher than the
nonnative group (M = 17.20, SD = 1.15), as expected. The lowest score for the native group was
11 and the highest score was 18. The nonnative group had a mean of M = 13.45 (SD = 1.85). The
lowest score for the nonnative group was 11 and the highest was 16. These results were
submitted to a two-sample t-test, which confirmed that the nonnative group was significantly
different from the native control; F(1, 36) = 48.74, p < .001. This indicates that the nonnative
group was less proficient than the native control, although they could read at an intermediate
(B1) proficiency level.
Procedure
Participants came to a lab where they sat comfortably in a chair in front of a computer
with a response pad with seven keys to start the experiment. Up to four participants were seated
in the lab at any given time, and were paid $20 each for their time. After reading the consent
form and indicating their consent, participants began the experiment. The instructions for the
experiment informed participants that they would be reading sentences that would be presented

26

in segments, and that segments would be revealed as they pressed the middle green button on the
response pad in front of them. This dissertation utilized a moving-window, non-cumulative, selfpaced reading procedure. This means that as participants pressed the middle green button, the
sentence fragment that was on the screen disappeared and the following segment appeared.
Participants could not go back to reread the sentence. During the instructions, participants
practiced with this procedure with five Spanish sentences. These sentences used the first person
plural verb form -mos to avoid providing participants with additional cues on the targeted verbal
morphology as seen in (8).
(8) Normalmente \ vamos \ a \ la \ universidad \ por \ la \ mañana.
‘Normally, we go to the university in the morning.’
The people in this sentence are probably students.
A. True
B. False
Each practice question was also presented with a true/false comprehension check to allow
participants to practice with the seven-button response pad. To indicate a ‘True’ response,
participants were told to press the button furthest to the left marked ‘A’. To indicate a ‘False’
response, participants were told to press the button furthest to the right marked ‘B’. To separate
each stimulus and give participants the opportunity to pause, a focus slide with a plus sign (+) in
the center of the screen appeared after each comprehension check question. During the
instructions participants were told to pause only when they saw the plus sign on the screen. After
practicing with the procedure, participants began the experiment.
Participants moved through the stimuli sentences at their own pace. Half-way through,
the experiment was programmed to pause, and participants were instructed that they should stop

27

to take a proficiency test. Participants then took the 18-question proficiency test in paper form.
When they finished the proficiency test, they continued to the second section of the experiment.
They again continued at their own pace until the experiment’s end. Once they finished the
second section, they were asked to fill out a background questionnaire (either Appendix D or E,
depending on the participant’s group), and were paid for their time. The total experiment time
was approximately 60-90 minutes in length. After receiving payment, participants were asked
what they thought the experiment was about, and were debriefed if they liked.
Scoring and Analysis
The participants’ reading times were collected for the target region and the three spillover
regions. Consistent with self-paced reading methodology, reading times that were less than
100ms were removed from the analysis, because reading times under 100ms may signify that
participants did not consciously read the words in the targeted region, although priming may
occur. Removing these times consisted of elimination of .004% of the data for this experiment.
To analyze the data, linear mixed models were conducted for each of the three conditions
(i.e., first person singular/third person singular; second person singular/third person plural; third
person singular/third person plural) regions. Linear mixed models were chosen because of their
ability to deal with robust, correlated, non-evenly distributed data (Baayen, Davidson, Bates,
2008). The traditional way of analyzing reading times has been ANOVAs, which assume that
data are independent and lack the ability to deal with outlying reading times (Jegerski, 2014;
Keating & Jegerski, 2015). The traditional analyses can also cause data loss, as the method
employed to deal with outlier reading times is to replace them with the participant’s mean for
that condition. Thus, linear mixed models were chosen for their ability to account for multiple
observations, outlying reading times, and random factors, such as participant and item.

28

Each linear mixed model had two random and two fixed factors. The two random factors
were participant and item. The two fixed factors were morpheme (-o or –-Ø, -s or –n, and –a and
–n) and grammaticality (i.e., grammatical or ungrammatical). There were two possible ways to
analyze the data. The first option was to hold the verb form constant, so that sentence A in
example (9) was compared to sentence D, and sentence B was compared to sentence C. The
second option was to hold the subject constant, so that sentence A was compared to sentence B,
and sentence C was compared to sentence D.
(9)

A. Ahora \ yo \ limpio \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
B. *Ahora \ yo \ limpia \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
C. Ahora \ la criada \ limpia \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
D. *Ahora \ la criada \ limpio \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
‘Right now, I/the maid am/is cleaning the client’s house.’

To determine which analyses should be used, the native control group was examined. As natives,
they were expected to show sensitivity to errors in every condition; however, this was not the
case. In fact, natives demonstrated no sensitivity to third person plural in the first set of analyses,
where the inflection marked on the verb was maintained (e.g., *tú hablan vs. los chicos hablan).
They also showed a pattern of reading 3pl subjects longer than 2sg forms. This demonstrates a
possible confound in the data due to longer subjects in the area preceding the target region. In the
second analyses, however, native speakers behave in the expected manner consistently across
conditions with no significant confounds due to the length of the subject region. For this reason,
the results from the second set of analyses were considered more controlled and more reliable,
and ultimately used.

29

For the 3sg/3pl condition (10), only one set of analyses was possible due to the length of
the target region. That is, to ensure that one inflection was not more salient than another, each
morpheme was compared to the same form but in an ungrammatical context (e.g., *el cliente
consideran vs. los clientes consideran). For these stimuli, sentence A was compared to sentence
D, and sentence B was compared to sentence C. The native control group performed as expected
in this condition, and slowed down significantly when presented with an ungrammatical sentence
compared to a grammatical sentence.
(10)

A. Ahora \ el cliente \ considera \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
B. Ahora \ el cliente \ consideran \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
C. Ahora \ los clientes \ consideran \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
D. Ahora \ los clientes \ considera \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
‘Right now, the client/the clients considers/consider the boss’s offer.’

For the linear mixed effects models to be valid, several steps were taken to ensure that the model
used was the best fit. First, the covariance structure of the model was first tested using two
covariance structure matrixes due to the correlated nature of the data: compound symmetry and
unstructured. To determine which covariance structure was best, the model’s AICs were
compared. For determining model fit, the lower the AIC, the better the model fits. For each
model, the unstructured covariance structure had the lowest AIC, indicating that this structure
best fit the data. In addition to using the AIC score to determine the appropriate covariance
structure, the residuals were plotted for each region; an example of which can be seen in Figure
2.1.

30

Figure 2.1
Sample Plot of Residuals for Nonnative Speaker Target Region
Residuals that fit the model well are those that do not cluster around the line marking zero, nor
diverge from the line in a linear fashion. As seen in Figure 2.1, the residuals based on reading
times for the target region are not ideally distributed, because they diverge from the zero line
linearly, and are also clustered together. Subsequent regions also had similar patterns in their
residuals. Because of this, all data were log-transformed. When transformed into logs, the
residuals were more appropriately distributed and the model fit the data better, as shown in the
Figure 2.2, which represents the log-transformed data for the target region. Finally, another
important factor in ensuring that the model is valid is ensuring that all fixed factors placed in the
model are significant predictors. Using the unstructured model, each fixed factor was examined,
and it was found that each fixed factor was significant in the model.

31

Figure 2.2
Sample Log-Transformed Residuals for Nonnative First Person Singular/Third Person Singular
Target Region
Results
Native Speakers
1sg/3sg Condition. Descriptive statistics for the native control group can be found in
Table 2.2. As for the nonnative group, linear mixed models with an unstructured covariance
structure.
Table 2.2
Descriptive Statistics of Native Speakers for 1sg/3sg in Milliseconds
Morpheme
Target
Spillover
Region
One
Grammatical
411.90
372.48
(yo hablo)
(279.13)
(130.45)
First Person
(yo)
Ungrammatical
440.67
423.95
(*yo habla)
(313.91)
(180.51)

Third Person
(el chico)

Spillover
Two
427.62
(165.94)

Spillover
Three
371.73
(103.17)

444.86
(253.11)

418.55
(331.18)

Grammatical
(el chico habla)

420.51
(181.33)

388.59
(166.86)

443.37
(235.22)

397.04
(120.76)

Ungrammatical
(*el chico hablo)

435.44
(201.54)

438.14
(265.80)

449.04
(200.13)

391.55
(146.87)

In the target region (Table 2.3), neither morpheme, grammaticality, nor any interaction
between them were significant predictors in the model for native speakers.
32

Table 2.3
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region 1sg/3sg
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.592
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

Std. Error
0.013

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being first
person compared to
third person

Morpheme

-0.019

0.017

.234

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.013

0.015

.394

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
first person

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.003

0.021

.862

In the first spillover region (Table 2.4), however, grammaticality was a significant
predictor in the model (estimate = 0.037, p = .021), indicating that ungrammatical sentences
were read longer than grammatical sentences.

33

Table 2.4
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region 1sg/3sg
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.567
0.010
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being first
person compared to
third person

Morpheme

-0.016

0.015

.270

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.037

0.016

.021

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
first person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.009

0.023

.700

In the second spillover region, there are no significant predictors or interactions (Table
2.5). In the third spillover region (Table 2.6), there is a trend toward significance for both
morpheme (estimate = -0.023, p = .060) and the interaction between morpheme and
grammaticality (estimate = 0.033, p = .060).

34

Table 2.5
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region 1sg/3sg
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.606
0.014
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being first
person compared to
third person

Morpheme

-0.002

0.015

.853

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.014

0.015

.352

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
first person

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.006

0.020

.761

Table 2.6
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region 1sg/3sg
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.581
0.009
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being first
person compared to
third person

Morpheme

0.024

0.013

.060

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

-0.009

0.014

.527

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
first person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.033

0.017

.060

35

2sg/3pl Condition. The descriptive statistics for the 2sg/3pl condition for the native
control group are presented in Table 2.7. In general, native speakers read ungrammatical
sentences longer than grammatical sentences.
Table 2.7
Descriptive Statistics of Native Speakers for 2sg/3pl in Milliseconds
Morpheme
Target
Spillover
Region
One
Grammatical
388.41
365.87
Second person
(tú hablas)
(170.91)
(110.09)
(-as)
Ungrammatical
487.14
459.27
(*tú hablan)
(365.64)
(231.80)
Third person
plural
(-an)

Spillover
Two
438.88
(223.05)

Spillover
Three
387.70
(128.90)

444.23
(218.72)

408.31
(317.23)

Grammatical
(los chicos
hablan)

510.34
(606.06)

401.95
(150.77)

443.91
(194.69)

413.33
(130.89)

Ungrammatical
(*los chicos
hablas)

571.50
(424.13)

474.27
(216.22)

483.83
(289.78)

393.55
(111.65)

The results for the target region analysis can be seen in Table 2.8. In this region,
morpheme is a significant predictor, indicating that second person singular forms are read faster
than third person plural forms (estimate = -0.077, p < . 001). In addition to morpheme being a
significant predictor, grammaticality was also a significant predictor in the model (estimate =
0.046, p = .032), with ungrammatical sentences being read longer than grammatical sentences as
expected.

36

Table 2.8
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region 2sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.639
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

Std. Error
0.016

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
second person
compared to third
person

Morpheme

-0.077

0.017

<.001

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.046

0.021

.032

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
second person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.004

0.026

.887

In the first spillover region (Table 2.9), morpheme is, again, a significant predictor,
indicating that second person singular forms were read faster than third person plural forms
(estimate = 0.034, p = .006). Grammaticality is also a significant predictor in the model (estimate
= 0.061, p <.001), with ungrammatical sentences being read longer than grammatical sentences.

37

Table 2.9
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region 2sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.581
0.011
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
second person
compared to third
person

Morpheme

-0.034

0.017

.006

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.061

0.014

<.001

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
second person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.012

0.021

.553

In the second spillover region (Table 2.10), the grammaticality predictor trends toward
significance consistent with the pattern observed in the previous regions (grammatical <
ungrammatical).

38

Table 2.10
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region 2sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.611
0.014
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
second person
compared to third
person

Morpheme

-0.008

0.017

.631

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.031

0.017

.065

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
second person

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.018

0.023

.418

In the final spillover region (seen in Table 2.11), morpheme continues to be significant as
a predictor (estimate = -0.027, p = .028), while grammaticality trends toward significance
(estimate = -0.019, p = .074). In both cases, the patterns of the previous regions are maintained
(2sg < 3pl; grammatical<ungrammatical).

39

Table 2.11
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region 2sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.599
0.010
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
second person
compared to third
person

Morpheme

-0.026

0.012

.028

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.019

0.011

.074

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
second person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.025

0.016

.105

3sg/3pl Condition. The descriptive statistics of native speaker reading times for this
condition can be seen in Table 2.12.
Table 2.12
Descriptive Statistics of Native Speakers for 3sg/3pl in Milliseconds
Morpheme
Target
Spillover
Region
One
Grammatical
456.76
393.90
(el chico habla)
(513.46)
(157.78)
Third Person
Singular
Ungrammatical
553.11
449.67
(-a)
(*los chicos
(405.01)
(213.92)
habla)

Third Person
Plural
(-an)

Spillover
Two
428.63
(201.96)

Spillover
Three
399.03
(222.90)

424.11
(235.11)

426.91
(468.39)

Grammatical
(los chicos
hablan)

453.03
(214.77)

381.09
(104.68)

423.89
(294.69)

383.65
(93.68)

Ungrammatical
(*el chico hablan)

575.91
(446.59)

439.79
(193.68)

435.90
(176.31)

390.98
(119.77)

40

The model for the target region can be seen in Table 2.13. In this region, there is a
grammaticality is a significant predictor, and indicates that ungrammatical sentences were read
significantly longer than grammatical sentences (estimate = 0.060, p = .002). There are no other
significant main predictors or interaction in the model.
Table 2.13
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for 3sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.622
0.014
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
singular compared to
plural

Morpheme

0.020

0.018

.243

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.060

0.019

.002

Effects of the
morpheme being
singular and
ungrammatical

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.008

0.028

.783

In the first spillover region (Table 2.14), grammaticality was a significant predictor
(estimate = 0.050, p <.001). There are no other significant predictors or interactions.

41

Table 2.14
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.57
0.008
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
singular compared to
plural

Morpheme

0.003

0.012

.777

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.050

0.013

<.001

Effects of the
morpheme being
singular and
ungrammatical

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.000

0.018

.982

The second two spillover regions (see in order in Tables 2.15 and 2.16) show no
significant predictors or interactions.

42

Table 2.15
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.590
0.013
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
singular compared to
plural

Morpheme

0.007

0.017

.658

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.021

0.015

.165

Effects of the
morpheme being
singular and
ungrammatical

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.023

0.024

.333

Table 2.16
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.573
0.008
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
singular compared to
plural

Morpheme

-0.001

0.010

.908

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.002

0.011

.864

Effects of the
morpheme being
singular and
ungrammatical

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.010

0.018

.550

43

Summary of Results for the Native Control Group. The results of this portion of the
study can be summarized as follows:
•

Native speakers showed sensitivity to errors in 1sg/3sg inflectional morphology in the
first spillover region

•

Native speakers showed sensitivity to errors in 2sg/3pl inflectional morphology in the
target and first spillover regions

•

Native speakers showed sensitivity to errors in 3sg/3pl inflectional morphology target
and first spillover regions.

Nonnative Speakers
1sg/3sg Condition. The descriptive statistics for the 1sg/3sg condition can be seen in
Table 2.17. The same type of linear mixed effects models with the same fixed and random
factors were used.
Table 2.17
Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Speakers for 1sg/3sg in Milliseconds
Morpheme
Target
Spillover
Spillover
Region
One
Two
Grammatical
492.96
397.29
474.32
(yo hablo)
(344.32)
(182.02)
(261.62)
First Person
(yo)
Ungrammatical
484.68
410.41
480.86
(*yo habla)
(300.72)
(158.41)
(246.62)

Third Person
(el chico)

Spillover
Three
396.75
(230.14)
402.83
(178.03)

Grammatical
(el chico habla)

585.71
(402.01)

408.96
(168.76)

481.76
(265.58)

385.55
(190.73)

Ungrammatical
(*el chico hablo)

594.49
(496.48)

473.07
(353.75)

530.75
(415.02)

374.33
(112.71)

44

The results for the target region of these analyses are presented in Table 2.18. There are
no significant predictors for grammaticality, only morpheme (estimate = -0.064, p = .004). There
is also no interaction between the two fixed effects.
Table 2.18
Model Results Analyses of Nonnative Speakers for Target Region for 1sg/3sg
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.697
0.018
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being first
person compared to
third person

Morpheme

-0.064

0.021

.004

Effect of the sentence
being grammatical
versus ungrammatical

Grammaticality

-0.021

0.021

.329

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
first person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.031

0.026

.241

The first, second, and third spillover regions, seen in Tables 2.19, 2.20, and 2.21 respectively,
showed that grammaticality was not a significant predictor. Morpheme is a significant predictor
in the second spillover region, indicating that first person singular forms were read faster than
third person singular forms (estimate = -0.043, p = .019).

45

Table 2.19
Model Results Analyses of Nonnative Speakers for First Spillover Region 1sg/3sg
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.602
0.011
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the
morpheme being first
person compared to
third person

Morpheme

-0.014

0.014

.313

Effect of the sentence
being grammatical
versus ungrammatical

Grammaticality

-0.013

0.016

.416

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
first person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.012

0.019

.509

Table 2.20
Model Results Analyses of Nonnative Speakers for Second Spillover Region 1sg/3sg
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.667
0.013
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the
morpheme being first
person compared to
third person

Morpheme

-0.043

0.018

.019

Effect of the sentence
being grammatical
versus ungrammatical

Grammaticality

-0.012

0.021

.556

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
first person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.000

0.024

.995

46

Table 2.21
Model Results Analyses of Nonnative Speakers for Third Spillover Region 1sg/3sg
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.570
0.011
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the
morpheme being first
person compared to
third person

Morpheme

0.001

0.013

.959

Effect of the sentence
being grammatical
versus ungrammatical

Grammaticality

-0.010

0.015

.495

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
first person

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.003

0.017

.878

2sg/3pl Condition. The descriptive statistics for the nonnative group for the can be seen
in Table 2.22. In general, ungrammatical sentences tended to be read longer than grammatical
sentences in both conditions.
Table 2.22
Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Speakers for 2sg/3pl in Milliseconds
Morpheme
Target
Spillover
Spillover
Region
One
Two
Grammatical
526.74
402.09
509.41
Second person
(tú hablas)
(469.45)
(162.58)
(358.10)
(-tú)
Ungrammatical
531.84
453.31
526.98
(*tú hablan)
(404.44)
(271.09)
(388.61)
Third person
plural
(los chicos)

Spillover
Three
394.59
(308.92)
413.58
(296.73)

Grammatical
(los chicos hablan)

596.72
(390.96)

422.73
(219.54)

490.63
(300.94)

391.31
(155.35)

Ungrammatical
(*los chicos hablas)

694.12
(552.40)

477.19
(341.96)

512.03
(280.73)

398.55
(151.61)

47

Results for the target region under this analysis can be seen in Table 2.23.
Grammaticality was a significant predictor in the model, with ungrammatical sentences being
read longer than grammatical sentences for both morphemes (estimate = 0.041, p = .040).
Morpheme is also a significant predictor (estimate = -0.071, p = <.001).
Table 2.23
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region 2sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.713
0.015
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
second person
compared to third
person

Morpheme

-0.071

0.018

.00

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.041

0.019

.040

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
second person

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.032

0.026

.230

In the first spillover region (see Table 2.24), grammaticality is a significant predictor,
with ungrammatical sentences being read longer than grammatical sentences (estimate = 0.037, p
= .006). There are no other significant predictors or interactions.

48

Table 2.24
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region 2sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.595
0.009
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
second person
compared to third
person

Morpheme

-0.018

0.012

.143

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.037

0.013

.006

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
second person

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.009

0.019

.964

In the second spillover region (seen in Table 2.25), there is a trend toward significance for the
grammaticality (estimate = 0.025, p = .090), with no other significant predictors or interactions.
This trend again indicates that ungrammatical sentences were read slower than grammatical
sentences.

49

Table 2.25
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region 2sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.639
0.013
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
second person
compared to third
person

Morpheme

0.000

0.016

.993

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.025

0.015

.090

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
second person

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.005

0.023

.819

The final spillover region (seen in Table 2.26) has no significant predictors or interactions.

50

Table 2.26
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Third Spillover Region 2sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.568
0.009
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
second person
compared to third
person

Morpheme

-0.010

0.013

.384

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.011

0.012

.338

Effects of the
morpheme being
ungrammatical and
second person

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.016

0.017

.356

3sg/3pl Condition. The descriptive statistics for the nonnative speakers in the 3sg/3pl
condition can be seen in Table 2.27.
Table 2.27
Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Speakers for 3sg/3pl in Milliseconds
Morpheme
Target
Spillover
Spillover
Region
One
Two
Grammatical
560.30
408.52
491.45
(el chico habla)
(304.65)
(155.21)
(418.22)
Third Person
Singular
Ungrammatical
547.65
423.88
493.62
(-a)
(*los chicos
(286.69)
(263.64)
(426.63)
habla)

Third Person
Plural
(-an)

Grammatical
(los chicos
hablan)
Ungrammatical
(*el chico hablan)

Spillover
Three
386.65
(179.60)
385.77
(162.28)

619.96
(391.76)

442.63
(298.65)

480.70
(388.29)

399.75
(179.02)

665.19
(539.28)

476.79
(628.72)

519.90
(324.18)

391.28
(148.80)

51

The results of the target region model can be seen in Table 2.28. In this region,
morpheme is a significant predictor (estimate = -0.035, p = .034, and indicates that third person
singular forms are read faster than third person plural forms. There are no other significant
predictors or interactions.
Table 2.28
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for 3sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.733
0.015
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

p value
<.001

Effect of the
morpheme being
singular compared to
plural

Morpheme

-0.035

0.016

.034

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.009

0.019

.640

Effects of the
morpheme being
singular and
ungrammatical

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.017

0.025

.513

Results for the first spillover region are reported in Table 2.29. In this region, there are no
significant predictors or interactions in the model.

52

Table 2.29
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.603
0.011
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the
morpheme being
singular compared to
plural

Morpheme

-0.016

014

.258

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.010

0.014

.473

Effects of the
morpheme being
singular and
ungrammatical

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.010

0.019

.611

The results for the second spillover region are presented in Table 2.30. In this region,
grammaticality is a significant predictor (estimate = 0.039, p = .013) in the model, but there is
also a significant interaction between morpheme and grammaticality (estimate = -0.048, p =
.026).

53

Table 2.30
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.617
0.014
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the
morpheme being
singular compared to
plural

Morpheme

0.015

0.016

.350

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

0.039

0.016

.013

Effects of the
morpheme being
singular and
ungrammatical

Morpheme*Grammaticality -0.048

0.021

.026

Post hoc pairwise comparisons (Table 2.31) show that nonnative speakers read ungrammatical
3pl sentences longer than grammatical 3pl sentences. There was no significant difference
between grammatical and ungrammatical third person singular forms.
Table 2.31
Post-Hoc Pairwise Comparisons of Morpheme/Grammaticality Interaction in Nonnative First
Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl
Morpheme
Mean Difference
Std. Error
df
p value
Third person Singular
-.009
0.015
219.000
.552
(-a)
Third Person Plural
(-an)

.039

0.016

218.598

.013

The final spillover region (Table 2.32) showed no significant predictors or interactions.

54

Table 2.32
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Third Spillover Region for 3sg/3pl
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.573
0.010
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the
morpheme being
singular compared to
plural

Morpheme

-0.013

0.012

.278

Effect of the sentence
being ungrammatical
versus grammatical

Grammaticality

-0.003

0.011

.817

Effects of the
morpheme being
singular and
ungrammatical

Morpheme*Grammaticality 0.004

0.016

.780

Summary of Results for the Nonnative Group. The results of the nonnative speakers
can be summarized as follows:
•

Nonnative speakers did not show sensitivity to errors in 1sg/3sg inflectional morphology

•

Nonnative speakers showed sensitivity to errors in 2sg/3pl inflectional morphology in the
target and first spillover regions

•

Nonnative speakers showed sensitivity to errors in 3pl inflectional morphology when it
was used with 3sg subjects in the second spillover region

•

Nonnative speakers did not show sensitivity to errors when 3sg inflectional morphology
was used with 3pl subjects.

55

Discussion for Experiment One
The research question for this experiment asked if L1 English/L2 Spanish speakers at B1
proficiency showed sensitivity to errors on present tense verbal morphology on regular –ar
verbs. To test this, a self-paced reading task was used. It was predicted that if L2 learners showed
sensitivity to errors, they would read ungrammatical sentences longer than grammatical
sentences. In general, nonnative speakers demonstrated piecewise acquisition of L2 verbal
morphology, and a tendency to engage in defaulting behavior. Specifically, the answers to this
study’s research question are:
•

1st person singular –o, no;

•

2nd person singular –s, yes;

•

3rd person singular -Ø, yes;

•

3rd person plural –n, yes.

The results of this study did not replicate the findings of VanPatten et al. (2012), and are
somewhat consistent with acquisition according to the feature hierarchies proposed by Harley
and Ritter (2000; 2002). In VanPatten et al.’s (2012) study, participants failed to show sensitivity
to any error in inflectional verbal morphology in L2 Spanish. Nonnatives in this study
demonstrated piecemeal acquisition of L2 Spanish verbal morphology that was affected by
feature specification. Specifically, nonnatives showed no sensitivity to errors in the 1sg/3sg
alternation, but did show sensitivity to errors in the 2sg/3pl alternation. They also showed
sensitivity to errors that occurred when 3pl was used in contexts where 3sg was required. This
suggests that learners at the B1 level have yet to build robust mental representations of all
present tense Spanish morphemes. Specifically, 1sg and 3sg, which are underspecified in the

56

geometries outlined by Harley and Ritter (2000; 2002) (Table 2.33), are problematic for the L2
learners, while the more specified forms 2sg and 3pl are controlled.
Table 2.33
Review of Summary of Person/Number (Participant/Individuation) Features in Spanish
Singular
Plural
First person
-o
-mos
[-addressee, -group]
[-addressee, +group]
Second person

-s
[+addressee, -group]
-Ø
[-group]

Third person

-is
[+addressee, +group]
-n
[+group]

L2 learners demonstrated acquisition of third person singular (-Ø), as it was
systematically used as a default as shown by their behavior on 3pl subjects. This can be seen by
their lack of sensitivity to errors in L2 verbal morphology where 3sg was used in place of a more
specified morpheme, such as in (23) and (24). In the case of sentences like (24), nonnative
speakers showed no sensitivity to these errors, despite showing sensitivity to errors like those in
(25). Such results indicate that 3sg is systematically being used as a default.
(23)

*Yo

habla

el

español

en

clase.

I

speak.3rd.sg

the

Spanish

in

class.

‘I speak Spanish in class.’
(24)

*Los

chicos

habla

el

español

en

clase.

The

boy.pl

speak.3rd.sg.

the

Spanish

in

class.

el

español

en

clase.

Spanish

in

class.

‘The boys speak Spanish in class.’
(25)

*Los

chicos

hablas

The

boy.pl

speak.2nd.sg. the

‘The boys speak Spanish in class.’

57

While 3sg may be considered acquired, it is important to note that it is treated as completely
unmarked by the nonnative speakers. As such, the nonnative speakers are not treating 3sg in the
same manner as the native speakers. The treatment of this form as default that is completely
unmarked is consistent with the predictions made for L1 Spanish children from both Bybee
(1985) and Albright (2002), signifying that L2 learners may be showing a developmental path
that is similar to that of L1 Spanish children.
A similar argument could be made for 1sg (-o), although further testing is needed to
examine the nature of this inflection. That is, 1sg is the default Participant form, and is
underspecified. Nonnative speakers did not show sensitivity to 1sg (-o) used with 3sg subjects,
and the reasoning for this could be that the nonnative speakers are also treating this form as a
default. In other words, the [-addressee, -group] specification is not yet robustly represented on
this morpheme, as it is in the native grammar. However, unlike 3sg, there is some level of
specification attached to this inflection, and for this reason, it is considered not acquired in the
current study. This being said, more research is necessary to determine the exact nature of a 1sg
default.
Despite having acquired some features, nonnatives demonstrated defaulting behavior as
predicted by hypotheses that argue for cognitive processing deficits that produce defaulting
behavior, and is consistent with the predictions of the MSIH (Prèvost & White, 2000), albeit in a
comprehension-based setting. To summarize, defaulting behavior occurs when a less-specified
morpheme is used in a context where a more-specified morpheme is required. In this study, there
is strong evidence that 3sg is used as a default, and indications that 1sg may also carry default
status in the nonnative grammar. The findings for 3sg are consistent with behavior from previous
studies that have found that defaulting behavior for inflectional morphology in L2 learning

58

(Bartning, 2000; Lopez-Prego, 2012; McCarthy, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2012; Prévost & White,
2000; Renaud, 2010, 2014; Spinner, 2013; White, 2003; White et al., 2004). Interestingly
however, these results also argue against the MSIH, because defaulting in this study was
observed in comprehension, which suggests that it is not the communicative pressure of
production that causes inflection to not be marked. This finding is not novel in L2 research, as
previous research, such as McCarthy (2008), has also found that L2 learners display defaulting
behavior in comprehension. However, the results of this study indicate that its predictions about
systematic defaulting behavior may be extended to comprehension. Thus, while the MSIH’s
general predictions of defaulting behavior was observed, the results are not completely consistent
with the predictions of the MSIH.
Ultimately, these results support that despite having inflection morphology robustly
represented within the morpho-lexical store, L2 learners may continue to demonstrate defaulting
behavior as observed in McCarthy (2008; 2010) and Lopez-Prego (2012). Such results would
seemingly be in line with the hypotheses that argue for cognitive-based processing deficits as
proposed by Hopp (2010), and suggest that it is not solely the burden of production that causes
morphosyntactic errors for nonnative speakers. Additionally, the results demonstrate that
systematic defaulting behavior may occur in L2 comprehension, as observed in McCarthy
(2008), thereby refuting the claims of the MSIH that it is the pressures of real-time production
that causes L2 learners difficulty. Finally, these results also support that the reassembly of
features may occur according to the feature specification hierarchies proposed by Harley &
Ritter (2000, 2002).

59

Conclusion to Experiment One
The current study examined whether adult L2 Spanish learners had L2 inflectional
morphology represented within the morpho-lexical store. The results indicated that the L2
learners did, but that they had not acquired all inflectional morphemes. Instead, they show that
underspecified morphemes may continue to be used as defaults for some time. Nonnatives
showed that 3sg was used as a base, or default, morpheme, and lacked specification, which
differentiated them from the native speakers. This was demonstrated through nonnative feature
defaulting behavior. They also showed behavior that indicated that 2sg (-s) and 3pl (-n) had also
been acquired. However, nonnative speakers also did not respond to errors involving the most
specified morpheme, 1sg (-o), which indicates that nonnative speakers may also be having
difficulty with the underspecified nature of 1sg (-o). These results, therefore, support two
separate conclusions. First, the results support the reassembly of features in L2 Spanish
consistent with feature strength hierarchies proposed by Harley & Ritter (2000, 2002). Second,
the results also suggest that nonnative speakers may continue to have difficulty accessing
acquired verbal morphology in real time, which leads to the acceptance of feature default errors.
Given that these L2 learners demonstrated that they had acquired parts of inflectional
morphology, the following question is whether these mental representations are reliably accessed
during real-time processing. Ultimately, the results of this study suggest that at this point in
acquisition, errors are caused by the parser’s inability to correctly recognize feature default
errors.

60

CHAPTER THREE
EXPERIMENT TWO
In second language acquisition, it has often been argued that while second language
learners can develop the syntax necessary for subject/verb agreement to occur, they lack the
morphological representations necessary to process subject/verb agreement (Bruhn de Garavito,
2003; Clahsen, 1988; Haznedar & Schwartz, 1997; Herschenson, 2001; Lardiere, 2000, 2007,
2008; Prévost & White, 2000; VanPatten et al., 2012). While these analyses tend to account for
some learner behavior, other research (e.g., Hopp, 2010) has indicated that native-like
representations and syntactic operations are acquirable, but that nonnative speakers have
difficulty implementing both in real time due to cognitive processing deficits. This research has
attempted to identify the contexts in which nonnatives may fail to process inflection, and has
tended focused on various aspects of sentence processing that pertain to sentence processing
complexity, such as movement or syntactic distance (Hopp, 2010; Keating, 2009; Tokowicz &
MacWhinney, 2005). This research has tended to find that L2 learners generally process
language less efficiently (Hopp, 2010; Keating, 2009; Tokowicz & MacWhinney, 2005).
Because the nonnative parser is less efficient, nonnatives must therefore rely on other processing
strategies to interpret sentences correctly. One such strategy is to rely on lexical items rather than
morphological inflection (Ellis & Sagarra, 2010; VanPatten, 1996, 2007). The current study
seeks to examine how subject/verb agreement is processed during on-line comprehension when
an overt subject is not present by examining nonnative behavior on topic/subject shifts. In the
absence of an overt pronoun, topic/subject shifts require Spanish speakers to process inflectional
morphology related to subject/verb agreement for correct interpretation to occur. However, these
sentences also extend beyond basic feature checking procedures (e.g., knowing that tú hablas is

61

correct but *tú hablan is incorrect) as presented in Experiment One, thereby causing a higher
level of processing complexity. Higher processing complexity has been observed to cause L2
learner processing issues, as nonnative speakers attempt to compute all language components
and the interfaces between them simultaneously (e.g., Hopp, 2009; Slabakova, Kempchinsky, &
Rothman, 2012; Tsimpli & Sorace, 2006; Valenzuela, 2006). Because these sentences require
Spanish speakers to compute not only subject/verb agreement but also discourse and semantic
constraints that apply to topic/subject shifts, these sentences present an opportunity to test how
nonnative speakers implement inflectional morphology in real time in more complex discourse.
Background and Motivation
Sentence Processing in SLA
In L2 research, it has been observed that L2 learners may show representational deficits
related to morphology in some conditions while simultaneously showing native-like behavior in
others (Hopp, 2010; Keating, 2009; Tokowicz & MacWhinney, 2005). Such an observation
implies that L2 learners have difficulties with linguistic performance; specifically, with language
processing, particularly when syntactic or discourse complexity is increased. Thus, a native-like
representation of inflectional morphology is possible, but the processing of this morphology is
context (sentence) dependent, and depends on various cognitive factors from working memory to
learner proficiency.
One of the most prominent hypotheses that has attempted to account for nonnatives’
processing behavior is the MSIH (Prévost & White, 2000), which originally argued that
nonnative speakers have difficulty accessing inflections reliably during production. Because of
this, the authors argued, nonnatives may produce underspecified morphology in contexts where
more specified morphology is called for, a behavior known as defaulting (McCarthy, 2008).

62

When this occurs, nonnatives were predicted to replace specified forms, such as 1sg or 2sg, with
less specified or underspecified forms, like 3sg. For example, in sentence (2), the verb is marked
as 3sg although the subject commands a verb marked with 1sg morphology, as in sentence (1).
(1)

Yo hablo

con

mis

amigos

con

I

with

my

friends

frequently.

speak.1sg

frecuencia.

‘I frequently speak with my friends.’
(2)

*Yo
I

habla

con

mis

amigos

con

frecuencia.

speak.3sg

with

my

friends

frequently.

‘I frequently speak with my friends.’
It was predicted that these errors would not occur or would be less frequent during written
production and comprehension, where there is no real-time pressure to produce (Prévost &
White, 2000; White, 2002). For example, Lardiere’s (2000, 2008, 2009) participant, Patty,
showed significant variable use of inflectional morphology, depending on the modality (written
vs. spoken production). However, the initial proposal from this hypothesis was contested by
researchers who found that L2 learners demonstrated less-effective processing during
comprehension at intermediate and advanced levels of acquisition (McCarthy, 2006, 2008), as
well as incomplete acquisition of morphological inflection (McCarthy, 2008; VanPatten et al.,
2012). In these studies, which focused on intermediate and advanced-lever learners, nonnative
speakers demonstrated defaulting behavior (McCarthy, 2006, 2008) during comprehension or, as
in VanPatten et al. (2012), they did not show any signs of having acquired any verbal
morphology at all during on-line comprehension. Such results indicate that the real-time burden
of production is not the only factor that causes defaulting behavior in L2 learners. As such, more
recent research has extended some of the predictions of the MSIH to comprehension by

63

examining how L1 transfer may affect how L2 learners process morpho-syntactic cues, and how
sentence complexity affects nonnative processing (e.g., Hopp, 2010). For example, Hopp (2010)
found that L1 English/L2 German and L1 Russian/L2 German participants’ ability to utilize
facilitative case-markings and process subject/verb agreement was context dependent, and
partially based on the transfer of L1 processing heuristics. That is, L1 English learners tended to
use English processing strategies that caused them to rely more on word order or lexical items,
rather than inflectional morphology. Thus, Hopp argues this behavior suggests the nonnative
parser relies of processing strategies, perhaps those taken from the L1, to process sentences that
are more syntactically complex or when the task at hand is more difficult. Hopp does not
suggest, however, that such reliance on nonnative-like processing strategies is permanent, and
leaves open the possibility that as learners become more proficient, they may begin to show more
native-like processing behaviors.
The relationship between syntactic and lexical complexity has been observed to affect
learner processing at various levels of acquisition, and has been accounted in various theories of
L2 acquisition. One common observation for tense, for example, has been that low-level L2
learners tend to rely on lexical information (e.g., adverbs) rather than syntactic information (e.g.,
inflectional morphology) during processing, particularly at lower levels of acquisition (Ellis &
Sagarra, 2010; VanPatten, 1996; VanPatten & Keating, 2007). Usage-based approaches attribute
this behavior to the concepts of learned attention and blocking that are transferred from the L1
(Ellis & Sagarra, 2010), while Input Processing argues that such behavior descends from a
universal default processing strategy employed by all L2 learners if the parser cannot compute
both meaning and form simultaneously (i.e., the Lexical Primacy Principle) (VanPatten, 2012). If

64

L2 learners use this strategy, the tense on the verb walked in sentence (3) would not be
processed, because the adverb yesterday has already assigned temporal reference to the sentence.
(3)

Yesterday, I walked to the store.

A similar observation has been made in L2 Spanish regarding the determination of a subject for
any given sentence: nonnative speakers tend to interpret the first noun that encounter as the
subject of the sentence, regardless of its actual role (Isabelli, 2008; Mandell, 2013; Tight, 2012;
VanPatten, 1996, 2007, 2014, 2015; VanPatten & Cadierno, 1993). Importantly, Input
Processing posits that this is a universal processing strategy available to all L2 learners,
regardless of L1, although the L1 may affect its use (VanPatten, 2012). As such, L2 learners
would tend to interpret the accusative clitic object pronoun (lo) in sentence (4) as the subject,
leaving the interpretation of this sentence to be ‘He hit Sally’ instead of the correct ‘Sally hit
him’.
(4)

Lo

golpeó

Sally.

Him.sg.acc.

hit.3sg.past

Sally.

‘Sally hit him.’
A similar observation based on the hypothesis that low-level learners would interpret the first
noun that they come across in a sentence as the subject was found in a pilot study that examined
whether L1 English/L2 Spanish processed verbal morphology. Mandell (2013) investigated
sentences like (5), and found that L1 English/L2 Spanish learners were more likely to interpret
the second verb (hablas) as relating to the first subject (Franco), regardless of the inflectional
morphology present on the verb. Mandell (2013) therefore concluded that adult L1 English/L2
Spanish learners relied on the overt subject rather than inflectional morphology while attempting
to disambiguate subjects. Such behavior implies that L1 English/L2 Spanish learners prefer overt

65

subjects rather than verbal morphology, and that in bi-clausal sentences, L2 learners are more
likely to attach verbs to overt subjects despite inflectional morphology indicating a new subject.
(5)

Franco dice

que

hablas

bien

el

español.

Franco says

that

speak.2sg.

well

the

Spanish.

‘Franco says you speak Spanish well.’
Based on these findings about learner processing, the following hypotheses can be
proposed. First, non-near-native nonnative speakers have, in general, parsers that rely on
strategies different from the native parser that cause them not to process inflection in the same
way. Second, L2 learners may make use of lexical items instead of morphological inflection to
process sentences either via universal processing default strategies (VanPatten, 2012) or due to
L1 influence (Ellis & Sagarra, 2010; Roberts, Gullberg, & Indefrey, 2008). And third, although
L2 learners may show the ability to process inflection in one condition, reliance on different
processing strategies may cause learners to fail to do so in other conditions that are more
burdensome (Hopp, 2010).
Topic/Subject Shifts in Spanish
An essential part of communication is the ability to link referring expressions (e.g.,
pronouns, including null pronouns) to the appropriate referent (a lexical noun or noun phrase).
When speakers of a language encounter a referring expression, they must be able to attach this
expression to the appropriate referent. For example, in sentence (6) the speaker must attach he
either to John or another referent outside of the sentence.
(6)

Johni said that hei/j asked for money.

For adult speakers, it is preferred to attach a referring expression to the most accessible referent
(Shin & Cairns, 2012), although this is mediated by the features encoded on the referring

66

expression. In other words, he in example (6) may be expected to attach to John, because John is
the most immediate referent. However, in example (7), she cannot be attached to John, because
of conflicting phi feature gender: she is [+feminine] while John is typically interpreted as
[-feminine]. In these conditions, speakers are forced find a less accessible referent to match the
features on she.
(7)

Johni said that she*i/j asked for money.

In languages that permit the use of null subjects, such as Spanish, there are additional
constraints on what antecedents null and overt pronouns can reference. This constraint, named
the Overt Pronoun Constraint (Montalbetti, 1984), dictates that overt pronouns cannot be bound
to a quantified or negative antecedent. For example, in sentence (8), the overt pronoun él cannot
be co-referenced with the pronoun nadie, forcing the speaker to attach él to a referent outside of
the sentence.
(8)

Nadiei

dijo

que

él*i/j

pidió

dinero.

No one

say.3sg.past

that

he

ask.3sg.past

money.

‘No one says that he asked for money.’
A null pronoun, on the other hand, represented by a pro, can be co-referenced with either nadie
or another referent outside of the sentence (9).
(9)

Nadiei

dijo

que

proi/j

pidió

dinero.

No one

say.3sg.past

that

pro

ask.3sg.past

money.

‘No one says that he asked for money.’
Thus, a speaker may readily attach pro to nadie. The attachment of a null pronoun to the nearest
overt referent is predictable, because use of a null subject instead of an overt subject suggests
that a referent is immediately accessible (Ariel, 1990; Givón, 1983; Gundel, Hedberg &

67

Zacharski 1993; Shin & Cairns, 2012). As such, null expressions are used only when there is
sufficient information for a referent to be highly accessible. For example, in sentence (10) a
native Spanish speaker could reasonably infer that the null subject pro refers to a 1sg subject due
to the morphological inflection present on the verb, and its [-addressee, -group] features.
(10)

Hablo

bien

el

español.

Speak.1sg

well

the

Spanish.

‘I speak Spanish well.’
However, a native Spanish speaker presented with sentence (11) must search the discourse for an
accessible referent, because the morphological inflection on the verb suggests a 3sg referent, but
does not readily identify who the referent is, because 3sg is devoid of Participant features.
(11)

Habla

bien

el

español.

Speak.3sg

well

the

Spanish.

‘He speaks Spanish well.’
Because 3sg does not encode all the necessary information to identify a referent, adult native
speakers often prefer overt subjects in contexts where another overt NP is not accessible (Shin &
Cairns, 2012). For example, sentence (12) is a bi-clausal sentence, but the subjects match across
clauses, as both are 1sg. Thus, upon encountering the verb in the second clause, a native speaker
is easily able to refer the pro in the second clause to the overt subject yo in the first.
(12)

Yo

limpio

la

casa

I

clean.1sg

the

house because

por

la

noche.

through

the

night.

porque

espero

invitados

expect.1sg

guests

‘I am cleaning the house because I am expecting guests tonight.’

68

Sentence (13), however, is more problematic for the parser, because morphology marked on the
second verb espera (‘expect’) suggests that a new subject has been introduced. Thus, the pro in
the second clause cannot be co-referenced with the overt subject in the first. Speakers must
therefore search the discourse for a referent, which puts a more substantial burden on the parser.
(13)

Yo

limpio

la

casa

I

clean.1sg

the

house because

por

la

noche.

through

the

night.

porque

espera

invitados

expect.3sg

guests

‘I am cleaning the house because he is expecting guests tonight.’
Due to the discourse constraints placed on null and overt subjects as well as other
referring expressions, bi-clausal sentences like (12) and (13) offer the opportunity to study the
processing behavior of Spanish speakers on inflectional verbal morphology. In the event of a
topic shift (also called switch-reference or subject shift), Spanish speakers must search for a
referent in the discourse. While this has been studied specifically for 3sg/3pl subjects (see Shin
& Cairns, 2012), this trend has also been observed for first person and second person subjects
(Bayley & Pease-Álvarez, 1997; Ortiz López, 2011; Shin & Otheguy, 2009).
As previously discussed, the pilot study by Mandell (2013) indicated that L1 English/L2
Spanish learners tended to rely on the overt subjects rather the inflectional morphology. Thus, biclausal sentences with topic shifts indicated by morphological inflection only rely on a speaker’s
ability to process morphological inflection accurately; these sentences present an opportunity to
test whether L2 learners rely on L1 (Ellis & Sagarra, 2010; Hopp, 2010) or universal processing
strategies, such as determining that the first overt noun or pronoun of the sentence is the subject
or relying on lexical items (VanPatten, 2012; VanPatten & Keating, 2007). If the predictions

69

from Mandell (2013) hold true for the present participants, nonnative speakers would not process
the inflection in either sentence (12) or (13), and would instead rely solely on the overt pronoun
in the first clause (yo). Because the inflection is not processed, nonnative speakers would
therefore interpret (yo) as the subject of both the first and the second clause, either rightfully (as
in (12)) or wrongfully (as in (13)).
Research Question for Experiment Two
In the previous chapter, the results of Experiment One established the following:
•

L2 learners at the B1 level demonstrated that they did not have robust enough mental
representations to respond to errors in 1sg and 3sg conditions

•

L2 learners at the B1 level demonstrated that they have robust enough mental
representations to respond to errors in 2sg and 3pl conditions

•

L2 learners showed a pattern of defaulting behavior, as they did not respond to errors
when 3sg was used in more specified contexts.
The findings presented in the second and third bullet points suggest that L2 learners have

reassembled features in the L2. However, the results also indicate that learners may have
processing difficulties when processing morphological inflection when it is immediately adjacent
to an overt subject; particularly when the representation of that morpheme is not robustly
represented within the morpho-lexical store. This was indicated not only by their lack of
response to errors involving 1sg morphology, but also their acceptance of 3sg as a default. The
purpose of the present study is to examine whether L2 learners reliably access these
representations during on-line processing that involves the processing of more complex sentence
structure, discourse, and interfaces. Specifically, the present study investigates the following
research question:

70

1. Assuming B1 proficiency level and that L1 English/L2 Spanish speakers have sensitivity
to present tense person/number verbal morphology (Experiment One), do they show
sensitivity to mismatches during a topic shift from one clause to the next with the
following morphemes:
a. 1st person singular
b. 2nd person singular
c. 3rd person singular
d. 3rd person plural?
If native and nonnative speakers make use of inflectional morphology to disambiguate
null subjects, they should slow down when the inflectional morphology in the second clause
indicates that a new subject has been introduced. If nonnative speakers do not rely on
morphological inflection to disambiguate null subjects, they should not slow down in the event
of a topic/subject shift in the second clause. Such behavior would be consistent with research
supporting hypotheses that posit that the nonnative parser relies on different strategies when
pressed for resources. Again, these strategies may stem from either the L1 (Ellis & Sagarra,
2010; Hopp, 2010), may be universal default processing strategies shared by all L2 learners
(VanPatten & Keating, 2007). If nonnative speakers slow down when presented with a verb that
marks a subject different from the previous clause, this is an indication that nonnatives speakers
have developed native-like processing heuristics in addition to having acquired inflectional
morphology.
Method and Procedure
Participants
Nonnative Speakers. The nonnative participants in the current dissertation (n = 22) were
the same nonnative participants from Experiment One.
71

Native Speakers. The native participants in the current dissertation (n = 15) were the
same native participants from Experiment One.
Materials
As a part of this dissertation, participants completed a self-paced reading task, and took
one proficiency measure. The proficiency measure is the same proficiency used in Experiment
One. Because of this, only the stimuli for Experiment Two will be discussed.
Stimuli. Eighty bi-clausal experimental quadruplets were created (Appendix B) and
segmented for a non-cumulative moving-window, self-paced reading procedure in SuperLab 5.0.
Forty of the stimuli tested sensitivity to topic/subject shifts using 1sg and 3sg inflectional verbal
morphology as below (bolding is for demonstration here and was not included in the actual
stimuli).
(14)

A. Yo \ limpio \ la casa \ porque \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
B. Yo \ limpio \ la casa \ porque \ espera \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
C. La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ espera \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
D. La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
‘I/the mother clean/cleans the house because I am expecting/she is expecting
guests tonight.

The other forty sentences tested learner sensitivity to topic/subject shifts using 2sg and 3pl
inflectional morphology as below:
(15)

A. Tú \ cambias \ de comida \ cuando \ empiezas \ una \ dieta \ recomendada.
B. Tú \ cambias \ de comida \ cuando \ empiezan \ una \ dieta \ recomendada.
C. Los hombres \ cambian \ de comida \ cuando \ empiezan \ una \ dieta \
recomendada.

72

D. Los hombres \ cambian \ de comida \ cuando \ empiezas \ una \ dieta \
recomendada.
‘You/The men changed their diet when you began/they began the recommended
diet.’
The present alternations of verbal morphemes were chosen to maintain the length of the verb in
the target region. This ensured that any participant sensitivity was not caused by increased
salience of verbal morphemes. All eighty sentences were grammatical.
Each stimulus consisted of eight separate regions, and contained two clauses. The first
clause contained an overt subject, and the second clause contained a null subject that either
matched the subject (as seen in sentences A and C) in the first clause or did not (as seen in
sentences B and D). Keeping in line with the alternations from Experiment One, 1sg (-o) and 3sg
(-a) were presented in the same experimental quadruplets to maintain the length of the verb in
the target region. For this same reason 2sg (-as) and 3pl (-an) also alternated in the same
experimental quadruplet. The clauses were linked by one of four possible conjunctions that were
split evenly between the stimuli: porque (‘because’), mientras (‘while’), cuando (‘when’), or
después que (‘after’). Stimuli that contained 3sg or 3pl subjects all began with noun phrases,
such as el chico/los chicos (‘the boy’/‘the boys’), to eliminate any issues with the ambiguity of
third person subjects, such as él/ellos (‘he’/‘they’), because these pronouns do not normally
occur in the discourse without a referent. This region contained the verb of the second clause. In
sentences B and D, the verb indicated a topic/subject shift. If the subject in the first clause was
1sg, the verb in the second clause was always 3sg in the event of a topic/subject shift. If the
subject in the first clause was 3sg, the verb in the second clause was always 1sg in the event of a

73

topic/subject shift. 2sg and 3pl alternated in the same manner in the event of a topic shift. These
quadruplets were blocked to create a total of four possible participant groups.
Each sentence was followed by a comprehension check in English (16). English was
chosen as the language of the comprehension checks to avoid giving participants additional cues
related to Spanish verbal morphology. Each comprehension check was in the form of a statement
that participants decided was true or false based on the sentence they just read. All sentences
targeted the context of the sentence, and did not directly address the issue of the subject. These
questions were made so that half of the comprehension checks were true (correct answer: ‘A’)
and half of the comprehension checks were false (correct answer: ‘B’). In example (16), the
answer is ‘False’.
(16)

La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
‘The mother cleans the house because I am expecting guests tonight.’
In this sentence, someone is cashing a check.
A. True
B. False

The stimuli for experiments one and three served as distractors for Experiment Two, and are
discussed in the appropriate chapter.
Procedure
The procedure for Experiment Two is the same procedure as that found in Experiment
One. To summarize, the procedure was as follows. Participants came to a lab where they sat in a
chair in front of a computer with a response pad, and read a consent form. They then read the
instructions, and practiced with a series of five practice questions, an example of which can be
seen in (17). All practice sentences used the first person plural verb form -mos to avoid providing

74

participants with additional cues on the targeted verbal morphology. This experiment also
utilized a moving-window, non-cumulative, self-paced reading procedure.
(17)

Normalmente \ vamos \ a \ la \ universidad \ por \ la \ mañana.
‘Normally, we go to the university in the morning.’
The people in this sentence are probably students.
A. True
B. False

After completing the practice sentences, and finishing the instructions, participants
moved through the stimuli at their own pace. Half-way through, participants took the proficiency
test. When they finished the test, they continued with the experiment. When they finished, they
were asked to fill out a background questionnaire, and were paid $20 for their time. The total
experiment time was approximately 60-90 minutes in length. After receiving payment,
participants were asked what they thought the experiment was about, and were debriefed if they
liked.
Scoring and Analysis
The participants’ (n = 22) reading times were collected for the target region and the three
spillover regions. Each reading time was coded by participant, region, morpheme, item, and
match. Consistent with the self-paced reading methodology, reading times that were less than
100ms were removed from the analysis, because reading times under 100ms signify that
participants did not read the words in the affected region. Removing these times consisted of
.003% of the data for this experiment.
As with Experiment One unstructured linear mixed models were conducted for each of
the two conditions’ (i.e., 1sg/3sg; 2sg/3pl) regions. Each linear mixed model had two random

75

and two fixed factors. The two random factors were participant and conjunction type, which was
correlated with item. The two fixed factors were person (1sg or 3sg; 2sg or 3pl) and match (i.e.,
subject matched between clauses or subject mismatched between clauses). Two sets of analyses
were conducted: one for the 1sg/3sg condition and one for the 2sg/3pl condition.
There were two possible ways of coding the data for analysis. The first was to code
sentence A to sentence D, and sentence B to sentence C as pertaining to the same category
respectively (see examples (14) and (15)). However, the results from the control group indicated
this analysis may not be reliable due to the differences in length in the initial subject region. The
second possible analysis is to code sentence A to sentence B and sentence C to sentence D as
pertaining to the same category respectively. This analysis controls for the length of the first
clause, and examines if the verb in the second clause is read longer when it indicates a change in
topic/subject. The control behaved as expected with this analysis, and for that reason, this
analysis was used.
For the linear mixed effects models to be conducted reliably, several steps were taken to
ensure that the model used was the best fit. First, the covariance structure of the model was first
submitted to two covariance structure matrixes due to the correlated nature of the data:
compound symmetry and unstructured. To determine which covariance structure was best, the
model’s AICs were compared. For determining model fit, the lower the AIC, the better the model
fits. For each model, the unstructured covariance structure had the lowest AIC, indicating that
this structure best fit the data. In addition to using the AIC score to determine the appropriate
covariance structure, the residuals were plotted for each region. As in Experiment One, the
residuals best fit the model when the log-transformed data were used. For this reason, the logtransformed data were used for analyses for the all groups. Finally, another important factor in

76

ensuring that the model is valid is ensuring that all fixed factors placed in the model are
significant predictors. Using the unstructured model, each fixed factor was examined, and it was
found that each fixed factor was significant in the model.
Results
Native Speakers
1sg/3sg Condition. Descriptive statistics for native speakers for the 1sg/3sg condition
can be seen in Table 3.1. In general, native speakers read slower when the verb in the second
clause indicated a topic/subject shift when compared to the first clause. The reading times were
log-transformed for all analyses.
Table 3.1
Descriptive Statistics of Native Reading Times for 1sg/3sg Condition in Milliseconds
Subject in First Clause
Target Region Spillover One Spillover Two

1sg
(yo)

3sg
(el chico)

Subject Match
(hablo)

448.79
(231.28)

417.63
(216.63)

452.95
(260.25)

Subject Mismatch
(habla)

499.84
(399.86)

433.79
(171.37)

479.04
(426.39)

Subject Match
(habla)

483.50
(306.57)

386.70
(120.90)

485.28
(478.93)

Subject Mismatch
(hablo)

468.58
(245.21)

450.14
(205.37)

434.97
(211.26)

The results for the target region can be seen in Table 3.2. In this region, there were no
significant predictors or interactions, although there was a trend toward significant for the effect
of morpheme, which indicated that when the subject in the first clause was first person, the verb
in the second region was read faster (estimate = -0.030, p = .100).

77

Table 3.2
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.639
0.019
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.030

0.018

.100

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-0.009

0.018

.629

Effects of the first
subject being 1sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

0.034

0.025

.174

The results for the first spillover region can be seen in Table 3.3. In this region, match
was a significant predictor in the model (estimate = 0.048, p = .001), which indicates that native
speakers slowed down when the verb in the second clause signaled a topic shift.

78

Table 3.3
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.571
0.013
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

0.019

0.015

.207

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.048

0.015

.001

Effects of the first
subject being 1sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

-0.028

0.021

.184

In the final spillover region (Table 3.4), there were no significant predictors or
interactions.

79

Table 3.4
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.626
0.016
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.009

0.018

.624

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-0.018

0.018

.298

Effects of the first
subject being 1sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

0.024

0.025

.336

2sg/3pl Condition. The descriptive statistics for the native speakers in 2sg/3pl condition
can be seen in Table 3.5. In general, the native speakers read sentences that contained a change
in subject longer than sentences in which the subject was constant between the two clauses.

80

Table 3.5
Descriptive Statistics of Native Reading Times for 2sg/3pl Condition in Milliseconds
Subject in First Clause
Target Region Spillover One Spillover Two

2sg
(tú)

3pl
(los chicos)

Subject Match
(hablas)

480.30
(391.64)

426.42
(368.59)

467.01
(434.20)

Subject Mismatch
(hablan)

513.95
(304.95)

445.47
(232.13)

440.18
(162.69)

Subject Match
(hablan)

440.56
(187.72)

382.61
(109.72)

418.57
(173.64)

Subject Mismatch
(hablas)

541.22
(361.55)

459.72
(223.17)

444.12
(196.89)

The analysis for the target region can be seen in Table 3.6. In this region, there was a
significant effect for match (estimate = 0.062, p = .002), which indicated that native speakers
read sentences that contained a topic/subject shift slower than sentences that did not. There were
no other significant effects or interactions.

81

Table 3.6
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.613
0.018
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

0.005

0.020

.771

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.062

0.020

.002

Effects of the first
subject being 2sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

-0.027

0.028

.336

The analyses for the first spillover region can be seen in Table 3.7. In this region, there is
a significant effect for match (estimate = 0.056, p = .001), that indicated that sentences that
contained a topic/subject shift were read more slowly than those that did not.

82

Table 3.7
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.570
0.014
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

0.007

0.017

.657

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.056

0.017

.001

Effects of the first
subject being 2sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

-0.021

0.024

.384

In the second spillover region, which can be seen in Table 3.8, there are no significant
effects or interactions.

83

Table 3.8
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.598
0.014
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

0.010

0.016

.562

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.023

0.016

.162

Effects of the first
subject being 2sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

-0.011

0.023

.620

Summary of Results for the Native Speakers. The results of the native speakers in both
conditions (1sg/3sg and 2sg/3pl) show that the design of the experiment is sufficient to test the
proposed hypotheses regarding the processing of inflectional morphology within the context of a
topic shift. The native speakers consistently slowed down when they encountered a topic/subject
shift in the second clause, as marked by inflectional verbal morphology. This suggests that the
processing burden of sentences containing topic shifts increases as native speakers search for and
incorporate a new referent into the discourse.

84

Nonnative Speakers
1sg/3sg Condition. The descriptive statistics for the nonnative groups for the 1sg/3sg
condition are presented in Table 3.9. The standard deviations for this condition tend to show a
larger rate of variation in the target region subject mismatch group for both first person singular
and third person singular. The reading times in the target region also are slightly longer in the
subject mismatch condition than in the subject match condition.
Table 3.9
Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Reading Times for 1sg/3sg Condition in Milliseconds
Subject in First Clause
Target Region Spillover One Spillover Two

1sg
(yo)

3sg
(el chico)

Subject Match
(hablo)

543.10
(346.62)

406.15
(161.88)

464.94
(290.60)

Subject Mismatch
(habla)

570.75
(480.69)

402.24
(178.71)

433.70
(208.25)

Subject Match
(habla)

493.14
(271.57)

421.72
(215.26)

479.29
(391.18)

Subject Mismatch
(hablo)

527.02
(329.98)

426.45
(252.44)

469.21
(279.52)

The results for the target region, the first spillover, and the second spillover can be seen
in turn in Tables 3.10, 3.11, and 3.12. There were no significant predictors or interactions in any
of the regions, signaling that sentences were read the same regardless of whether topic/subject
shift was present or not.

85

Table 3.10
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.647
0.013
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

0.023

0.016

.138

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.018

0.016

.274

Effects of the first
subject being 1sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

-0.015

0.024

.531

86

Table 3.11
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.593
0.011
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.011

0.013

.394

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-0.008

0.014

.540

Effects of the first
subject being 1sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

0.004

0.018

.842

87

Table 3.12
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.614
0.014
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

0.000

0.018

.982

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-0.005

0.017

.767

Effects of the first
subject being 1sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

-0.012

0.021

.576

2sg/3pl Condition. The descriptive statistics for the nonnative group in the 2sg/3pl
condition are presented in Table 3.13. Reading times across conditions were similar, although the
subject mismatched condition read slightly longer the second spillover for sentences that began
with 2sg subjects and in the target region for sentences that began in with 3pl subjects.

88

Table 3.13
Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Reading Times for 2sg/3pl Condition in Milliseconds
Subject in First Clause
Target Region Spillover One Spillover Two

Second Person
(tú)

Third person plural
(los chicos)

Subject Match
(hablas)

603.00
(411.05)

441.11
(375.11)

432.18
(242.46)

Subject Mismatch
(hablan)

603.15
(424.01)

442.78
(436.34)

447.83
(348.03)

Subject Match
(hablan)

523.84
(307.34)

407.59
(195.06)

424.30
(259.17)

Subject Mismatch
(hablas)

570.44
(390.81)

434.26
(258.29)

427.25
(243.39)

The results for the target region, the first spillover, and the second spillover can be seen
in Tables 3.14, 3.15, and 3.16 respectively. A significant effect was found in the target region,
and was for person (estimate = 0.043, p = .016). This result indicates that nonnative speakers
read sentences faster when the subject of the first clause was 2sg tú compared to when the
subject of the first clause was 3pl. Other than this effect, no other significant effects were found
in any of the regions.

89

Table 3.14
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.668
0.019
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

0.043

0.018

.016

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.018

0.018

.305

Effects of the first
subject being 2sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

-0.021

0.025

.399

90

Table 3.15
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.579
0.029
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

0.018

0.040

.650

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.023

0.039

.553

Effects of the first
subject being 2sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

0.021

0.056

.711

91

Table 3.16
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.589
0.014
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the first region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

0.004

0.014

.799

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.005

0.014

.710

Effects of the first
subject being 2sg and
the second subject not
matching the first

Person*Match

-0.005

0.020

.794

Summary of Results for the Nonnative Speakers. The results from the nonnative
speakers show that nonnatives are not sensitive to topic/subject shifts. Nonnative speakers failed
to slow down in any context in which a topic shift occurred. This suggests that nonnative
speakers do not reliably process morphological inflection.

92

Discussion of Experiment Two
The research question for this experiment asked whether nonnative speakers at the B1
proficiency level were sensitive to topic/subject shifts, indicated by inflectional verbal
morphology, with the following morphemes:
a. 1st person singular
b. 2nd person singular
c. 3rd person singular
d. 3rd person plural
The results of the current study suggest that L2 learners are not sensitive to topic/subject
shifts when signaled by any of the targeted morphemes. This result is partially unsurprising,
because the same group of learners also did not show sensitivity to errors in the 1sg/3sg
condition in Experiment One. As such, it is not surprising that they did not show sensitivity to
topic/subject shifts in the 1sg/3sg condition in the current study. They did, however, show
sensitivity to errors in 2sg/3pl in Experiment One, and because of this, the nonnative group had
the potential to show sensitivity to topic shifts using these inflectional morphemes. However, the
nonnative group did not seem to make use of verbal morphology during topic shifts. So, on the
one hand, they are sensitive to grammatical errors regarding person/number during real-time
processing, but they are not sensitive to topic-shifts as signaled by person/number morphology.
The results of this study further support hypotheses that posit nonnative speakers
underutilize morpho-syntactic cues in favor of using other processing strategies during L2
processing. In this case, it can be hypothesized that L2 learners are unaware of topic shifts in the
second clause, as they are co-referencing the unspoken pro to the overt pronoun in the first
clause, as they tended to do in Mandell (2013). Thus, nonnative speakers show a pattern like

93

native-speaking children (Shin & Cairns, 2012), who, in the event of a topic shift, tend to coreference null subject to the nearest available referent, regardless of the subject marked by
morphological inflection. Thus, the nonnative speakers may be using L1 English (Ellis &
Sagarra, 2010; Hopp, 2010) or universal processing strategies (VanPatten & Keating, 2007) that
cause them to rely more heavily on lexical items than morphological inflection.
Conclusion of Experiment Two
This experiment examined whether L2 learners process the L2 less efficiently than native
speakers by examining whether nonnative speakers responded to topic/subject shifts between
clauses when a change was signaled by inflectional morphology. The results of this study
suggest that despite having individual inflectional morphemes represented within the morpholexical store, L2 learners at the intermediate reading level do not necessarily rely on
morphological inflection to determine subjects. Such results imply that L2 learners are relying on
default processing strategies when asked to interpret more complex sentences.

94

CHAPTER FOUR
EXPERIMENT THREE
The purpose of the current experiment is to test an issue related to Experiment Two. For
the reader’s convenience, I will summarize what happened in Experiment Two. A question that
falls out of these results is whether the nonnative speakers tested in Experiment Two would slow
down for topic/subject shifts when an overt subject signals a change in topic or subject. Previous
research that has focused on the development of L2 pragmatics and the co-reference of subjects
has indicated that bilingual speakers with L1 English, tend to overuse overt subjects, and extend
them to situations in which a null subject would be expected (García-Alcaraz & Bel, 2014;
Rothman, 2008, 2009; Sorace, 2004; Sorace & Filiaci, 2006). However, what remains unclear is
whether overt pronouns are used because they facilitate nonnative processing. In other words, the
nonnative speakers demonstrated in Experiment Two that they did not use morpho-syntactic cues
to process topic/subject shifts. The current study examines whether the same group of nonnative
speakers will show the ability to do so when the shift is indicated by an overt subject, rather than
solely morphological inflection.
Background and Motivation
Summary of Results of Experiment Two
The results of Experiment Two indicated that the nonnative Spanish speakers in the
current study did not respond to topic/subject shifts when this change was indicated only by
inflectional morphology. This behavior occurred even though the same group of nonnative
speakers showed sensitivity to some errors in morphological inflection in Experiment One. This
suggests that L1 English/L2 Spanish speakers did not rely on morphological inflection to
determine the subject of a clause, and may be relying on either L1 processing strategies (Ellis &

95

Sagarra, 2010; Hopp, 2010) or universal processing measures (VanPatten, 2012; VanPatten &
Cadierno, 1993; VanPatten & Keating, 2007) to process stimuli. Thus, despite being able to
engage in feature-checking procedures, L2 learners did not use these cues during online
comprehension of bi-clausal sentences.
Research Question for Experiment Three
The current study builds on the findings of the second experiment by investigating
whether L2 learners slow down when a topic/subject shift occurs, and is signaled by an overt
subject. Specifically, the research question is:
1. Assuming B1 proficiency level and that L1 English/L2 Spanish speakers have sensitivity
to present tense person/number verbal morphology, does the presence of an overt
pronoun affect L2 learner sensitivity to topic shifts from one clause to the next with the
following morphemes:
a. 1st person singular
b. 2nd person singular
c. 3rd person singular
d. 3rd person plural?
If L2 processing of topic/subject shifts is facilitated by the presence of an overt subject pronoun
in the current study, L2 learners should slow down when presented with a new subject, because
the overt subject should provide a clear indication that a new topic has been introduced (GarcíaAlcaraz & Bel, 2014). The findings of this experiment should help to clarify whether overt
subjects affect nonnative processing behavior, and are facilitative to sentence processing.
Furthermore, results demonstrating that L2 learners are sensitive to topic/subject shifts when

96

overt subjects are present suggests that the processing of inflectional morphology may only
reliably occur when the verb is adjacent to an overt subject.
Method and Procedure
Participants
Nonnative Speakers. The nonnative participants in the current dissertation (n = 22) were
the same nonnative participants from Experiment One and Experiment Two.
Native Speakers. The native participants in the current dissertation (n = 15) were the
same native participants from Experiment One and Experiment Two.
Materials
As part of this dissertation, participants completed a self-paced reading task, and took one
proficiency measure. The proficiency measure is the same proficiency used in Experiment One.
Because of this, only the stimuli for Experiment Three will be discussed.
Stimuli. Eighty bi-clausal experimental quadruplets were created (Appendix C) and
segmented for a non-cumulative moving-window, self-paced reading procedure in SuperLab 5.0.
Forty of the stimuli tested sensitivity to topic/subject shifts using 1sg and 3sg inflectional verbal
morphology as below in example (1) (bolding is for demonstration here and was not included in
the actual stimuli):
(1)

A. Yo \ limpio \ la casa \ porque \ yo \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
B. Yo \ limpio \ la casa \ porque \ la mamá \ espera \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
C. La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ la mamá \ espera \ invitados \ por \ la
noche.
D. La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ yo \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
‘I/the mother clean/cleans the house because I am expecting/the mother is
expecting guests tonight.
97

The other forty sentences tested learner sensitivity to topic/subject shifts using 2sg and 3pl
inflectional morphology as below:
(2)

A. Tú \ cambias \ de comida \ cuando \ tú \ empiezas \ una \ dieta \ recomendada.
B. Tú \ cambias \ de comida \ cuando \ los hombres \ empiezan \ una \ dieta \
recomendada.
C. Los hombres \ cambian \ de comida \ cuando \ los hombres \ empiezan \ una \
dieta \ recomendada.
D. Los hombres \ cambian \ de comida \ cuando \ tú \ empiezas \ una \ dieta \
recomendada.
‘You/The men changed their diet when you began/the men began the
recommended diet.’

The present alternations of verbal morphemes were chosen to maintain the length of the subject
in the target region, which is bolded in examples (1) and (2) for demonstrative purposes only. It
should be noted that the sentences in which the subject repeats across both clauses is likely
unnatural in Spanish, and may cause discourse violations to occur. Such discourse violations
may therefore affect the native speakers’ behavior on these sentences. The target region was not
bolded in the experiment. This ensured that any participant sensitivity was not caused by
increased salience of verbal morphemes. All sentences in the third experiment were grammatical,
although there was the potential for pragmatic and discourse violations in sentences A and C.
Each stimulus consisted of nine separate regions, and contained two clauses. The first
clause contained an overt subject, and the second clause contained an overt subject that either
matched the subject (as seen in sentences A and C) in the first clause or did not (as seen in
sentences B and D). Thus, in sentences B and D, the subject contained a topic/subject shift. If the

98

subject in the first clause was 1sg, the verb in the second clause was always 3sg in the event of a
topic/subject shift. If the subject in the first clause was 3sg, the verb in the second clause was
always 1sg in the event of a topic/subject shift. 2sg and 3pl alternated in the same manner in the
event of a topic shift. The clauses were linked by one of four possible conjunctions that were
split evenly between the stimuli: porque (‘because’), mientras (‘while’), cuando (‘when’), or
después que (‘after’). The subject of the second clause (region 5) was the target region for this
experiment. Stimuli that contained 3sg or 3pl subjects all began with noun phrases, such as el
chico/los chicos (‘the boy’/‘the boys’), to eliminate any issues with the ambiguity of third person
subjects, such as él/ellos (‘he’/‘they’), because these pronouns do not normally occur in the
discourse without a referent. Furthermore, for 3sg and 3pl subjects, the subject in the second
clause was always the same as the first when the subjects matched across clauses. This was done
so that any discourse violations that may occur were held constant across all sentences. These
quadruplets were blocked to create a total of four possible participant groups.
As in Experiments One and Two, participants received a comprehension check in English
after each sentence. English was chosen as the language of the comprehension checks to avoid
giving participants additional cues on Spanish verbal morphology. Each comprehension check
was in the form of a statement that participants decided was true or false based on the sentence
they just read. All sentences targeted the context of the sentence, and did not directly address
inflectional verbal morphology. These questions were made so that half of the comprehension
checks were true (correct answer: ‘A’) and half of the comprehension checks were false (correct
answer: ‘B’). In example (3), the answer is ‘False’.
(3)

La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ yo \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
‘The mother cleans the house because I am expecting guests tonight.’

99

In this sentence, someone is cashing a check.
A. True
B. False
Procedure
The procedure for Experiment Three is the same procedure as that found in Experiment
One and Experiment Three. To summarize, the procedure was as follows. Participants came to a
lab where they sat in a chair in front of a computer with a response pad, and read a consent form.
They then read the instructions, and practiced with a series of five practice questions, an example
of which can be seen in (4). All practice sentences used the first person plural verb form -mos to
avoid providing participants with additional cues on the targeted verbal morphology. This
experiment also utilized a moving-window, non-cumulative, self-paced reading procedure.
(4)

Normalmente \ vamos \ a \ la \ universidad \ por \ la \ mañana.
‘Normally, we go to the university in the morning.’
The people in this sentence are probably students.
A. True
B. False

After completing the practice sentences, and finishing the instructions, participants
moved through the stimuli at their own pace. Half-way through, participants took the proficiency
test. When they finished the test, they continued with the experiment. When they finished, they
were asked to fill out a background questionnaire, and were paid $20 for their time. The total
experiment time was approximately 60-90 minutes in length. After receiving payment,
participants were asked what they thought the experiment was about, and were debriefed if they
liked.

100

Scoring and Analysis
The participants’ (n = 22) reading times were collected for the target region and the three
spillover regions. Each reading time was coded by participant, region, morpheme, item, and
match. Consistent with the self-paced reading methodology, reading times that were less than
100ms were removed from the analysis, because reading times under 100ms signify that
participants did not read the words in the affected region. Removing these times consisted of
.0005% of the data for this experiment.
As in Experiment One and Experiment Two, linear mixed effects models were used to
analyze the data. Each linear mixed model had two random and two fixed factors. The two
random factors were participant and conjunction type. The two fixed factors were person (1sg or
3sg; 2sg or 3pl) and match (i.e., subject matched between clauses or subject mismatched between
clauses). Two sets of analyses were conducted were conducted: one for the 1sg/3sg condition
and one for the 2sg/3pl condition.
There were two possible ways of coding the data for analysis. The first was to code
sentence A to sentence D, and sentence B to sentence C (see examples (14) and (15)) as
pertaining to the same group respectively. The second possible analysis was to code sentence A
to sentence B and sentence C to sentence D as belonging to the same group respectively. The
results from the control group indicated this second analysis may not be reliable due to the
differences in the length of the subject in the second clause. Because of this, the first coding
scheme was used: sentence A was coded opposite of sentence D, and sentence B was coded
opposite of sentence C. This analysis alternates the length of the first clause, but maintains the
subject presented in the second clause, and examines whether the subject and verb are read
longer in the event of a topic/subject shift.

101

For the linear mixed effects models to be conducted reliably, several steps were taken to
ensure that the model used was the best fit. First, the covariance structure of the model was first
submitted to two covariance structure matrixes due to the correlated nature of the data:
compound symmetry and unstructured. To determine which covariance structure was best, the
model’s AICs were compared. The unstructured covariance structure had the lowest AIC,
indicating that this structure best fit the data. In addition to using the AIC score to determine the
appropriate covariance structure, the residuals were plotted for each region. As in Experiments
One and Two, the residuals best fit the model when the log-transformed data were used. For this
reason, the log-transformed data were used for analyses for the all groups and conditions.
Finally, another important factor in ensuring that the model is valid is ensuring that all fixed
factors placed in the model are significant predictors. Using the unstructured model, each fixed
factor was examined, and it was found that each fixed factor was significant in the model.
Results
Native Speakers
1sg/3sg Condition. The descriptive statistics for the native speakers in the 1sg/3sg
sentence condition can be seen in Table 4.1. As expected, native speakers tended to read the
subject in the second region longer when it was new, signaling the incorporation of a new subject
into the discourse.

102

Table 4.1
Descriptive Statistics of Native Reading Times for 1sg/3sg Condition in Milliseconds
Subject in First
Subject in
Target
Spillover
Spillover
Spillover
Clause
Second Clause
Region
One
Two
Three
First person
(yo)

First person
(yo)

401.33
(264.61)

393.19
(117.32)

377.21
(137.50)

411.27
(154.20)

Third person
singular
(el chico)

First person
(yo)

403.03
(146.47)

427.87
(218.38)

390.93
(145.86)

451.02
(346.82)

Third person
singular
(el chico)

Third person
singular
(el chico)

474.24
(235.62)

429.75
(160.83)

384.33
(101.81)

430.00
(171.35)

First person
(yo)

Third person
singular
(el chico)

566.85
(538.11)

491.38
(271.53)

400.73
(138.13)

452.78
(229.35)

The linear mixed effect model for the subject region is presented in Table 4.2. In this
region, there is a significant predictor for person in the second clause, which is expected, because
1sg subjects are significant shorter than 3sg subjects. There is also a trend toward significance
for subject match, which signals that sentences with mismatched subject were read slower than
subjects in the matched conditions.

103

Table 4.2
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.641
0.013
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.069

0.018

<.001

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.030

0.018

.088

Effects of the second
subject being 1sg and
the not matching the
first subject

Person*Match

-0.016

0.025

.524

Results for the target region (the verb) can be seen in Table 4.3. In this region, there is
still a significant predictor for person that indicates that 1sg-marked verbs were read faster than
3sg-marked verbs. However, match is also a significant main predictor, indicating that native
speakers read sentences with a change of subject longer than those without a change in subject.

104

Table 4.3
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.609
0.014
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.033

0.016

.037

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.044

0.015

.005

Effects of the second
subject being 1sg and
the not matching the
first subject

Person*Match

-0.023

0.022

.305

In the two spillover regions presented in Tables 4.4 and 4.5 respectively, there were no
significant predictors.

105

Table 4.4
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Mean log reading
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

Fixed Effects
Intercept

Estimate
2.571

Std. Error
0.011

p value
<.001

Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.015

0.012

.225

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.012

0.012

.309

Effects of the second
subject being 1sg and
the not matching the
first subject

Person*Match

0.005

0.017

.782

106

Table 4.5
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Mean log reading
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model

Fixed Effects
Intercept

Estimate
2.609

Std. Error
0.014

p value
<.001

Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.020

0.015

.190

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.011

0.015

.468

Effects of the second
subject being 1sg and
the not matching the
first subject

Person*Match

0.014

0.021

.514

2sg/3pl Condition. The descriptive statistics for the native group in the 2sg/3pl condition
can be seen in Table 4.6. In general, native speakers tended to read 3pl sentences longer when
the subjects in the two clauses were the same. Otherwise, no other pattern is decipherable from
the descriptive statistics.

107

Table 4.6
Descriptive Statistics of Native Reading Times for 2sg/3pl Condition in Milliseconds
Subject in First
Subject in
Target
Spillover
Spillover
Spillover
Clause
Second Clause
Region
One
Two
Three
Second person
(tú)

Second person
(tú)

400.92
(217.96)

430.36
(218.38)

375.32
(133.52)

407.07
(138.13)

Third person
plural
(los chicos)

Second person
(tú)

406.65
(138.90)

449.59
(224.99)

419.59
(261.09)

409.17
(149.59)

Third person
plural
(los chicos)

Third person
plural
(los chicos)

530.60
(273.11)

485.31
(202.96)

403.31
113.49

427.61
158.32

Second person
(tú)

Third person
plural
(los chicos)

500.53
(286.17)

482.85
(244.74)

421.83
(168.91)

436.69
(236.18)

The results for the subject region for the 2sg/3pl condition can be seen in Table 4.7. In
this region, the interaction between Person and Match is significant, indicating behavior on 3pl
subjects differs from behavior on 2sg subjects.

108

Table 4.7
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Target Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.678
0.016
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

-0.103

0.018

<.001

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject from
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-0.035

0.018

.049

Effects of the subject
being 2sg and not
matching the first
subject

Person*Match

0.051

0.025

.043

To further examine the interaction between person and match, post hoc tests with Bonferroni
adjustments for multiple comparisons were performed (Table 4.8). These tests indicate that
regardless of matched status, 2sg was read for the approximately the same amount of time. For
3pl subjects, however, there was a significant difference between clauses that had subject that
matched the first clause, and those that did not. In this case, the difference indicated that matched
sentences were read significantly slower than matched sentences.

109

Table 4.8
Post-Hoc Pairwise Comparisons of Morpheme/Match Interaction in Native Target Region for
2sg/3pl
Morpheme
Mean Difference
Std. Error
df
p value
Second Person Singular
0.016
0.018
536.966
.372
(-as)
Third Person Plural
(-an)

-0.035

0.018

537.723

.049

In the following target region (Table 4.9), there are no significant predictors other than
morpheme (estimate = -0.060, p = <.001). This indicates that the verb was read for a shorter
amount of time when it was 2sg compared to when it was 3pl.
Table 4.9
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker First Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.656
0.016
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

-0.060

0.017

<.001

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject from
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-0.011

0.017

.482

Effects of the subject
being 2sg and not
matching the first
subject

Person*Match

0.039

0.023

.102

110

In the following spillover region (Table 4.10), morpheme is a significant predictor
(estimate = -0.039, p = .004), with 2sg sentences being read faster than 3pl sentences. There are
no other significant predictors.
Table 4.10
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.594
0.012
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

-0.039

0.013

.004

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject from
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.008

0.013

.555

Effects of the subject
being 2sg and not
matching the first
subject

Person*Match

0.024

0.019

.201

111

In the final spillover region (Table 4.11), there are no significant predictors.
Table 4.11
Model Results Analyses for Native Speaker Third Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.611
0.013
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

-0.021

0.014

.127

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject from
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-0.006

0.014

.624

Effects of the subject
being 2sg and not
matching the first
subject

Person*Match

0.007

0.020

.714

Summary of Native Speaker Results. The native-speaker results can be summarized as
follows:
•

Native speakers read 1sg and 3sg sentences significantly slower in mismatched
conditions when an overt pronoun was present in the first spillover region

•

Native speakers read 3pl sentences slower when subjects were matched across clauses
in the target region

•

Native speakers read 2sg sentences at the same pace regardless of whether the subject
matched or did not match across clauses.

112

Nonnative Speakers
1sg/3sg Condition. The descriptive statistics for the nonnative speakers can be seen in
Table 4.12. In general, nonnative speakers tended to read 1sg clauses faster than 3sg clauses,
which is expected due to the length of the subject region. These reading times were logtransformed for analysis.
Table 4.12
Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Reading Times for 1sg/3sg Condition in Milliseconds
Subject in First
Subject in
Target
Spillover
Spillover
Spillover
Clause
Second Clause
Region
One
Two
Three
First Person
(yo)

First person
(yo)

428.11
(244.44)

493.93
(409.51)

424.83
(322.65)

432.11
(193.03)

Third person
singular
(el chico)

First person
(yo)

431.39
(208.38)

480.75
(311.72)

398.18
(185.94)

467.68
(277.91)

Third person
singular
(el chico)

Third person
singular
(el chico)

546.38
(323.06)

478.56
(284.25)

420.92
(304.78)

457.37
(294.69)

First person
(yo)

Third person
singular
(el chico)

578.80
(431.89)

557.00
(372.80)

453.06
(571.36)

444.14
(245.62)

The results for the subject region can be seen in Table 4.13. In this region, only
morpheme is a significant predictor (estimate = -0.084, p = <.001). There are no other significant
predictors or interactions in this region.

113

Table 4.13
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for the 1sg/3sg Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.676
0.060
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.084

0.017

<.001

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.014

0.016

.393

Effects of the second
subject being 1sg and
the not matching the
first subject

Person*Match

-0.008

0.023

.737

The results for the for the target region are the provided in Table 4.14. In this region,
match is a significant predictor. (estimate = -0.017, p = .007). There is also a trend toward
significance for the interaction between match and morpheme (estimate = -0.040, p = .081).
Because this interaction is not significant, it is not interpreted in the current analysis.

114

Table 4.14
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.636
0.017
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.017

0.016

.298

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.045

0.016

.007

Effects of the second
subject being 1sg and
the not matching the
first subject

Person*Match

-0.041

0.023

.081

In the final two spillover regions (seen in Table 4.15 and Table 4.16), there were no
significant predictors or interactions.

115

Table 4.15
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.585
0.013
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.003

0.014

.789

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.010

0.014

.488

Effects of the second
subject being 1sg and
the not matching the
first subject

Person*Match

-0.021

0.020

.289

116

Table 4.16
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Third Spillover Region for the 1sg/3sg
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.611
0.015
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 1sg compared
to 3sg

Person

-0.008

0.014

.543

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject as
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-0.006

0.014

.661

Effects of the second
subject being 1sg and
the not matching the
first subject

Person*Match

0.027

0.020

.190

2sg/3pl Condition. The descriptive statistics for the nonnative speakers in the 2sg/3pl
condition can be seen in Table 4.17. Nonnative speakers tended to read 3pl subject longer when
the subject was new when compared to when the subject matched the first clause. No such
pattern was observed for 2sg subjects. These reading times were log-transformed for analysis.

117

Table 4.17
Descriptive Statistics of Nonnative Reading Times for 2sg/3pl Condition in Milliseconds
Subject in First
Subject in
Target
Spillover
Spillover
Spillover
Clause
Second Clause
Region
One
Two
Three
Second person
(tú)

Second person
(tú)

398.54
(162.53)

468.62
(269.56)

386.75
(178.02)

410.05
(211.79)

Third person
plural
(los chicos)

Second person
(tú)

409.26
(158.40)

478.03
(348.51)

393.83
(153.06)

410.55
(166.33)

Third person
plural
(los chicos)

Third person
plural
(los chicos)

567.75
(317.10)

520.86
(279.38)

393.29
(151.15)

421.69
(196.76)

Second person
(tú)

Third person
plural
(los chicos)

694.11
(535.24)

539.89
(263.91)

413.83
(332.31)

422.58
(186.26)

The results for the subject region can be seen in Table 4.18. In this reason, the interaction
between morpheme and match is significant, and post hoc tests were conducted to determine
reason for the interaction.

118

Table 4.18
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Target Region for the 2sg/3pl Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.678
.016
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

-.103

.018

<.001

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject from
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

-.035

.018

.049

Effects of the subject
being 2sg and not
matching the first
subject

Person*Match

.051

.025

.043

The results of the post hoc tests can be seen in Table 4.19. The results of the post hoc tests
indicate that the nonnative speakers did not read sentences with a 2sg subject in the second
clause in a significantly different way based on subject match/mismatch. They did, however,
read 3pl subject longer when the subject was new and did not match the subject in the first
clause.

119

Table 4.19
Post-Hoc Pairwise Comparisons of Morpheme/Match Interaction in Nonnative Target Region
for 2sg/3pl
Morpheme
Mean Difference
Std. Error
df
p value
Second Person Singular
.010
0.017
793.046
.555
(-as)
Third Person Plural
(-an)

.058

0.017

794.781

.001

The results for the verb region can be seen in Table 4.20. In this region, morpheme is a
significant predictor, signifying that 2sg was read faster than 3pl, which is likely spillover from
the subject region. There were no other significant predictors.
Table 4.20
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker First Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.671
0.016
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

-0.051

0.016

.002

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject from
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.019

0.016

.231

Effects of the subject
being 2sg and not
matching the first
subject

Person*Match

-0.021

0.023

.356

120

In the following two spillover regions (Tables 4.21 and 4.22), there were no significant
predictors.
Table 4.21
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Second Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.574
0.011
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

-0.013

0.012

.287

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject from
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.004

0.012

.755

Effects of the subject
being 2sg and not
matching the first
subject

Person*Match

0.003

0.017

.843

121

Table 4.22
Model Results Analyses for Nonnative Speaker Third Spillover Region for the 2sg/3pl
Condition
Meaning
Fixed Effects
Estimate
Std. Error
p value
Mean log reading
Intercept
2.594
0.013
<.001
time of the fixed
effects included in the
model
Effect of the subject
in the second region
being 2sg compared
to 3pl

Person

-0.018

0.012

.143

Effect of the second
clause having a
different subject from
the first compared to
the second clause
having the same
subject as the first

Match

0.001

0.012

.906

Effects of the subject
being 2sg and not
matching the first
subject

Person*Match

0.010

0.017

.554

Summary of Nonnative Speaker Results. The results for the nonnative speakers can be
summarized as follows:
•

Nonnative speakers read 1sg and 3sg sentences significantly slower in mismatched
conditions when an overt pronoun was present in the first spillover region

•

Nonnative speakers read 2sg sentences at the same pace regardless of whether the
subject matched or did not match across clauses

•

Nonnative speakers read 3pl conditions longer when the subject was new than when it
was not in the target region.

122

Discussion of Experiment Three
The research question for this experiment was an extension of the second research
question and asked whether the presence of an overt pronoun affected learner sensitivity to topic
shifts. This was measured by comparing the reading times on overt subjects in the second clause
when the subject matched the overt subject in the first clause to the reading times in on overt
subjects in the second language when the subject was new. The results of this study indicated the
following:
•

1st person singular; yes

•

2nd person singular; no

•

3rd person singular; yes

•

3rd person plural; yes

Although the results for 2sg was “no”, these results must be interpreted in light of the native
control group, who also did not show any behavioral changes between matched and mismatched
conditions for 2sg. An interesting result from this data, however, was that nonnative speakers
tended to slow down for 3pl subjects when the subject did not match the subject in the first
clause. Native speakers, on the other hand, read 3pl subjects significantly more slowly when they
matched the first clause, which suggests that this construction may violate the discourse
constraints placed on null and overt subjects, specifically for 3pl subjects. One reason for this
may be the semantic properties of the 3pl subjects. For example, for native Spanish speakers the
use of a 3pl subject (e.g., las madres ‘the mothers’ or los padres ‘the fathers/parents’) may
already include all the people that fit the category of the presented subject (e.g., all mothers or all
fathers/parents). Thus, the introduction of this subject again implies a separate semantic group
with similar characteristics to the already in place subject (e.g., a separate group of mothers or

123

fathers). For this reason, native Spanish speakers slow down when the same 3pl subject is
reintroduced, while the nonnative speakers do not. This difference in behavior, however, further
suggests overt subjects are facilitative to L1 English/L2 Spanish interlanguage processing,
because nonnative speakers significantly slowed down when an overt pronoun signaled a
topic/subject shift. In comparison, the same group of nonnative speakers did not slow down
when a new subject was introduced in Experiment Two where the topic shift was only indicated
by verbal morphology.
The results of this study are in line with previous research that has indicated that L1
English/L2 Spanish speakers tend to overuse overt subjects in contexts where a null subject may
be expected (see Rothman, 2008, 2009; Sorace 2006), but from the point of view that the use of
overt subject is facilitative to interlanguage processing. Thus, these results are also consistent
with the hypothesis that the L2 parser makes use of different processing strategies than the L1
parser in that it may occasionally rely on L1 or universal processing strategies for more complex
tasks (Ellis & Sagarra, 2010; Hopp, 2010; Keating, 2009; Roberts et al., 2008; VanPatten, 2012).
Specifically, these results suggest that nonnative speakers may rely on overt subjects to process
person and number inflection, despite having that morphology represented in the morpho-lexical
store. Taken together with the results of Experiment One and Experiment Two, the results of this
experiment further suggest that at the B1 level of acquisition, the parser does not reliably access
morphological inflection within the context of the discourse, although it is able to perform basic
feature checking procedures when overt subjects are present.
Conclusion to Experiment Three
The present study sought to further examine L1 English/L2 Spanish learners’ behavior on
topic/subject shifts in L2 Spanish by examining their processing strategies when overt pronouns

124

were placed in the second clause. The results of this experiment suggest that the nonnative parser
may not always engage in the processing of inflectional morphology reliably, despite having
built robust enough representations to do so (i.e. the results of Experiment One). These results
are consistent with studies that have indicated that nonnative speakers show nonnative-like
distributions of both overt and null subjects (see Roberts et al., 2008; Rothman, 2008, 2009;
Tiffany, 2011), although the current study suggests that overt pronouns may be necessary for
morphology to be processed reliably within the discourse. As such, the results of this study tend
to indicate that the L2 parser relies on strategies different from than the native parser during online comprehension.

125

CHAPTER FIVE
GENERAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The present dissertation examined the extent to which nonnative Spanish speakers rely on
verbal morphology in determining the subject of a sentence. Participants with L1 English and L2
Spanish were recruited. Experiment One examined the extent to which inflectional verbal
morphology was represented within L2 learners’ morpho-lexical store by presenting nonnative
speakers with syntactically simple sentences that tested their sensitivity to errors in subject/verb
agreement. Experiment Two examined whether the same group of nonnative Spanish speakers
would rely on inflectional morphology during processing by examining their behavior on
topic/subject shifts in L2 Spanish. Experiment Three examined whether the presence of an overt
subject affected the processing of the same topic/subject shifts in L2 Spanish that were the focus
of Experiment Two. If L2 Spanish speakers at the B1 level had inflectional morphology
represented within the morpho-lexical store, they were predicted to slow down when
ungrammatical sentences were presented in the first experiment. Based on the information
obtained from this experiment, it was predicted that L2 learners would rely on the verbal
morphology that they had acquired to process topic/subject shifts, if inflection could be reliably
accessed. Similarly, if L2 learners could not reliably access or process inflectional morphology,
they should not slow down when a topic/subject shift occurs, because of their reliance on overt
subjects. Finally, if the L2 learners did not show sensitivity to topic/subject shifts in L2 Spanish,
the third experiment hypothesized that the presence of an overt subject would result in more
native-like behavior on topic/subject shifts. The remainder of this chapter first summarizes the
findings of each study for the reader’s convenience, and then discusses the theoretical

126

significance of these studies. The limitations and suggestions for future research are also
addressed.
Summary of Findings of the Three Experiments
Experiment One. The results of the first study indicated that L1 English/L2 Spanish
learners had developed robust enough mental representations to be able to respond to
ungrammaticalities for the following morphemes:
•

3pl (-n)

•

2sg (-s)

The results also indicated that, while the nonnative speakers did not respond to
ungrammaticalities involving 3sg morphology (-Ø), 3sg (-Ø) was chosen as a default or base
inflection. By nature, the null morpheme that marks 3sg (-Ø) lacks specification (Harley &
Ritter, 2000, 2002). Therefore, by using this feature as a base form or default, L2 learners
demonstrate that it has been acquired, although the mental representation of this morpheme is not
the same as the native speakers’. 1sg (-o) was not considered acquired, because the nonnative
speakers did not slow down when this morpheme appeared in ungrammatical contexts. However,
following the feature hierarchy presented by Harley and Ritter (2000, 2002), this morpheme may
also have been assigned a default status. Ultimately, these results suggest that L2 learners still
demonstrate defaulting behavior caused by the lack of specification on default morphemes.
Experiment Two. The results of the second study indicated that nonnative Spanish
speakers did not rely on inflectional morphology for determining subjects within the discourse.
This was determined because L2 learners failed to slow down when a new subject was
introduced via morphology that they had previously shown sensitivity to (i.e. 2sg and 3pl).

127

Experiment Three. The results of the third study indicated that the presence of an overt
subject was facilitative to the processing of L2 inflectional morphology. In this experiment, L2
learners did not need to rely on verbal morphology to decipher topic shifts, because an overt
subject in the second clause either (1) matched the overt subject in the first clause or (2) did not
match the overt subject in the first clause. This experiment utilized the same stimuli as
Experiment Two, but with overt subjects added. With an overt subject in the second clause,
nonnative speakers slowed down when new subject was introduced in the second clause. The
strongest evidence of the facilitative nature of inflectional morphology occurred in the 3pl
condition. In this condition, the nonnative group read the 3pl subjects longer when they were
new, while the control group read 3pl subject longer when they matched the subject in the first
clause. This difference in behavior between the control and experimental group indicates that for
nonnative speakers, overt subjects were facilitated the processing of topic/subject shifts in
mismatched conditions, while they were a violation of discourse constraints for native speakers
in matched conditions.
Significance of Findings
The previous research on L2 verbal morphology has also examined L2 learner defaulting
behavior (McCarthy, 2012), and whether agreement processes between L2 language learners and
native speakers are fundamentally similar (Tanner, 2011). Furthermore, previous research that
examined the use of overt subjects has tended to focus on attachment preferences (e.g., Hopp,
2014; Jegerski, VanPatten, & Keating, 2016;) or nonnative speaker overuse of overt subjects
(Sorace, 2004; Sorace & Filiaci, 2006; Rothman, 2008, 2009; Rothman & Iverson, 2007). This
dissertation differed from these studies, because it sought to identify a specific developmental

128

pattern for inflectional morphology in L2 Spanish, while also examining whether overt pronouns
were necessary for sentence processing in the event of a topic/subject shift.
Overall, the results of this dissertation suggest that the acquisition of L2 inflectional
morphology develops according to feature specification (Harley & Ritter, 2000, 2002), and at
this point in acquisition, L2 learners’ defaulting behavior is caused by the underspecified nature
of 3sg and possibly 1sg. These results support that nonnative speakers choose the least specified
form or forms to serve as a base or default form, which is consistent with the findings of
numerous studies that have observed L2 learner defaulting behavior of some type (e.g., Bruhn de
Garavito & White, 2002; Keating, 2009; McCarthy 2008, 2012; Prévost & White, 2000; White et
al., 2004). More importantly, the results suggest that defaulting behavior is systematically
present in L2 comprehension, further confirming that it is not only the pressures of real time
production that cause L2 learners to fail to mark inflection. Instead, there may be cognitive
constraints, such as those tied to working memory, processing burden, etc., that cause learners to
be less sensitive to feature default errors. Additionally, the systematic use of defaults continues
after learners have acquired and marked appropriate morphological items in the L2. The clearest
example of this comes from the examination of the treatment of 3pl subjects, as learners were
sensitive to the use of 2sg inflection with 3pl subjects, and not sensitive to 3sg inflection used
with 3pl subjects. Finally, the results of this study may suggest that nonnative speakers acquire
inflectional morphology from least to most specified, and that those morphemes acquired early
(defaults) remain problematic for some time. Such behavior has been observed in previous
research, such as the research done by Lopez Prego (2012). In her study, she found that L2
learners tended to perform better on feminine, more marked, items when compared to masculine
items, thereby suggesting that at a certain point in acquisition, errors may not be caused by a

129

failure to acquire specified morphology, but rather may be caused by non-native-like assignment
of features on underspecified items. Thus, even after a robust mental representation has been
constructed, the L2 parser may continue to commit defaulting errors depending on the context.
More central to this dissertation is the relationship between the development of the
representation of an inflectional morpheme and how the parser accesses this representation
during processing. Taken together, the results of the three presented studies suggest that the L2
parser is reliant on default processing strategies when attempting to integrate syntactic processes,
morphosyntactic information, and lexical information simultaneously. Because the parser is less
efficient, the nonnative speakers in this study relied on lexical items either due to the use of L1
processing strategies taken from English (Ellis & Sagarra, 2010; Hopp, 2010) or universal
processing strategies, such as the Lexical Primacy Principle (VanPatten, 2012; VanPatten &
Keating, 2007). Due to this reliance on overt subjects, the nonnative group showed no signs of
defaulting behavior during Experiment Two, as there was no indication that inflection had been
processed at all. This behavior was similar to what was found by Mandell (2013), who also
concluded that L2 learners were reliant on the first subject they encountered to determine the
subject of a subsequent clause. This finding was further bolstered by the results from Experiment
Three, which indicated that overt subjects were facilitative to nonnative processing, as nonnative
speakers slowed down for topic/subject shifts when the shift was indicated by an overt subject.
Thus, the results of the current dissertation do not support hypotheses that argue for defaulting
behavior as being the root cause of nonnative-like-ness, such as the MSIH, beyond those that
may occur during basic feature checking procedures (as seen in Experiment One). Instead, these
results suggest that the failure to process inflection is at least partially tied to the processing
strategies employed by the parser during on-line comprehension. In other words, the parser may

130

choose to disregard the information provided by morphological inflection in favor of resolving
other syntactic, semantic, or discourse functions. As such, this behavior is more consistent with
general cognitive processing difficulties due to reliance on L1 or universal processing strategies
(Ellis & Sagarra, 2010; Hopp, 2010; VanPatten, 2012), rather than systematic difficulties of
accessing inflection in real time.
Importantly, the reliance on these strategies does not necessarily indicate a deficient
parser. Rather, it may indicate that the L2 parser makes use of known and reliable processing
strategies to comprehend sentences in real time. This is similar to what was observed in Hopp
(2010), where he observed that L2 learners showed the ability to make use of inflectional cues
when they were presented in simpler syntax, but failed to do so when they were required to do so
in more complex syntax. Thus, in the case of Experiment Two, the parser becomes overburdened
by the sentence complexity, and it chooses to rely on lexical items rather than morphological
inflection to comprehend sentences in real time. However, the representation of at least some of
these inflections (2sg and 3pl) is available. Importantly, the results of this study do not
necessarily suggest that native-like attainment is impossible, which is consistent with Hopp’s
(2010) proposal. Instead, given the nonnative group’s performance on the first experiment, it
may be possible for nonnative speakers to acquire the ability to process the topic/subject shifts
presented in a native-like way as they become more advanced. That being said, as the parser
becomes overburdened with syntactic, semantic, lexical, and discourse information, L2 learners
may frequently default to the processing strategies described in this dissertation.
A final implication for the current dissertation is the relationship between processing
research and literacy skills. Because English and Spanish share an orthography system,
processing research often takes L2 learners’ reading ability for granted. In other words, it is

131

assumed that a high reading ability in English equates to a high reading ability in Spanish. The
participants in this study were recruited from upper level courses that focused on literary,
cultural, and linguistic topics. Half of them had studied abroad. However, only 22 of the 39
original participants passed a B1 level reading test. This suggests that their reading ability may
not be as automatized as presumed by processing reseach. While the current study cannot
address the automization of literacy skills in L2 Spanish, it is possible that literacy skills—or the
lack thereof—affected nonnatives’ ability to process inflectional morphology.
Limitations
In this dissertation, there are several limitations. As with many L2 studies, this study had
a small sample size. It is therefore possible that a study with more participants at the current level
would show different results than the current dissertation. Furthermore, the current study cannot
make any claims about learners who are not primarily classroom-based (i.e., heritage or
naturalistic language learners). As implied in the previous section, the input that these learners
received may be vastly different from the input received by child heritage language learners or
naturalistic language learners.
Finally, the present study cannot make any generalizations beyond the intermediate B1
reading level. L2 learners who fall below or above this threshold may show vastly different
processing strategies, and may show more- or less-complete acquisition of inflectional
morphology. As previously mentioned, L2 learners in this study demonstrated a pattern of using
3sg as a default, and more research is necessary to determine whether 1sg is also acting a default
at this stage. Furthermore, the current study cannot distinguish between what may be a reading
issue from what may be a processing deficit. That is, it is possible that L2 learners did not behave
like the control group in Experiment One and two, because of a deficit in literacy skills rather

132

than a pure processing deficit. Because of this, a replication of these studies utilizing procedure
that rely on various language skills (i.e., speaking, reading, writing, and listening), may be
beneficial in determining whether L2 learners at this level have representational and/or
processing deficits.
Future Research
The current dissertation offers several avenues for future research. First, the current
dissertation only made use of participants at an intermediate level. Future research should
examine advanced, intermediate, and novice L2 readers to better explain L2 processing strategies
and the development of L2 inflectional morphology. Such research would be of benefit, because
it would show the development of representational, syntactic, and processing behavior over time.
Another avenue of future research related to this is the examination of how literacy skills
affect L2 processing. As previously mentioned, while reading proficiency was controlled in this
study, it is unclear the extent to which literacy skills may have affected processing behavior on
these on-line reading tasks. It is possible that more advanced readers may have vastly different
reading strategies that increase their ability to perceive inflectional morphology, and make use of
these markings in real time. In the reverse, it is also possible to examine whether less proficient
readers demonstrate different behavior from the participants in this study.
A third avenue for future research would be to compare the results of the current study
with results from L2 Spanish learners whose first language is morphologically rich and permits
the use of null subjects. Because the current dissertation only examined L1 English/L2 Spanish
participants, it is not possible to distinguish whether the reliance on lexical items observed in
Experiments Two and Three was an L1 processing strategy, as proposed by Ellis & Sagarra
(2010) and Hopp (2010), or whether this is a universal processing strategy, as proposed by

133

(VanPatten, 1996, 2007; VanPatten & Keating, 2007). For this reason, it is necessary to test
various L1 groups to determine the source of the processing strategies.
Finally, future research may wish to investigate how L2 learners make use of overt and
null subjects, along with inflectional morphology, within the context of the discourse. That is, it
would be of benefit to examine how L2 learners and native speakers resolve topic/subject shifts
within the context of a paragraph or longer text. The current study only examined behavior at the
sentence level, and it is possible that behavior at a discourse level would differ. Eye-tracking
methodology may be one way for such behavior to be examined.
Conclusion
The current dissertation examined the relationship between the representation of
morphological inflection within the L2 interlanguage and how L1 English/B1-level L2 Spanish
speakers made use of these inflections during on-line processing. The results of this dissertation
indicated that the processing of L2 inflectional morphology is influenced by feature
specification, with less-specified forms being subject to defaulting behavior for some time. The
results also indicated that, despite having developed robust mental representations of several
morphemes, these representations were not relied on during real-time processing. These results
suggest that the nonnative parser at this stage of acquisition does not reliably process morphosyntactic cues, and instead relies on lexical items (i.e. overt subjects) to process sentences (Ellis
& Sagarra, 2010; VanPatten, 1996, 2007; 2012). As such, the current dissertation provides
evidence that the L2 parser continues to employ default processing strategies at the intermediate
stage of acquisition that rely on lexical items rather than inflectional morphology during online
comprehension, despite having constructed robust enough mental representations of inflectional
morphemes. Thus, while the L2 parser should not be considered as less effective than the native

134

parser, it employs different strategies that are consistent with the L2 learners’ current
interlanguage and processing capabilities.

135

APPENDICES

136

APPENDIX A

Experiment One Stimuli and Instructions
Thank you for your participation in this experiment. To continue, please press the middle
green button on the keypad in front of you.
In this portion of the experiment, you will read 160 total sentences, presented in pieces.
To reveal each section of the section, you will press the middle green button on the key pad. To
continue, please press the middle green button.
After each sentence, a sentence written in English will appear on the screen. After you
read the sentence, indicate whether you believe the sentence is True (Button A) or False (Button
B) in relation to the sentence you just read using the keypad in front of you. When you select
your answer, a plus sign (+) will appear on the screen. If you must pause at any time, please
pause only when you see the plus sign on the screen (+). You will have the opportunity to
practice with the procedure prior to beginning.
If you have any questions, please ask them now. If not, please press the middle green
button to continue to the practice section.
1. Normalmente \ vamos \ a \ la \ universidad \ por \ la \ mañana.
The people in this sentence are probably students.
A. True
B. False
2. Por \ las \ noches, \ leemos \ algunos \ libros\ y \ bebemos \ agua.
The people in this sentence don’t read.
A. True
B. False
3. Estudiamos \ en \ la \ biblioteca \ mientras \ comemos \ el \ almuerzo.
137

The people in this sentence probably are studying on campus.
A. True
B. False
4. Cuando \ estamos \ en \ casa, \ preparamos \ la \ cena \ juntos.
The people in this sentence eat dinner at fancy restaurants.
A. True
B. False
5. Hablamos \ mucho \ en \ la \ clase \ de \ español.
The people in this sentence are probably speaking Spanish.
A. True
B. False
This concludes the practice section. If you have any other questions, please ask them now. You
will not be permitted to speak or ask questions during the experiment. If you have no further
questions, please press the middle green button to continue to the experiment.
Please press the middle green button to continue to the experiment section.
1. Ahora \ yo \ acabo \ la \ tarea \ de \ español.
Ahora \ yo \ acaba \ la \ tarea \ de\ español.
Ahora \ el chico \ acaba \ la \ tarea \ de \ español.
Ahora \ el chico \ acabo \ la \ tarea\ de \ español.
The person in this sentence is taking a Spanish class.
A. True
B. False
2. En este momento \ yo \ entro \ al \ cuarto \ con \ la llave.
En este momento \ yo \ entra \ al \ cuarto \ con \ la llave.
En este momento \ la chica \ entra \ al \ cuarto \ con \ la llave.
En este momento \ la chica \ entro \ al \ cuarto \ con \ la llave.
The person in this sentence is in danger.
A. True
B. False
138

3. Ahora \ yo \ espera \ el \ autobús \ en \ la calle.
Ahora \ yo \ espero \ el \ autobús \ en \ la calle.
Ahora \ el muchacho \ espera \ el \ autobús \ en \ la calle.
Ahora \ el muchacho \ espero \ el \ autobús \ en \ la calle.
The person in this sentence is waiting for a bus.
A. True
B. False
4. En este momento \ yo \ inyecto \ la \ insulina \ en \ el estómago.
En este momento \ yo \ inyecta \ la \ insulina \ en \ el estómago.
En este momento \ el médico \ inyecta \ la \ insulina \ en \ el estómago.
En este momento \ el médico \ inyecto \ la \ insulina \ en \ el estómago.
The person in this sentence is a driver.
A. True
B. False
5. Ahora \ yo \ limpio \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
Ahora \ yo \ limpia \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
Ahora \ la criada \ limpia \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
Ahora \ la criada \ limpio \ la \ casa \ de \ la cliente.
The person in this sentence is a maid.
A. True
B. False
6. En este momento \ yo \ lleno \ la \ bolsa \ en \ la tienda.
En este momento \ yo \ llena \ la \ bolsa \ en \ la tienda.
En este momento \ el cajero \ llena \ la \ bolsa \ en \ la tienda.
En este momento \ el cajero \ lleno \ la \ bolsa \ en \ la tienda.
The person in this sentence is reading.
A. True
B. False
7. Ahora \ yo \ lloro \ de \ alegría \ en \ la iglesia.
Ahora \ yo \ llora \ de \ alegría \ en \ la iglesia.
Ahora \ la madre \ llora \ de \ alegría \ en \ la iglesia.
139

Ahora \ la madre \ lloro \ de \ alegría \ en \ la iglesia.
The person in this sentence is happy.
A. True
B. False
8. En este momento \ yo \ manejo \ el \ coche \ de \ la compañía.
En este momento \ yo \ maneja \ el \ coche \ de \ la compañía.
En este momento \ el conductor \ maneja \ el \ coche \ de \ la compañía.
En este momento \ el conductor \ manejo \ el \ coche \ de \ la compañía.
The person in this sentence is skydiving.
A. True
B. False
9. Ahora \ yo \ opero \ la \ máquina \ de \ la oficina.
Ahora \ yo \ opera \ la \ máquina \ de \ la oficina.
Ahora \ la secretaria \ opera \ la \ máquina \ de \ la oficina.
Ahora \ la secretaria \ opero \ la \ máquina \ de \ la oficina.
The person in this sentences is a secretary.
A. True
B. False
10. En este momento \ yo \ peino \ el \ cabello \ de \ la cliente.
En este momento \ yo \ peina \ el \ cabello \ de \ la cliente.
En este momento \ el peluquero \ peina \ el \ cabello \ de \ la cliente.
En este momento \ el peluquero \ peino \ el \ cabello \ de \ la cliente.
The person in this sentence works in a library.
A. True
B. False
11. Ahora \ yo \ nombro \ la \ mascota \ de \ mi familia.
Ahora \ yo \ nombra \ la \ mascota \ de \ mi familia.
Ahora \ la tía \ nombra \ la \ mascota \ de \ mi familia.
Ahora \ la tía \ nombro \ la \ mascota \ de \ mi familia.
The family probably just got a new pet.

140

A. True
B. False
12. En este momento \ yo \ monto \ a \ caballo \ en \ la granja.
En este momento \ yo \ monta \ a \ caballo \ en \ la granja.
En este momento \ el vaquero \ monta \ a \ caballo \ en \ la granja.
En este momento \ el vaquero \ monto \ a \ caballo \ en \ la granja.
The person in this sentence is probably in the city.
A. True
B. False
13. Ahora \ yo \ perdono \ al \ hombre \ por \ su crimen.
Ahora \ yo \ perdona \ al \ hombre \ por \ su crimen.
Ahora \ la víctima \ perdona \ al \ hombre \ por \ su crimen.
Ahora \ la víctima \ perdono \ al \ hombre \ por \ su crimen.
Someone in this sentence is forgiving somone.
A. True
B. False
14. En este momento \ yo \ pinto \ un \ cuadro \ de \ la tierra.
En este momento \ yo \ pinta \ un \ cuadro \ de \ la tierra.
En este momento \ el artista \ pinta \ un \ cuadro \ de \ la tierra.
En este momento \ el artista \ pinto \ un \ cuadro \ de \ la tierra.
The person in this sentence is watching Netflix.
A. True
B. False
15. Ahora \ yo \ plancho \ la \ ropa \ de \ la cliente.
Ahora \ yo \ plancha \ la \ ropa \ de \ la cliente.
Ahora \ la mujer \ plancha \ la \ ropa \ de \ la cliente.
Ahora \ la mujer \ plancho \ la \ ropa \ de \ la cliente.
The person in this sentence is ironing clothes.
A. True
B. False
16. En este momento \ yo \ quemo \ la \ comida \ de \ los chicos.
En este momento \ yo \ quema \ la \ comida \ de \ los chicos.
En este momento \ el chef \ quema \ la \ comida \ de \ los chicos.
141

En este momento \ el chef \ quemo \ la \ comida \ de \ los chicos.
The person in this sentence is drinking water.
A. True
B. False
17. Ahora \ yo \ llego \ a \ Detroit \ en \ avión.
Ahora \ yo \ llega \ a \ Detroit \ en \ avión.
Ahora \ la viajera \ llega \ a \ Detroit \ en \ avión.
Ahora \ la viajera \ llego \ a \ Detroit \ en \ avión.
The person in this sentence is traveling.
A. True
B. False
18. En este momento \ yo \ hablo \ con \ Sandra \ en \ la clase.
En este momento \ yo \ habla \ con \ Sandra \ en \ la clase.
En este momento \ el estudiante \ habla \ con \ Sandra \ en \ la clase.
En este momento \ el estudiante \ hablo \ con \ Sandra \ en \ la clase.
The person in this sentence is running a marathon.
A. True
B. False
19. Ahora \ yo \ bailo \ con \ el hombre \ en \ el bar.
Ahora \ yo \ baila \ con \ el hombre\ en \ el bar.
Ahora \ la cantante \ baila \ con \ el hombre\ en \ el bar.
Ahora \ la cantante \ bailo \ con \ el hombre \ en \ el bar.
The person in this sentence can probably hear music.
A. True
B. False
20. En este momento \ yo \ ceno \ en \ Five Guys \ con \ unos chicos.
En este momento \ yo \ cena \ en \ Five Guys \ con \ unos chicos.
En este momento \ el tío \ cena \ en \ Five Guys \ con \ unos chicos.
En este momento \ el tío \ ceno \ en \ Five Guys \ con \ unos chicos.
The person in this sentence is exercising.
A. True
B. False
142

21. Ahora \ yo \ nado \ en \ IM West \ con \ los amigos.
Ahora \ yo \ nada \ en \ IM West \ con \ los amigos.
Ahora \ la atleta \ nada \ en \ IM West \ con \ los amigos.
Ahora \ la atleta \ nado \ en \ IM West \ con \ los amigos.
The person in this sentence is in a pool.
A. True
B. False
22. En este momento \ yo \ visito \ las \ ruinas \ en \ México.
En este momento \ yo \ visita \ las \ ruinas \ en México.
En este momento \ el turista \ visita \ las \ ruinas \ en \ México.
En este momento \ el turista \ visito \ las \ ruinas \ en \ México.
The person in this sentence is getting their driver's license.
A. True
B. False
23. Ahora \ yo \ saco \ fotos \ de \ las \ vacaciones \ en Brasil.
Ahora \ yo \ saca \ fotos \ de \ las \ vacaciones \ en Brasil.
Ahora \ la fotógrafa \ saca \ fotos \ de \ las \ vacaciones \ en Brasil.
Ahora \ la fotógrafa \ saco \ fotos \ de \ las \ vacaciones \ en Brasil.
The person in this sentence has a camera.
A. True
B. False
24. En este momento \ yo \ paseo \ por \ la \ plaza \ mayor.
En este momento \ yo \ pasea \ por \ la \ plaza \ mayor.
En este momento \ el chico \ pasea \ por \ la \ plaza \ mayor.
En este momento \ el chico \ paseo \ por \ la \ plaza \ mayor.
The person in this sentence is in their house.
A. True
B. False
25. Ahora \ yo \ toco \ el \ piano \ en \ el hotel.
Ahora \ yo \ toca \ el \ piano \ en \ el hotel.
143

Ahora \ la música \ toca \ el \ piano \ en \ el hotel.
Ahora \ la música \ toco \ el \ piano \ en \ el hotel.
The person in this sentence is a musician.
A. True
B. False

26. En este momento \ yo \ bajo \ el \ volumen \ de \ la música.
En este momento \ yo \ baja \ el \ volumen \ de \ la música.
En este momento \ el padre \ baja \ el \ volumen \ de \ la música.
En este momento \ el padre \ bajo \ el \ volumen \ de \ la música.
The person in this sentence is turning the volume up.
A. True
B. False
27. Ahora \ yo \ pago \ el \ alquiler \ al \ dueño.
Ahora \ yo \ paga \ el \ alquiler \ al \ dueño.
Ahora \ la inquilina \ paga \ el \ alquiler \ al \ dueño.
Ahora \ la inquilina \ pago \ el \ alquiler \ al \ dueño.
Someone in this sentence is a tenant.
A. True
B. False
28. En este momento \ yo \ descargo \ la \ música \ en \ la biblioteca.
En este momento \ yo \ descarga \ la \ música \ en \ la biblioteca.
En este momento \ el joven \ descarga \ la \ música \ en \ la biblioteca.
En este momento \ el joven \ descargo \ la \ música \ en \ la biblioteca.
The person in this sentence is at home.
A. True
B. False
29. Ahora \ yo \ explico \ las \ razones \ de \ la mujer.
Ahora \ yo \ explica \ las \ razones \ de \ la mujer.
Ahora \ la maestra \ explica \ las \ razones \ de \ la mujer.
144

Ahora \ la maestra \ explico \ las \ razones \ de \ la mujer.
Someone in this sentence is explaining something.
A. True
B. False
30. En este momento \ yo \ miro \ los \ videos \ en \ YouTube.
En este momento \ yo \ mira \ los \ videos \ en \ YouTube.
En este momento \ el profesor \ mira \ los \ videos \ en \ YouTube.
En este momento \ el profesor \ miro \ los \ videos \ en \ YouTube.
The person in this sentence playing a game.
A. True
B. False
31. Ahora \ yo \ gasto \ el \ dinero \ en \ unas tiendas.
Ahora \ yo \ gasta \ el \ dinero \ en \ unas tiendas.
Ahora \ la cliente \ gasta \ el \ dinero \ en \ unas tiendas.
Ahora \ la cliente \ gasto \ el \ dinero \ en \ unas tiendas.
The person in this sentence is spending money.
A. True
B. False
32. En este momento \ yo \ gano \ el \ partido \ de \ fútbol.
En este momento \ yo \ gana \ el \ partido \ de \ fútbol.
En este momento \ el jugador \ gana \ el \ partido \ de \ fútbol.
En este momento \ el jugador \ gano \ el \ partido \ de \ fútbol.
The person in this sentence is reading a book.
A. True
B. False
33. Ahora \ yo \ peleo \ al \ niño \ en \ la casa.
Ahora \ yo \ pelea \ al \ niño \ en \ la casa.
Ahora \ la niña \ pelea \ al \ niño \ en \ la casa.
Ahora \ la niña \ peleo \ al \ niño \ en \ la casa.

145

Someone in this sentence is fighting.
A. True
B. False
34. En este momento \ yo \ ataco \ al \ hombre \ en \ la calle.
En este momento \ yo \ ataca \ al \ hombre \ en \ la calle.
En este momento \ el ladrón \ ataca \ al \ hombre \ en \ la calle.
En este momento \ el ladrón \ ataco \ al \ hombre \ en \ la calle.
The person in this sentence is flying.
A. True
B. False
35. Ahora \ yo \ enseño \ las \ palabras \ a \ los niños.
Ahora \ yo \ enseña \ las \ palabras \ a \ los niños.
Ahora \ la maestra \ enseña \ las \ palabras \ a \ los niños.
Ahora \ la maestra \ enseño \ las \ palabras \ a \ los niños.
The person in this sentence is a teacher.
A. True
B. False
36. En este momento \ yo \ presto \ los \ lápices \ a \ los estudiantes.
En este momento \ yo \ presta \ los lápices \ a \ los estudiantes.
En este momento \ el niño \ presta \ los \ lápices \ a \ los estudiantes.
En este momento \ el niño \ presto \ los \ lápices \ a \ los estudiantes.
Someone in this sentence is sending a text message.
A. True
B. False
37. Ahora \ yo \ guardo \ las \ joyas \ de \ la reina.
Ahora \ yo \ guarda \ las \ joyas \ de \ la reina.
Ahora \ la soldada \ guarda \ las \ joyas \ de \ la reina.
Ahora \ la soldada \ guardo \ las \ joyas \ de \ la reina.
The person in this sentence works for a queen.

146

A. True
B. False
38. En este momento \ yo \ busco \ los \ ensayos \ de \ los estudiantes.
En este momento \ yo \ busca \ los \ ensayos \ de \ los estudiantes.
En este momento \ el director \ busca \ los \ ensayos \ de \ los estudiantes.
En este momento \ el director \ busco \ los \ ensayos \ de \ los estudiantes.
The person in this sentence is a train conductor.
A. True
B. False
39. Ahora \ yo \ canto \ las \ canciones \ de \ Broadway.
Ahora \ yo \ canta \ las canciones \ de \ Broadway.
Ahora \ la actriz \ canta \ las \ canciones \ de \ Broadway.
Ahora \ la actriz \ canto \ las \ canciones \ de \ Broadway.
The person in this sentence is probably a fan of musicals.
A. True
B. False
40. En este momento \ yo \ arreglo \ las \ cosas \ en \ el escritorio.
En este momento \ yo \ arregla \ las \ cosas \ en \ el escritorio.
En este momento \ el jefe \ arregla \ las \ cosas \ en \ el escritorio.
En este momento \ el jefe \ arreglo \ las \ cosas \ en \ el escritorio.
The person in this sentence is in the kitchen.
A. True
B. False
41. Ahora \ tú \ alquilas \ la \ casa \ en \ en centro.
Ahora \ tú \ alquilan \ la \ casa \ en \ en centro.
Ahora \ los chicos \ alquilan \ la \ casa \ en \ en centro.
Ahora \ los chicos \ alquilas \ la \ casa \ en \ en centro.
Someone in this sentence is renting a house.
A. True
B. False

147

42. En este momento \ tú \ reparas \ el \ piso\ de \ los apartamentos.
En este momento \ tú \ reparan \ el \ piso\ de \ los apartamentos.
En este momento \ las chicas \ reparan \ el \ piso\ de \ los apartamentos.
En este momento \ las chicas \ reparas \ el \ piso\ de \ los apartamentos.
The ceiling in this sentence is being repaired.
A. True
B. False
43. Ahora \ tú \ trabajas \ en \ el \ ensayo \ para la clase.
Ahora \ tú \ trabajan \ en \ el \ ensayo \ para la clase.
Ahora \ los estudiantes \ trabajan \ en \ el \ ensayo \ para la clase.
Ahora \ los estudiantes \ trabajas \ en \ el \ ensayo \ para la clase.
This sentence is about a writing assignment.
A. True
B. False
44. En este momento \ tú \ terminas \ la \ construcción \ de \ la casa.
En este momento \ tú \ terminan \ la \ construcción \ de \ la casa.
En este momento \ los obreros \ terminan \ la \ construcción \ de \ la casa.
En este momento \ los obreros \ terminas \ la \ construcción \ de \ la casa.
In this sentence, somone is making a table.
A. True
B. False
45. Ahora \ tú \ recitas \ el \ poema \ de \ España.
Ahora \ tú \ recitan \ el \ poema \ de \ España.
Ahora \ las poetas \ recitan \ el \ poema \ de \ España.
Ahora \ las poetas \ recitas \ el \ poema \ de \ España.
The poem is probably written in Spanish.
A. True
B. False
46. En este momento \ tú \ gritas \ los \ nombres \ de \ los chicos.
En este momento \ tú \ gritan \ los \ nombres \ de \ los chicos.
En este momento \ el agente \ gritan \ los \ nombres \ de \ los chicos.
En este momento \ el agente \ gritas \ los \ nombres \ de \ los chicos.
The person in this sentence is speaking softly.
A. True
148

B. False
47. Ahora \ tú \ pateas \ la \ pelota \ con \ el pie.
Ahora \ tú \ patean \ la \ pelota \ con \ el pie.
Ahora \ las atletas \ patean \ la \ pelota \ con \ el pie.
Ahora \ las atletas \ pateas \ la \ pelota \ con \ el pie.
Someone is playing a sport in this sentence.
A. True
B. False
48. En este momento \ tú \ grabas \ los \ sonidos \ de \ los pájaros.
En este momento \ tú \ graban \ los \ sonidos \ de \ los pájaros.
En este momento \ los científicos \ graban \ los \ sonidos \ de \ los pájaros.
En este momento \ los científicos \ grabas \ los \ sonidos \ de \ los pájaros.
The birds are silent in this sentence.
A. True
B. False
49. Ahora \ tú \ fumas \ los \ cigarros \ en \ el coche.
Ahora \ tú \ fuman \ los \ cigarros \ en \ el coche.
Ahora \ las conductoras \ fuman \ los \ cigarros \ en \ el coche.
Ahora \ las conductoras \ fumas \ los \ cigarros \ en \ el coche.
Someone in this sentence has an unhealthy habit.
A. True
B. False
50. En este momento \ tú \ escuchas \ la \ música \ en \ el iPod.
En este momento \ tú \ escuchan \ la \ música \ en \ el iPod.
En este momento \ los niños \ escuchan \ la \ música \ en \ el iPod.
En este momento \ los niños \ escuchas \ la \ música \ en \ el iPod.
The person in this sentence is using a Microsoft product.
A. True
B. False
51. Ahora \ tú \ evitas \ la \ discusión \ con \ el profesor.
Ahora \ tú \ evitan \ la \ discusión \ con \ el profesor.
Ahora \ las estudiantes \ evitan \ la \ discusión \ con \ el profesor.
Ahora \ las estudiantes \ evitas \ la \ discusión \ con \ el profesor.
A person in this sentence probably works at the university.
A. True
149

B. False
52. En este momento \ tú \ examinas \ el \ trabajo \ de \ la estudiante.
En este momento \ tú \ examinan \ el \ trabajo \ de \ la estudiante.
En este momento \ los maestros \ examinan \ el \ trabajo \ de \ la estudiante.
En este momento \ los maestros \ examinas \ el \ trabajo \ de \ la estudiante.
A person in this sentence is probably a doctor.
A. True
B. False
53. Ahora \ tú \ expresas \ la \ opinión \ en \ un párrafo.
Ahora \ tú \ expresan \ la \ opinión \ en \ un párrafo.
Ahora \ las autoras \ expresan \ la \ opinión \ en \ un párrafo.
Ahora \ las autoras \ expresas \ la \ opinión \ en \ un párrafo.
This person is probably writing an editorial piece.
A. True
B. False
54. En este momento \ tú \ llevas \ los \ libros \ a \ la clase.
En este momento \ tú \ llevan \ los \ libros \ a \ la clase.
En este momento \ los hombres \ llevan \ los \ libros \ a \ la clase.
En este momento \ los hombres \ llevas \ los \ libros \ a \ la clase.
This sentence is about going to the bank.
A. True
B. False
55. Ahora \ tú \ consideras \ la \ conclusión \ del \ juez.
Ahora \ tú \ consideran \ la \ conclusión \ del \ juez.
Ahora \ las abogadas \ consideran \ la \ conclusión \ del \ juez.
Ahora \ las abogadas \ consideras \ la \ conclusión \ del \ juez.
The conclusion was reached by the judge.
A. True
B. False
56. En este momento \ tú \ observas \ al \ profesor \ en \ la clase.
En este momento \ tú \ observan \ al \ profesor \ en \ la clase.
En este momento \ los directores \ observan \ al \ profesor \ en \ la clase.
En este momento \ los directores \ observas \ al \ profesor \ en \ la clase.
The professor is in their office.
A. True
150

B. False
57. Ahora \ tú \ aceptas \ el \ dinero \ del \ cliente.
Ahora \ tú \ aceptan \ el \ dinero \ del \ cliente.
Ahora \ las cajeras \ aceptan \ el \ dinero \ del \ cliente.
Ahora \ las cajeras \ aceptas \ el \ dinero \ del \ cliente.
Somebody in this sentence received money.
A. True
B. False
58. En este momento \ tú \ utilizas \ la \ máquina \ de \ fax.
En este momento \ tú \ utilizan \ la \ máquina \ de \ fax.
En este momento \ los secretarios \ utilizan \ la \ máquina \ de \ fax.
En este momento \ los secretarios \ utilizas \ la \ máquina \ de \ fax.
Somebody in this sentence is eating ice cream.
A. True
B. False
59. Ahora \ tú \ olvidas \ los \ consejos \ de \ los padres.
Ahora \ tú \ olvidan \ los \ consejos \ de \ los padres.
Ahora \ las hijas \ olvidan \ los \ consejos \ de \ los padres.
Ahora \ las hijas \ olvidas \ los \ consejos \ de \ los padres.
Somebody in this sentence gave advice.
A. True
B. False
60. En este momento \ tú \ compras \ los \ regalos \ para \ la hija.
En este momento \ tú \ compran \ los \ regalos \ para \ la hija.
En este momento \ los padres \ compran \ los \ regalos \ para \ la hija.
En este momento \ los padres \ compras \ los \ regalos \ para \ la hija.
The person in this sentence is watching TV.
A. True
B. False
61. Ahora \ tú \ imaginas \ las \ escenas \ de \ la película.
Ahora \ tú \ imaginan \ las \ escenas \ de \ la película.
Ahora \ las directoras \ imaginan \ las \ escenas \ de \ la película.
Ahora \ las directoras \ imaginas \ las \ escenas \ de \ la película.
Somebody in this sentence is imagining something.
151

A. True
B. False
62. En este momento \ tú \ indicas \ los \ cambios \ de \ la autora.
En este momento \ tú \ indican \ los \ cambios \ de \ la autora.
En este momento \ los editores \ indican \ los \ cambios \ de \ la autora.
En este momento \ los editores \ indicas \ los \ cambios \ de \ la autora.
Somebody in this sentence is reading a book.
A. True
B. False
63. Ahora \ tú \ preparas \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños.
Ahora \ tú \ preparan \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños.
Ahora \ las madres \ preparan \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños
Ahora \ las madres \ preparas \ la \ cena \ para \ los niños.

.

Somebody in this sentence is cooking for someone else.
A. True
B. False
64. En este momento \ tú \ representas \ los \ grupos \ de \ la universidad.
En este momento \ tú \ representan \ los \ grupos \ de \ la universidad.
En este momento \ los líderes \ representan \ los \ grupos \ de \ la universidad.
En este momento \ los líderes \ representas \ los \ grupos \ de \ la universidad.
Somebody in this sentence is buying things at the mall.
A. True
B. False
65. Ahora \ tú \ colocas \ las \ botellas \ en \ el bar.
Ahora \ tú \ colocan \ las \ botellas \ en \ el bar.
Ahora \ las camareras \ colocan \ las \ botellas \ en \ el bar.
Ahora \ las camareras \ colocas \ las \ botellas \ en \ el bar.
Somebody in this sentence is near liquor.
A. True
B. False
66. En este momento \ tú \ lanzas \ los \ insultos \ a \ la jefa.
En este momento \ tú \ lanzan \ los \ insultos \ a \ la jefa.
En este momento \ los empleados \ lanzan \ los \ insultos \ a \ la jefa.
152

En este momento \ los empleados \ lanzas \ los \ insultos \ a \ la jefa.
Somebody in this sentence is being kind.
A. True
B. False
67. Ahora \ tú \ actúas \ en \ obras \ de \ Shakespeare.
Ahora \ tú \ actúan \ en \ obras \ de \ Shakespeare.
Ahora \ las actrices \ actúan \ en \ obras \ de \ Shakespeare.
Ahora \ las actrices \ actúas \ en \ obras \ de \ Shakespeare.
Somebody in this sentence is an actor.
A. True
B. False
68. En este momento \ tú \ inicias \ el \ partido \ de \ fútbol americano.
En este momento \ tú \ inician \ el \ partido \ de \ fútbol americano.
En este momento \ los árbitros \ inician \ el \ partido \ de \ fútbol americano.
En este momento \ los árbitros \ inicias \ el \ partido \ de \ fútbol americano.
The person in this sentence is in a movie theater.
A. True
B. False
69. Ahora \ tú \ mandas \ las \ cartas \ a \ los parientes.
Ahora \ tú \ mandan \ las \ cartas \ a \ los parientes.
Ahora \ las profesoras \ mandan \ las \ cartas \ a \ los parientes.
Ahora \ las profesoras \ mandas \ las \ cartas \ a \ los parientes.
The person in this sentence is sending letters.
A. True
B. False
70. En este momento \ tú \ dejas \ las \ llaves \ en \ la mesa.
En este momento \ tú \ dejan \ las \ llaves \ en \ la mesa.
En este momento \ los empleados \ dejan \ las \ llaves \ en \ la mesa.
En este momento \ los empleados \ dejas \ las \ llaves \ en \ la mesa.
In this sentence, the keys are on the floor.
A. True
B. False
71. Ahora \ tú \ cancelas \ los \ vuelos \ a \ Europa.
Ahora \ tú \ cancelan \ los \ vuelos \ a \ Europa.
153

Ahora \ las azafatas \ cancelan \ los \ vuelos \ a \ Europa.
Ahora \ las azafatas \ cancelan \ los \ vuelos \ a \ Europa.
The person in this sentence is cancelling flights.
A. True
B. False
72. En este momento \ tú \ dañas \ las \ plantas \ en \ el jardín.
En este momento \ tú \ dañan \ las \ plantas \ en \ el jardín.
En este momento \ los chicos \ dañan \ las \ plantas \ en \ el jardín.
En este momento \ los chicos \ dañas \ las \ plantas \ en \ el jardín.
The person in this sentence is in a garage.
A. True
B. False
73. Ahora \ tú \ envías \ el \ cheque \ a \ los obreros.
Ahora \ tú \ envían \ el \ cheque \ a \ los obreros.
Ahora \ las dueñas \ envían \ el \ cheque \ a \ los obreros.
Ahora \ las dueñas \ envías \ el \ cheque \ a \ los obreros.
The person in this sentence is paying someone.
A. True
B. False
74. En este momento \ tú \ viajas \ por \ Europa \ y \ Asia.
En este momento \ tú \ viajan \ por \ Europa \ y \ Asia.
En este momento \ los jóvenes \ viajan \ por \ Europa \ y \ Asia.
En este momento \ los jóvenes \ viajas \ por \ Europa \ y \ Asia.
The person in this sentence is in Africa.
A. True
B. False
75. Ahora \ tú \ piensas \ en \ algunos \ temas \ para la clase.
Ahora \ tú \ piensan \ en \ algunos \ temas \ para la clase.
Ahora \ las maestras \ piensan \ en \ algunos \ temas \ para la clase.
Ahora \ las maestras \ piensas \ en \ algunos \ temas \ para la clase.
The person in this sentence is thinking.
A. True
B. False
76. En este momento \ tú \ pruebas \ los \ pasteles \ del \ chef.
154

En este momento \ tú \ prueban \ los \ pasteles \ del \ chef.
En este momento \ los novios \ prueban \ los \ pasteles \ del \ chef.
En este momento \ los novios \ pruebas \ los \ pasteles \ del \ chef.
The person in this sentence is eating meat.
A. True
B. False
77. Ahora \ tú \ firmas \ los \ contratos \ de \ la compañía.
Ahora \ tú \ firman \ los \ contratos \ de \ la compañía.
Ahora \ las abogadas \ firman \ los \ contratos \ de \ la compañía.
Ahora \ las abogadas \ firmas \ los \ contratos \ de \ la compañía.
The person in this sentence is signing an agreement.
A. True
B. False
78. En este momento \ tú \ das \ los \ paquetes \ a \ la cartera.
En este momento \ tú \ dan \ los \ paquetes \ a \ la cartera.
En este momento \ los vecinos \ dan \ los \ paquetes \ a \ la cartera.
En este momento \ los vecinos \ das \ los \ paquetes \ a \ la cartera.
The person in this sentence is emailing someone.
A. True
B. False
79. Ahora \ tú \ copias \ las \ pinturas \ de \ Picasso.
Ahora \ tú \ copian \ las \ pinturas \ de \ Picasso.
Ahora \ los estudiantes \ copian \ las \ pinturas \ de \ Picasso.
Ahora \ los estudiantes \ copias \ las \ pinturas \ de \ Picasso.
The person in this sentence is copying art.
A. True
B. False
80. En este momento \ tú \ cuentas \ el \ dinero \ en \ el banco.
En este momento \ tú \ cuentan \ el \ dinero \ en \ el banco.
En este momento \ los maestros \ cuentan \ el \ dinero \ en \ el banco.
En este momento \ los maestros \ cuentas \ el \ dinero \ en \ el banco.
The person in this sentence is playing on their cellphone.
A. True
B. False
81. Ahora \ el padre \ termina \ el \ juego \ con \ los chicos.
Ahora \ el padre \ terminan \ el \ juego \ con \ los chicos.
155

Ahora \ los padres \ terminan \ el \ juego \ con \ los chicos.
Ahora \ los padres \ termina \ el \ juego \ con \ los chicos.
In this sentence, there is a person playing a game.
A. True
B. False
82. En este momento \ la chica \ necesita \ la \ droga \ de \ la farmacia.
En este momento \ la chica \ necesitan \ la \ droga \ de \ la farmacia.
En este momento \ las chicas \ necesitan \ la \ droga \ de \ la farmacia.
En este momento \ las chicas \ necesita \ la \ droga \ de \ la farmacia.
In this sentence, there is a hair dresser.
A. True
B. False
83. Ahora \ el maestro \ cambia \ las \ frases \ del \ párrafo.
Ahora \ el maestro \ cambian \ las \ frases \ del \ párrafo.
Ahora \ los maestros \ cambian \ las \ frases \ del \ párrafo.
Ahora \ los maestros \ cambia \ las \ frases \ del \ párrafo.
In this sentence, there is a person that is changing something.
A. True
B. False
84. En este momento \ la jefa \ presenta \ las \ ideas \ a \ los clientes.
En este momento \ la jefa \ presentan \ las \ ideas \ a \ los clientes.
En este momento \ las jefas \ presentan \ las \ ideas \ a \ los clientes.
En este momento \ las jefas \ presenta \ las \ ideas \ a \ los clientes.
In this sentence, there is a person that is baking a cake.
A. True
B. False
85. Ahora \ el cliente \ considera \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
Ahora \ el cliente \ consideran \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
Ahora \ los clientes \ consideran \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
Ahora \ los clientes \ considera \ la \ oferta \ de \ los jefes.
In this sentence, there is a person that is considering an offer.
A. True
B. False
86. En este momento \ la pilota \ acelera \ el \ avión \ en \ la pista.
En este momento \ la pilota \ aceleran \ el \ avión \ en \ la pista.
En este momento \ las pilotas \ aceleran \ el \ avión \ en \ la pista.
156

En este momento \ las pilotas \ acelera \ el \ avión \ en \ la pista.
In this sentence, there is a person that is slowing a car down.
A. True
B. False
87. Ahora \ el maestro \ aclara \ los \ puntos \ en \ la tarea.
Ahora \ el maestro \ aclaran \ los \ puntos \ en \ la tarea.
Ahora \ los maestros \ aclaran \ los \ puntos \ en \ la tarea.
Ahora \ los maestros \ aclara \ los \ puntos \ en \ la tarea.
In this sentence, there is homework.
A. True
B. False
88. En este momento \ la chica \ agarra \ el \ papel \ de \ su compañero.
En este momento \ la chica \ agarran \ el \ papel \ de \ su compañero.
En este momento \ las chicas \ agarran \ el \ papel \ de \ su compañero.
En este momento \ las chicas \ agarra \ el \ papel \ de \ su compañero.
In this sentence, there is a person who is typing a paper.
A. True
B. False
89. Ahora \ el agente \ determina \ las \ rutas \ de \ los ladrones.
Ahora \ el agente \ determinan \ las \ rutas \ de \ los ladrones.
Ahora \ los agentes \ determinan \ las \ rutas \ de \ los ladrones.
Ahora \ los agentes \ determina \ las \ rutas \ de \ los ladrones.
In this sentence, there is a person who stole something.
A. True
B. False
90. En este momento \ la mujer \ deposita \ el \ dinero \ en \ el banco.
En este momento \ la mujer \ depositan \ el \ dinero \ en \ el banco.
En este momento \ las mujeres \ depositan \ el \ dinero \ en \ el banco.
En este momento \ las mujeres \ deposita \ el \ dinero \ en \ el banco.
In this sentence, there is a person who is spending money.
A. True
B. False
91. Ahora \ el hombre \ inspecciona \ el \ coche \ en \ el aeropuerto.
Ahora \ el hombre \ inspeccionan \ el \ coche \ en \ el aeropuerto.
Ahora \ los hombres \ inspeccionan \ el \ coche \ en \ el aeropuerto.
Ahora \ los hombres \ inspecciona \ el \ coche \ en \ el aeropuerto.
157

In this sentence, there is a person who examining a car.
A. True
B. False
92. En este momento \ el guardia \ apaga \ las \ luces \ en \ el edificio.
En este momento \ el guardia \ apagan \ las \ luces \ en \ el edificio.
En este momento \ los guardias \ apagan \ las \ luces \ en \ el edificio.
En este momento \ los guardias \ apaga \ las \ luces \ en \ el edificio.
In this sentence, there is a person who is swimming.
A. True
B. False
93. Ahora \ la artista \ aprecia \ el \ arte \ en \ el museo.
Ahora \ la artista \ aprecian \ el \ arte \ en \ el museo.
Ahora \ las artistas \ aprecian \ el \ arte \ en \ el museo.
Ahora \ las artistas \ aprecia \ el \ arte \ en \ el museo.
In this sentence, there is a person who is in a museum.
A. True
B. False
94. En este momento \ el niño \ aprueba \ el \ examen \ de \ la clase.
En este momento \ el niño \ aprueban \ el \ examen \ de \ la clase.
En este momento \ los niños \ aprueban \ el \ examen \ de \ la clase.
En este momento \ los niños \ aprueba \ el \ examen \ de \ la clase.
In this sentence, there is a person who wrote a test.
A. True
B. False
95. Ahora \ la madre \ busca \ las \ llaves \ de \ la puerta.
Ahora \ la madre \ buscan \ las \ llaves \ de \ la puerta.
Ahora \ las madres \ buscan \ las \ llaves \ de \ la puerta.
Ahora \ las madres \ busca \ las \ llaves \ de \ la puerta.
In this sentence, there is a person who is looking for keys.
A. True
B. False
96. En este momento \ el judío \ celebra \ la \ fiesta \ de \ las luces.
En este momento \ el judío \ celebran \ la \ fiesta \ de \ las luces.
En este momento \ los judíos \ celebran \ la \ fiesta \ de \ las luces.
En este momento \ los judíos \ celebra \ la \ fiesta \ de \ las luces.

158

In this sentence, there is a person who is drinking water.
A. True
B. False
97. Ahora \ la niña \ charla \ con \ amigos \ en \ la cafetería.
Ahora \ la niña \ charlan \ con \ amigos \ en \ la cafetería.
Ahora \ las niñas \ charlan \ con \ amigos \ en \ la cafetería.
Ahora \ las niñas \ charla \ con \ amigos \ en \ la cafetería.
In this sentence, there is a person who is speaking with friends.
A. True
B. False
98. En este momento \ el chef \ cocina \ la \ cena \ en \ el restaurante.
En este momento \ el chef \ cocinan \ la \ cena \ en \ el restaurante.
En este momento \ los chefs \ cocinan \ la \ cena \ en \ el restaurante.
En este momento \ los chefs \ cocina \ la \ cena \ en \ el restaurante.
In this sentence, there is a person who is eating food.
A. True
B. False
99. Ahora \ la guía \ cuenta \ la \ historia \ a \ las turistas.
Ahora \ la guía \ cuentan \ la \ historia \ a \ las turistas.
Ahora \ las guías \ cuentan \ la \ historia \ a \ las turistas.
Ahora \ las guías \ cuenta \ la \ historia \ a \ las turistas.
In this sentence, there is a person who is acting as a guide.
A. True
B. False
100.
En este momento \ el abogado \ declara \ la \ verdad \ en \ la corte.
En este momento \ el abogado \ declaran \ la \ verdad \ en \ la corte.
En este momento \ los abogados \ declaran \ la \ verdad \ en \ la corte.
En este momento \ los abogados \ declara \ la \ verdad \ en \ la corte.
In this sentence, there is a person who is lying.
A. True
B. False
101.
Ahora \ la maestra \ demuestra \ el \ ejemplo \ en \ la pantalla.
Ahora \ la maestra \ demuestran \ el \ ejemplo \ en \ la pantalla.
Ahora \ las maestras \ demuestran \ el \ ejemplo \ en \ la pantalla.
Ahora \ las maestras \ demuestra \ el \ ejemplo \ en \ la pantalla.
In this sentence, there is a person who is showing an example.
159

A. True
B. False
102.
En este momento \ el artista \ dibuja \ las \ figuras \ en \ la clase de arte.
En este momento \ el artista \ dibujan \ las \ figuras \ en \ la clase de arte.
En este momento \ los artistas \ dibujan \ las \ figuras \ en \ la clase de arte.
En este momento \ los artistas \ dibuja \ las \ figuras\ en \ la clase de arte.
In this sentence, there is a person who is selling art.
A. True
B. False
103.
Ahora \ la soldada \ ejecuta \ la \ orden \ de \ los tenientes.
Ahora \ la soldada \ ejecutan \ la \ orden \ de \ los tenientes.
Ahora \ las soldadas \ ejecutan \ la \ orden \ de \ los tenientes.
Ahora \ las soldadas \ ejecuta \ la \ orden \ de \ los tenientes.
In this sentence, there is a person who is part of the army.
A. True
B. False
104.
En este momento \ el chico \ empieza \ el \ libro \ de \ JK Rowling.
En este momento \ el chico \ empiezan \ el \ libro \ de \ JK Rowling.
En este momento \ los chicos \ empiezan \ el \ libro \ de \ JK Rowling.
En este momento \ los chicos \ empieza \ el \ libro \ de \ JK Rowling.
In this sentence, there is a person who is writing a book.
A. True
B. False
105.
Ahora \ la mujer \ escucha \ la \ música \ en \ la radio.
Ahora \ la mujer \ escuchan \ la \ música \ en \ la radio.
Ahora \ las mujeres \ escuchan \ la \ música \ en \ la radio.
Ahora \ las mujeres \ escucha \ la \ música \ en \ la radio.
In this sentence, there is a person who hears music.
A. True
B. False
106.
En este momento \ el maestro \ explica \ los \ errores \ más \ comunes.
En este momento \ el maestro \ explican \ los \ errores \ más \ comunes.
En este momento \ los maestros \ explican \ los \ errores \ más \ comunes.
En este momento \ los maestros \ explica \ los \ errores \ más \ comunes.
In this sentence, there is a person who is running a business.
A. True
160

B. False
107.
Ahora \ la doctora \ expresa \ el \ pésame \ a \ la familia.
Ahora \ la doctora \ expresan \ el \ pésame \ a \ la familia.
Ahora \ las doctoras \ expresan \ el \ pésame \ a \ la familia.
Ahora \ las doctoras \ expresa \ el \ pésame \ a \ la familia.
In this sentence, there is a person who is a doctor.
A. True
B. False
108.
En este momento \ el atleta \ levanta \ las \ pesas \ en \ el gimnasio.
En este momento \ el atleta \ levantan \ las \ pesas \ en \ el gimnasio.
En este momento \ los atletas \ levantan \ las \ pesas \ en \ el gimnasio.
En este momento \ los atletas \ levanta \ las \ pesas \ en \ el gimnasio.
In this sentence, there is a person who is running on a treadmill.
A. True
B. False
109.
Ahora \ la taxista \ maneja \ el \ auto \ por \ la ciudad.
Ahora \ la taxista \ manejan \ el \ auto \ por \ la ciudad.
Ahora \ las taxistas \ manejan \ el \ auto \ por \ la ciudad.
Ahora \ las taxistas \ maneja \ el \ auto \ por \ la ciudad.
In this sentence, there is a person who drives for a living.
A. True
B. False
110.
En este momento \ el maestro \ marca \ los \ errores \ en \ el examen.
En este momento \ el maestro \ marcan \ los \ errores \ en \ el examen.
En este momento \ los maestros \ marcan \ los \ errores \ en \ el examen.
En este momento \ los maestros \ marca \ los \ errores \ en \ el examen.
In this sentence, there is a person who is taking an exam.
A. True
B. False
111.
Ahora \ la pirata \ navega \ el \ barco \ por \ el océano.
Ahora \ la pirata \ navegan \ el \ barco \ por \ el océano.
Ahora \ las piratas \ navegan \ el \ barco \ por \ el océano.
Ahora \ las piratas \ navega \ el \ barco \ por \ el océano.
In this sentence, there is a person who is sailing.
A. True
B. False
161

112.
En este momento \ el cazador \ observa \ el \ animal \ en \ el bosque.
En este momento \ el cazador \ observan \ el \ animal \ en \ el bosque.
En este momento \ los cazadores \ observan \ el \ animal \ en \ el bosque.
En este momento \ los cazadores \ observa \ el \ animal \ en \ el bosque.
In this sentence, there is an animal in a zoo.
A. True
B. False
113.
Ahora \ la chica \ practica \ el \ piano \ con \ su tutor.
Ahora \ la chica \ practican \ el \ piano \ con \ su tutor.
Ahora \ las chicas \ practican \ el \ piano \ con \ su tutor.
Ahora \ las chicas \ practica \ el \ piano \ con \ su tutor.
In this sentence, there is a person who is playing an instrument.
A. True
B. False
114.
En este momento \ el cajero \ presenta \ las \ ofertas \ a \ los compradores.
En este momento \ el cajero \ presentan \ las \ ofertas \ a \ los compradores.
En este momento \ los cajeros \ presentan \ las \ ofertas \ a \ los compradores.
En este momento \ los cajeros \ presenta \ las \ ofertas \ a \ los compradores.
In this sentence, there is a person who is baking.
A. True
B. False
115.
Ahora \ la criada \ prepara \ el \ cuarto \ en \ el hotel.
Ahora \ la criada \ preparan \ el \ cuarto \ en \ el hotel.
Ahora \ las criadas \ preparan \ el \ cuarto \ en \ el hotel.
Ahora \ las criadas \ prepara \ el \ cuarto \ en \ el hotel.
In this sentence, there is a person who works in a hotel.
A. True
B. False
116.
En este momento \ el niño \ mezcla \ la \ pintura \ en \ el garaje.
En este momento \ el niño \ mezclan \ la \ pintura \ en \ el garaje.
En este momento \ los niños \ mezclan \ la \ pintura \ en \ el garaje.
En este momento \ los niños \ mezcla \ la \ pintura \ en \ el garaje.
In this sentence, there is a person who is reading a book.
A. True
B. False

162

117.
Ahora \ la mujer \ repara \ la \ máquina \ en \ la oficina.
Ahora \ la mujer \ reparan \ la \ máquina \ en \ la oficina.
Ahora \ las mujeres \ reparan \ la \ máquina \ en \ la oficina.
Ahora \ las mujeres \ repara \ la \ máquina \ en \ la oficina.
In this sentence, there is a person who is fixing a machine.
A. True
B. False
118.
En este momento \ el chico \ separa \ la \ ropa \ por \ color.
En este momento \ el chico \ separan \ la \ ropa \ por \ color.
En este momento \ los chicos \ separan \ la \ ropa \ por \ color.
En este momento \ los chicos \ separa \ la \ ropa \ por \ color.
In this sentence, there is a person who is watching TV.
A. True
B. False
119.
Ahora \ la chica \ utiliza \ las \ ideas \ en \ su charla.
Ahora \ la chica \ utilizan \ las \ ideas \ en \ su charla.
Ahora \ las chicas \ utilizan \ las \ ideas \ en \ su charla.
Ahora \ las chicas \ utiliza \ las \ ideas \ en \ su charla.
In this sentence, there is a person who is using someone else’s ideas.
A. True
B. False
120.
En este momento \ el conductor \ viaja \ en \ tren \ por \ los EE.UU.
En este momento \ el conductor \ viajan \ en \ tren \ por \ los EE.UU.
En este momento \ los conductores \ viajan \ en \ tren \ por \ los EE.UU.
En este momento \ los conductores \ viajan \ en \ tren \ por \ los EE.UU.
In this sentence, there is a person who is travelling by car.
A. True
B. False

163

APPENDIX B

Experiment Two Stimuli
1. A. Yo \ necesito \ ir a Schuler’s \ porque \ deseo \ un \ libro \ de historia.
B. Yo \ necesito \ ir a Schuler’s \ porque \ desea \ un \ libro \ de historia.
C. El chico \ necesita \ ir a Schuler’s \ porque \ desea \ un \ libro \ de historia.
D. El chico \ necesita \ ir a Schuler’s \ porque \ deseo \ un \ libro \ de historia.
In this sentence, a bookstore is mentioned.
A. True
B. False
2. A. Yo \ limpio \ la casa \ porque \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
B. Yo \ limpio \ la casa \ porque \ espera \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
C. La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ espera \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
D. La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
In this sentence, someone is cashing a check.
A. True
B. False
3. A. Yo \ saco \ un préstamo \ porque \ pago \ por \ las clases \ en la universidad.
B. Yo \ saco \ un préstamo \ porque \ paga \ por \ las clases \ en la universidad.
C. La madre \ saca \ un préstamo \ porque \ paga \ por \ las clases \ en la universidad.
D. La madre \ saca \ un préstamo \ porque \ pago \ por \ las clases \ en la universidad.
In this sentence, someone is attending university.
A. True
B. False
4. A. Yo \ agarro \ el micrófono \ porque \ grabo \ la \ voz \ del cantante.
B. Yo \ agarro \ el micrófono \ porque \ graba \ la \ voz \ del cantante.
C. La periodista \ agarra \ el micrófono \ porque \ graba \ la \ voz \ del cantante.
D. La periodista \ agarra \ el micrófono \ porque \ grabo \ la \ voz \ del cantante.
In this sentence, someone is noticing an error.
A. True
B. False
5. A. Yo \ deposito \ el cheque \ porque \ cobro \ el \ salario \ de la compañía.
B. Yo \ deposito \ el cheque \ porque \ cobra \ el \ salario \ de la compañía.
C. La cajera \ deposita \ el cheque \ porque \ cobra \ el \ salario \ de la compañía.
D. La cajera \ deposita \ el cheque \ porque \ cobro \ el \ salario \ de la compañía.
164

In this sentence, someone is depositing a check.
A. True
B. False
6. A. Yo \ grito \ de felicidad \ porque \ marco \ dos \ puntos \ por cada gol.
B. Yo \ grito \ de felicidad \ porque \ marca \ dos \ puntos \ por cada gol.
C. El jugador \ grita \ de felicidad \ porque \ marca \ dos \ puntos \ por cada gol.
D. El jugador \ grita \ de felicidad \ porque \ marco \ dos \ puntos \ por cada gol.
In this sentence, someone is very sad.
A. True
B. False
7. A. Yo \ corto \ el césped \ porque \ arreglo \ la \ casa \ para la venta.
B. Yo \ corto \ el césped \ porque \ arregla \ la \ casa \ para la venta.
C. El jardinero \ corta \ el césped \ porque \ arregla \ la \ casa \ para la venta.
D. El jardinero \ corta \ el césped \ porque \ arreglo \ la \ casa \ para la venta.
In this sentence, someone is mowing the lawn.
A. True
B. False
8. A. Yo \ investigo \ el crimen \ porque \ testifico \ en \ la corte \ como experto.
B. Yo \ investigo \ el crimen \ porque \ testifica \ en \ la corte \ como experto.
C. El agente \ investiga \ el crimen \ porque \ testifica \ en \ la corte \ como experto.
D. El agente \ investiga \ el crimen \ porque \ testifico \ en \ la corte \ como experto.
In this sentence, someone is hunting.
A. True
B. False
9. A. Yo \ trabajo \ mucho \ porque \ agoto \ el \ dinero \ ahorrado.
B. Yo \ trabajo \ mucho \ porque \ agota \ el \ dinero \ ahorrado.
C. El empleado \ trabaja \ mucho \ porque \ agota \ el \ dinero \ ahorrado.
D. El empleado \ trabaja \ mucho \ porque \ agoto \ el \ dinero \ ahorrado.
In this sentence, someone is working a lot.
A. True
B. False
10. A. Yo \ compro \ unos cuadros \ porque \ decoro \ las \ paredes \ de la casa.
B. Yo \ compro \ unos cuadros \ porque \ decora \ las \ paredes \ de la casa.
C. El hombre \ compra \ unos cuadros \ porque \ decora \ las \ paredes \ de la casa.
D. El hombre \ compra \ unos cuadros \ porque \ decoro \ las \ paredes \ de la casa.

165

In this sentence, someone is buying groceries.
A. True
B. False
11. A. Yo \ firmo \ el cheque \ mientras \ compro \ la \ comida \ en el supermercado.
B. Yo \ firmo \ el cheque \ mientras \ compra \ la \ comida \ en el supermercado.
C. El padre \ firma \ el cheque \ mientras \ compra \ la \ comida \ en el supermercado.
D. El padre \ firma \ el cheque \ mientras \ compro \ la \ comida \ en el supermercado.
In this sentence, someone is at the store.
A. True
B. False
12. A. Yo \ escucho \ la música \ mientras \ estudio \ la \ clase \ para mañana.
B. Yo \ escucho \ la música \ mientras \ estudia \ la \ clase \ para mañana.
C. La muchacha \ escucha \ la música \ mientras \ estudia \ la \ clase \ para mañana.
D. La muchacha \ escucha \ la música \ mientras \ estudio \ la \ clase \ para mañana.
In this sentence, someone is playing the piano.
A. True
B. False
13. A. Yo \ hablo \ por teléfono \ mientras \ explico \ el \ problema \ a la compañía.
B. Yo \ hablo \ por teléfono \ mientras \ explica \ el \ problema \ a la compañía.
C. El abogado \ habla \ por teléfono \ mientras \ explica \ el \ problema \ a la compañía.
D. El abogado \ habla \ por teléfono \ mientras \ explico \ el \ problema \ a la compañía.
In this sentence, someone is talking on the phone.
A. True
B. False
14. A. Yo \ cambio \ unas frases \ mientras \ repaso \ los \ párrafos \ del libro.
B. Yo \ cambio \ unas frases \ mientras \ repasa \ los \ párrafos \ del libro.
C. El editor \ cambia \ unas frases \ mientras \ repasa \ los \ párrafos \ del libro.
D. El editor \ cambia \ unas frases\ mientras \ repaso \ los \ párrafos \ del libro.
In this sentence, someone is buying toys.
A. True
B. False
15. A. Yo \ miro \ el paisaje \ mientras \ manejo \ a \ la ciudad \ de México.
B. Yo \ miro \ el paisaje \ mientras \ maneja \ a \ la ciudad \ de México.
C. El conductor \ mira \ el paisaje \ mientras \ maneja \ a \ la ciudad \ de México.
D. El conductor \ mira \ el paisaje \ mientras \ manejo \ a \ la ciudad \ de México.

166

In this sentence, someone is visiting Mexico.
A. True
B. False
16. A. Yo \ dibujo \ una imagen \ mientras \ imagino \ una \ escena \ en el bosque.
B. Yo \ dibujo \ una imagen \ mientras \ imagina \ una \ escena \ en el bosque.
C. La artista \ dibuja \ una imagen \ mientras \ imagina \ una \ escena \ en el bosque.
D. La artista \ dibuja \ una imagen \ mientras \ imagino \ una \ escena \ en el bosque.
In this sentence, someone is writing a book.
A. True
B. False
17. A. Yo \ lanzo \ una moneda \ mientras \ pienso \ el \ deseo \ enfrente de la fuente.
B. Yo \ lanzo \ una moneda \ mientras \ piensa \ el \ deseo \ enfrente de la fuente.
C. La maestra \ lanza \ una moneda \ piensa \ el \ deseo \ enfrente de la fuente.
D. La maestra \ lanza \ una moneda \ mientras \ pienso \ el \ deseo \ enfrente de la fuente.
In this sentence, someone is making a wish.
A. True
B. False
18. A. Yo \ deletreo \ las palabras \ mientras \ completo \ los \ espacios \ en el crucigrama.
B. Yo \ deletreo \ las palabras \ mientras \ completa \ los \ espacios \ en el crucigrama.
C. La joven \ deletrea \ las palabras \ mientras \ completa \ los \ espacios \ en el
crucigrama.
D. La joven \ deletrea \ las palabras \ mientras \ completo \ los \ espacios \ en el
crucigrama.
In this sentence, someone is cooking.
A. True
B. False
19. A. Yo \ reviso \ los datos \ mientras \ finalizo \ los \ análisis \ de la investigación.
B. Yo \ reviso \ los datos \ mientras \ finaliza \ los \ análisis \ de la investigación.
C. El científico \ revisa \ los datos \ mientras \ finaliza \ los \ análisis \ de la investigación.
D. El científico \ revisa \ los datos \ mientras \ finalizo \ los \ análisis \ de la investigación.
In this sentence, someone is revising data.
A. True
B. False
20. A. Yo \ practico \ el discurso \ mientras \ memorizo \ la \ presentación \ para la clase.
B. Yo \ practico \ el discurso \ mientras \ memoriza \ la \ presentación \ para la clase.
C. La estudiante \ practica \ el discurso \ mientras \ memoriza \ la \ presentación \ para la
clase.
167

D. La estudiante \ practica \ el discurso \ mientras \ memorizo \ la \ presentación \ para la
clase.
In this sentence, someone is drinking coffee in StarBucks.
A. True
B. False
21. A. Yo \ brindo \ por la boda \ cuando \ celebro \ con \ la pareja \ en el restaurante.
B. Yo \ brindo \ por la boda \ cuando \ celebra \ con \ la pareja \ en el restaurante.
C. La amiga \ brinda \ por la boda \ cuando \ celebra \ con \ la pareja \ en el restaurante.
D. La amiga \ brinda \ por la boda \ cuando \ celebro \ con \ la pareja \ en el restaurante.
In this sentence, someone celebrates a wedding.
A. True
B. False
22. A. Yo \ presto \ atención \ cuando \ escucho \ las \ preguntas \ del examen.
B. Yo \ presto \ atención \ cuando \ escucha \ las \ preguntas \ del examen.
C. La mujer \ presta \ atención \ cuando \ escucha \ las \ preguntas \ del examen.
D. La mujer \ presta \ atención \ cuando \ escucho \ las \ preguntas \ del examen.
In this sentence, someone drives a car.
A. True
B. False
23. A. Yo \ celebro \ en el bar \ cuando \ logro \ un \ ascenso \ en el trabajo.
B. Yo \ celebro \ en el bar \ cuando \ logra \ un \ ascenso \ en el trabajo.
C. El jefe \ celebra \ en el bar \ cuando \ logra \ un \ ascenso \ en el trabajo.
D. El jefe \ celebra \ en el bar \ cuando \ logro \ un \ ascenso \ en el trabajo.
In this sentence, someone celebrates a promotion.
A. True
B. False
24. A. Yo \ observo \ las estrellas \ cuando \ trabajo \ en \ el \ observatorio.
B. Yo \ observo \ las estrellas \ cuando \ trabaja \ en \ el \ observatorio.
C. El director \ observa \ las estrellas \ cuando \ trabaja \ en \ el \ observatorio.
D. El director \ observa \ las estrellas \ cuando \ trabajo \ en \ el \ observatorio.
In this sentence, it is day time.
A. True
B. False

168

25. A. Yo \ utilizo \ tapones \ cuando \ disparo \ la \ pistola \ en el campo de tiro.
B. Yo \ utilizo \ tapones \ cuando \ dispara \ la \ pistola \ en el campo de tiro.
C. La soldada \ utiliza \ tapones \ cuando \ dispara \ la \ pistola \ en el campo de tiro.
D. La soldada \ utiliza \ tapones \ cuando \ disparo \ la \ pistola \ en el campo de tiro.
In this sentence, someone uses a weapon.
A. True
B. False
26. A. Yo \ escalo \ la montaña \ cuando \ acampo \ en \ el parque \ nacional.
B. Yo \ escalo \ la montaña \ cuando \ acampa \ en \ el parque \ nacional.
C. La exploradora \ escala \ la montaña \ cuando \ acampa \ en \ el parque \ nacional.
D. La exploradora \ escala \ la montaña \ cuando \ acampo \ en \ el parque \ nacional.
In this sentence, someone runs a marathon.
A. True
B. False
27. A. Yo \ detesto \ las tareas \ cuando \ olvido \ las \ respuestas \ de las preguntas.
B. Yo \ detesto \ las tareas \ cuando \ olvida \ las \ respuestas \ de las preguntas.
C. El niño \ detesta \ las tareas \ cuando \ olvida \ las \ respuestas \ de las preguntas.
D. El niño \ detesta \ las tareas \ cuando \ olvido \ las \ respuestas \ de las preguntas.
In this sentence, someone forgets something.
A. True
B. False
28. A. Yo \ evito \ las controversias \ cuando \ expreso \ opiniones \ en \ público.
B. Yo \ evito \ las controversias \ cuando \ expresa \ opiniones \ en \ público.
C. La chica \ evita \ las controversias \ cuando \ expresa \ opiniones \ en \ público.
D. La chica \ evita \ las controversias \ cuando \ expreso \ opiniones \ en \ público.
In this sentence, someone tells a lie.
A. True
B. False
29. A. Yo \ apruebo \ el examen \ cuando \ tomo \ notas \ en \ cada clase.
B. Yo \ apruebo \ el examen \ cuando \ toma \ notas \ en \ cada clase.
C. La estudiante \ aprueba \ el examen \ cuando \ toma \ notas \ en \ cada clase.
D. La estudiante \ aprueba \ el examen \ cuando \ tomo \ notas \ en \ cada clase.
In this sentence, someone takes notes.
A. True
B. False

169

30. A. Yo \ capto \ una señal \ cuando \ giro \ el \ dial \ a la estación de la radio.
B. Yo \ capto \ una señal \ cuando \ gira \ el \ dial \ a la estación de la radio.
C. El capitán \ capta \ una señal \ cuando \ gira \ el \ dial \ a la estación de la radio.
D. El capitán \ capta \ una señal \ cuando \ giro \ el \ dial \ a la estación de la radio.
In this sentence, someone receives a phone call.
A. True
B. False
31. A. Yo \ explico \ los errores \ después que \ califico \ el \ examen \ de Español.
B. Yo \ explico \ los errores \ después que \ califica \ el \ examen \ de Español.
C. El asistente \ explica \ los errores \ después que \ califica \ el \ examen \ de Español.
D. El asistente \ explica \ los errores \ después que \ califico \ el \ examen \ de Español.
In this sentence, someone explains errors.
A. True
B. False
32. A. Yo \ uso \ el detergente \ después que \ mancho \ el \ pantalón \ en el césped.
B. Yo \ uso \ el detergente \ después que \ mancha \ el \ pantalón \ en el césped.
C. El jugador \ usa \ el detergente \ después que \ mancha \ el \ pantalón \ en el césped.
D. El jugador \ usa \ el detergente \ después que \ mancho \ el \ pantalón \ en el césped.
In this sentence, someone dries clothes.
A. True
B. False
33. A. Yo \ utilizo \ la toalla \ después que \ lavo \ los \ platos \ en el restaurante.
B. Yo \ utilizo \ la toalla \ después que \ lava \ los \ platos \ en el restaurante.
C. El camarero \ utiliza \ la toalla \ después que \ lava \ los \ platos \ en el restaurante.
D. El camarero \ utiliza \ la toalla \ después que \ lavo \ los \ platos \ en el restaurante.
In this sentence, someone uses a towel.
A. True
B. False
34. A. Yo \ termino \ el ejercicio \ después que \ encuentro \ la \ solución \ adecuada.
B. Yo \ termino \ el ejercicio \ después que \ encuentra \ la \ solución \ adecuada.
C. La estudiante \ termina \ el ejercicio \ después que \ encuentra \ la \ solución \
adecuada.
D. La estudiante \ termina \ el ejercicio \ después que \ encuentro \ la \ solución \
adecuada.
In this sentence, someone plays a game.
A. True
170

B. False
35. A. Yo \ festejo \ en el bar \ después que \ acabo \ las \ tareas \ de clase.
B. Yo \ festejo \ en el bar \ después que \ acaba \ las \ tareas \ de clase.
C. El hombre \ festeja \ en el bar \ después que \ acaba \ las \ tareas \ de clase.
D. El hombre \ festeja \ en el bar \ después que \ acabo \ las \ tareas \ de clase.
In this sentence, someone celebrates in a bar.
A. True
B. False
36. A. Yo \ experimento \ problemas \ después que \ ignoro \ las \ quejas \ de los clientes.
B. Yo \ experimento \ problemas \ después que \ ignora \ las \ quejas \ de los clientes.
C. La jefa \ experimenta \ problemas \ después que \ ignora \ las \ quejas \ de los clientes.
D. La jefa \ experimenta \ problemas \ después que \ ignoro \ las \ quejas \ de los clientes.
In this sentence, someone reads an essay.
A. True
B. False
37. A. Yo \ inicio \ el proceso \ después que \ acepto \ los \ planes \ de los jefes.
B. Yo \ inicio \ el proceso \ después que \ acepta \ los \ planes \ de los jefes.
C. El cliente \ inicia \ el proceso \ después que \ acepta \ los \ planes \ de los jefes.
D. El cliente \ inicia \ el proceso \ después que \ acepto \ los \ planes \ de los jefes.
In this sentence, someone accepts plans.
A. True
B. False
38. A. Yo \ cocino \ la comida \ después que \ regreso \ a \ casa \ por la tarde.
B. Yo \ cocino \ la comida \ después que \ regresa \ a \ casa \ por la tarde.
C. La chef \ cocina \ la comida \ después que \ regresa \ a \ casa \ por la tarde.
D. La chef \ cocina \ la comida \ después que \ regreso \ a \ casa \ por la tarde.
In this sentence, someone buys a dog.
A. True
B. False
39. A. Yo \ repaso \ los errores \ después que \ reviso \ todas \ las \ composiciones de los
niños.
B. Yo \ repaso \ los errores \ después que \ revisa \ todas \ las \ composiciones de los
niños.
C. El profesor \ repasa \ los errores \ después que \ revisa \ todas \ las \ composiciones de
los niños.

171

D. El profesor \ repaso \ los errores \ después que \ reviso \ todas \ las \ composiciones de
los niños.
In this sentence, someone reviews compositions.
A. True
B. False
40. A. Yo \ formulo \ preguntas \ después que \ converso \ con \ el \ agente de ventas.
B. Yo \ formulo \ preguntas \ después que \ conversa \ con \ el \ agente de ventas.
C. La cliente \ formula \ preguntas \ después que \ conversa \ con \ el \ agente de ventas.
D. La cliente \ formula \ preguntas \ después que \ converso \ con \ el \ agente de ventas.
In this sentence, someone paints a house.
A. True
B. False
41. A. Tú \ examinas \ la música \ porque \ tocas \ el \ piano \ como profesional.
B. Tú \ examinas \ la música \ porque \ tocan \ el \ piano \ como profesional.
C. Los hombres \ examinan \ la música \ porque \ tocan \ el \ piano \ como profesional.
D. Los hombres \ examinan \ la música \ porque \ tocas \ el \ piano \ como profesional.
In this sentence, someone is a professional musician.
A. True
B. False
42. A. Tú \ visitas \ el museo \ porque \ tomas \ cursos \ de \ historia del arte.
B. Tú \ visitas \ el museo \ porque \ toman \ cursos \ de \ historia del arte.
C. Las jóvenes \ visitan \ el museo \ porque \ toman \ cursos \ de \ historia del arte.
D. Las jóvenes \ visitan \ el museo \ porque \ tomas \ cursos \ de \ historia del arte.
In this sentence, someone is in the library.
A. True
B. False
43. A. Tú \ reservas \ unos asientos \ porque \ acompañas \ al \ joven \ al concierto.
B. Tú \ reservas \ unos asientos \ porque \ acompañan \ al \ joven \ al concierto.
C. Las hermanas \ reservan \ unos asientos \ porque \ acompañan \ al \ joven \ al
concierto.
D. Las hermanas \ reservan \ unos asientos \ porque \ acompañas \ al \ joven \ al
concierto.
In this sentence, someone is going to a concert.
A. True
B. False
44. A. Tú \ bajas \ el volumen \ porque \ molestas \ a \ otros \ en el edificio.
172

B. Tú \ bajas \ el volumen \ porque \ molestan \ a \ otros \ en el edificio.
C. Los padres \ bajas \ el volumen \ porque \ molestan \ a \ otros \ en el edificio.
D. Los padres \ bajas \ el volumen \ porque \ molestas \ a \ otros \ en el edificio.
In this sentence, someone is unlocking a door.
A. True
B. False
45. A. Tú \ lloras \ de alegría \ porque \ realizas \ sueños \ de \ la niñez.
B. Tú \ lloras \ de alegría \ porque \ realizan \ sueños \ de \ la niñez.
C. Las estudiantes \ lloran \ de alegría \ porque \ realizan \ sueños \ de \ la niñez.
D. Las estudiantes \ lloran \ de alegría \ porque \ realizas \ sueños \ de \ la niñez.
In this sentence, someone is happy.
A. True
B. False
46. A. Tú \ limitas \ los temas \ porque \ enseñas \ a \ estudiantes \ muy jóvenes.
B. Tú \ limitas \ los temas \ porque \ enseñan \ a \ estudiantes \ muy jóvenes.
C. Las maestras \ limitan \ los temas \ porque \ enseñan \ a \ estudiantes \ muy jóvenes.
D. Las maestras \ limitan \ los temas \ porque \ enseñas \ a \ estudiantes \ muy jóvenes.
In this sentence, someone is speaking to adults.
A. True
B. False
47. A. Tú \ silencias \ el celular \ porque \ ignoras \ los \ problemas \ del trabajo.
B. Tú \ silencias \ el celular \ porque \ ignoran \ los \ problemas \ del trabajo.
C. Las turistas \ silencian \ el celular \ porque \ ignoran \ los \ problemas \ del trabajo.
D. Las turistas \ silencian \ el celular \ porque \ ignoras \ los \ problemas \ del trabajo.
In this sentence, someone is ignoring problems.
A. True
B. False
48. A. Tú \ navegas \ por Internet \ porque \ investigas \ un \ caso \ de plagio.
B. Tú \ navegas \ por Internet \ porque \ investigan \ un \ caso \ de plagio.
C. Las profesoras \ navegan \ por Internet \ porque \ investigan \ un \ caso \ de plagio.
D. Las profesoras \ navegan \ por Internet \ porque \ investigas \ un \ caso \ de plagio.
In this sentence, someone is reading a blog.
A. True
B. False
49. A. Tú \ hablas \ poco \ porque \ guardas \ un \ secreto \ del político.
173

B. Tú \ hablas \ poco \ porque \ guardan \ un \ secreto \ del político.
C. Los porteros \ hablan \ poco \ porque \ guardan \ un \ secreto \ del político.
D. Los porteros \ hablan \ poco \ porque \ guardas \ un \ secreto \ del político.
In this sentence, someone is keeping a secret.
A. True
B. False
50. A. Tú \ preparas \ las notas \ porque \ hablas \ con \ los padres \ esta noche.
B. Tú \ preparas \ las notas \ porque \ hablan \ con \ los padres \ esta noche.
C. Las maestras \ preparan \ las notas \ porque \ hablan \ con \ los padres \ esta noche.
D. Las maestras \ preparan \ las notas \ porque \ hablas \ con \ los padres \ esta noche.
In this sentence, someone is changing a light bulb.
A. True
B. False
51. A. Tú \ lavas \ los platos \ después que \ desayunas \ en \ casa \ por la mañana.
B. Tú \ lavas \ los platos \ después que \ desayunan \ en \ casa \ por la mañana.
C. Los cocineros \ lavan \ los platos \ después que \ desayunan \ en \ casa \ por la mañana.
D. Los cocineros \ lavan \ los platos \ después que \ desayunas \ en \ casa \ por la mañana.
In this sentence, someone washes dishes.
A. True
B. False
52. A. Tú \ criticas \ la película \ después que \ contemplas \ las \ moralejas \ de los
personajes.
B. Tú \ criticas \ la película \ después que \ contemplan \ las \ moralejas \ de los
personajes.
C. Los autores \ critican \ la película \ después que \ contemplan \ las \ moralejas \ de los
personajes.
D. Los autores \ critican \ la película \ después que \ contemplas \ las \ moralejas \ de los
personajes.
In this sentence, someone watches a TV show.
A. True
B. False
53. A. Tú \ empeoras \ la situación \ después que \ irritas \ al \ cliente \ enojado.
B. Tú \ empeoras \ la situación \ después que \ irritan \ al \ cliente \ enojado.
C. Las nietas \ empeoran \ la situación \ después que \ irritan \ al \ cliente \ enojado.
D. Las nietas \ empeoran \ la situación \ después que \ irritas \ al \ cliente \ enojado.
In this sentence, someone irritates a customer.
A. True
174

B. False
54. A. Tú \ esperas \ una respuesta \ después que \ entregas \ la \ carta \ de resignación.
B. Tú \ esperas \ una respuesta \ después que \ entregan \ la \ carta \ de resignación.
C. Las empleadas \ esperan \ una respuesta \ después que \ entregan \ la \ carta \ de
resignación.
D. Las empleadas \ esperan \ una respuesta \ después que \ entregas \ la \ carta \ de
resignación.
In this sentence, someone speaks on the phone.
A. True
B. False
55. A. Tú \ calientas \ la comida \ después que \ regresas \ a \ casa \ muy tarde.
B. Tú \ calientas \ la comida \ después que \ regresan \ a \ casa \ muy tarde.
C. Las madres \ calientan \ la comida \ después que \ regresan \ a \ casa \ muy tarde.
D. Las madres \ calientan \ la comida \ después que \ regresas \ a \ casa \ muy tarde.
In this sentence, someone heats up food.
A. True
B. False
56. A. Tú \ doblas \ la ropa \ después que \ organizas \ los \ cuartos \ de los jóvenes.
B. Tú \ doblas \ la ropa \ después que \ organizan \ los \ cuartos \ de los jóvenes.
C. Las niñeras \ doblan \ la ropa \ después que \ organizan \ los \ cuartos \ de los jóvenes.
D. Las niñeras \ doblan \ la ropa \ después que \ organizas \ los \ cuartos \ de los jóvenes.
In this sentence, someone makes a mess.
A. True
B. False
57. A. Tú \ cierras \ la puerta \ después que \ escuchas \ las \ voces \ de los vecinos.
B. Tú \ cierras \ la puerta \ después que \ escuchan \ las \ voces \ de los vecinos.
C. Los estudiantes \ cierran \ la puerta \ después que \ escuchan \ las \ voces \ de los
vecinos.
D. Los estudiantes \ cierran \ la puerta \ después que \ escuchas \ las \ voces \ de los
vecinos.
In this sentence, someone closes a door.
A. True
B. False
58. A. Tú \ llamas \ a la grúa \ después que \ paras \ el \ coche \ al lado de la calle.
B. Tú \ llamas \ a la grúa \ después que \ paran \ el \ coche \ al lado de la calle.
C. Las agentes\ llaman \ a la grúa \ después que \ paran \ el \ coche \ al lado de la calle.
D. Las agentes \ llaman \ a la grúa \ después que \ paras \ el \ coche \ al lado de la calle.
175

In this sentence, someone flies a plane.
A. True
B. False
59. A. Tú \ regresas \ a casa \ después que \ terminas \ el \ trabajo \ en la oficina.
B. Tú \ regresas \ a casa \ después que \ terminan \ el \ trabajo \ en la oficina.
C. Los trabajadores \ regresan \ a casa \ después que \ terminan \ el \ trabajo \ en la
oficina.
D. Los trabajadores \ regresan \ a casa \ después que \ terminas \ el \ trabajo \ en la
oficina.
In this sentence, someone returns home.
A. True
B. False
60. A. Tú \ creas \ una cuenta \ después que \ completas \ el \ formulario \ en línea.
B. Tú \ creas \ una cuenta \ después que \ completan \ el \ formulario \ en línea.
C. Las cajeras \ crean \ una cuenta \ después que \ completan \ el \ formulario \ en línea.
D. Las cajeras \ crean \ una cuenta \ después que \ completas \ el \ formulario \ en línea.
In this sentence, someone waits in line.
A. True
B. False
61. A. Tú \ disfrutas \ el partido \ cuando \ ganas \ a \ los \ oponentes.
B. Tú \ disfrutas \ el partido \ cuando \ ganan \ a \ los \ oponentes.
C. Los niños \ disfrutan \ el partido \ cuando \ ganan \ a \ los \ oponentes.
D. Los niños \ disfrutan \ el partido \ cuando \ ganas \ a \ los \ oponentes.
In this sentence, someone wins a game.
A. True
B. False
62. A. Tú \ levantas \ la mano \ cuando \ preguntas \ algo \ al \ profesor en clase.
B. Tú \ levantas \ la mano \ cuando \ preguntan \ algo \ al \ profesor en clase.
C. Las estudiantes \ levantan \ la mano \ cuando \ preguntan \ algo \ al \ profesor en clase.
D. Las estudiantes \ levantan \ la mano \ cuando \ preguntas \ algo \ al \ profesor en clase.
In this sentence, someone takes notes.
A. True
B. False
63. A. Tú \ visitas \ la escuela \ cuando \ participas \ en \ las \ reuniones de padres de familia.
B. Tú \ visitas \ la escuela \ cuando \ participan \ en \ las \ reuniones de padres de familia.
176

C. Los padres \ visitan \ la escuela \ cuando \ participan \ en \ las \ reuniones de padres de
familia.
D. Los padres \ visitan \ la escuela \ cuando \ participas \ en \ las \ reuniones de padres de
familia.
In this sentence, someone goes to a meeting.
A. True
B. False
64. A. Tú \ pasas \ la aspiradora \ cuando \ limpias \ la \ casa \ de los clientes.
B. Tú \ pasas \ la aspiradora \ cuando \ limpian \ la \ casa \ de los clientes.
C. Las criadas \ pasan \ la aspiradora \ cuando \ limpian \ la \ casa \ de los clientes.
D. Las criadas \ pasan \ la aspiradora \ cuando \ limpias \ la \ casa \ de los clientes.
In this sentence, someone takes care of cats.
A. True
B. False
65. A. Tú \ llevas \ comida \ cuando \ trabajas \ para \ la \ compañía .
B. Tú \ llevas \ comida \ cuando \ trabajan \ para \ la \ compañía.
C. Los compañeros de cuarto \ llevan \ comida \ cuando \ trabajan \ para \ la \ compañía .
D. Los compañeros de cuarto \ llevan \ comida \ cuando \ trabajas \ para \ la \ compañía.
In this sentence, someone works for a company.
A. True
B. False
66. A. Tú \ cambias \ de comida \ cuando \ empiezas \ una \ dieta \ recomendada.
B. Tú \ cambias \ de comida \ cuando \ empiezan \ una \ dieta \ recomendada.
C. Los hombres \ cambian \ de comida \ cuando \ empiezan \ una \ dieta \ recomendada.
D. Los hombres \ cambian \ de comida \ cuando \ empiezas \ una \ dieta \ recomendada.
In this sentence, someone eats ice cream.
A. True
B. False
67. A. Tú \ coloreas \ las páginas \ cuando \ juegas \ con \ los \ hijos de mi amigo.
B. Tú \ coloreas \ las páginas \ cuando \ juegan \ con \ los \ hijos de mi amigo.
C. Los adultos \ colorean \ las páginas \ cuando \ juegan \ con \ los \ hijos de mi amigo.
D. Los adultos \ colorean \ las páginas \ cuando \ juegas \ con \ los \ hijos de mi amigo.
In this sentence, someone colors on paper.
A. True
B. False
177

68. A. Tú \ violas \ el pacto \ cuando \ mencionas \ el \ tema \ prohibido.
B. Tú \ violas \ el pacto \ cuando \ mencionan \ el \ tema \ prohibido.
C. Las periodistas \ violan \ el pacto \ cuando \ mencionan \ el \ tema \ prohibido.
D. Las periodistas \ violan \ el pacto \ cuando \ mencionas \ el \ tema \ prohibido.
In this sentence, someone attends church.
A. True
B. False
69. A. Tú \ patinas \ sobre hielo \ cuando \ visitas \ el \ lago \ en el invierno.
B. Tú \ patinas \ sobre hielo \ cuando \ visitan \ el \ lago \ en el invierno.
C. Los jugadores \ patinan \ sobre hielo \ cuando \ visitan \ el \ lago \ en el invierno.
D. Los jugadores \ patinan \ sobre hielo \ cuando \ visitas \ el \ lago \ en el invierno.
In this sentence, someone ice-skates.
A. True
B. False
70. A. Tú \ ocasionas \ problemas \ cuando \ combinas \ las \ clases \ de los chicos y chicas.
B. Tú \ ocasionas \ problemas \ cuando \ combinan \ las \ clases \ de los chicos y chicas.
C. Las directoras \ ocasionan \ problemas \ cuando \ combinan \ las \ clases \ de los chicos
y chicas.
D. Las directoras \ ocasionan \ problemas \ cuando \ combinas \ las \ clases \ de los chicos
y chicas.
In this sentence, someone raises their hand.
A. True
B. False
71. A. Tú \ estornudas \ mucho \ mientras \ acaricias \ al \ animal \ en el zoológico.
B. Tú \ estornudas \ mucho \ mientras \ acarician \ al \ animal \ en el zoológico.
C. Los fotógrafos \ estornudan \ mucho \ mientras \ acarician \ al \ animal \ en el
zoológico.
D. Los fotógrafos \ estornudan \ mucho \ mientras \ acaricias \ al \ animal \ en el
zoológico.
In this sentence, someone probably has allergies.
A. True
B. False
72. A. Tú \ examinas \ la herida \ mientras \ cambias \ los \ vendajes \ en el hospital.
B. Tú \ examinas \ la herida \ mientras \ cambian \ los \ vendajes \ en el hospital.
C. Las enfermeras \ examinan \ la herida \ mientras \ cambian \ los \ vendajes \ en el
hospital.

178

D. Las enfermeras \ examinan \ la herida \ mientras \ cambias \ los \ vendajes \ en el
hospital.
In this sentence, someone is playing games.
A. True
B. False
73. A. Tú \ limpias \ la cocina \ mientras \ preparas \ la \ comida \ para la fiesta.
B. Tú \ limpias \ la cocina \ mientras \ preparan \ la \ comida \ para la fiesta.
C. Las mujeres \ limpian \ la cocina \ mientras \ preparan \ la \ comida \ para la fiesta.
D. Las mujeres \ limpian \ la cocina \ mientras \ preparas \ la \ comida \ para la fiesta.
In this sentence, someone is cleaning.
A. True
B. False
74. A. Tú \ miras \ el puntaje \ mientras \ nadas \ en \ los \ concursos.
B. Tú \ miras \ el puntaje \ mientras \ nadan \ en \ los \ concursos.
C. Las nadadoras \ miran \ el puntaje \ mientras \ nadan \ en \ los \ concursos.
D. Las nadadoras \ miran \ el puntaje \ mientras \ nadas \ en \ los \ concursos.
In this sentence, someone is running on a treadmill.
A. True
B. False
75. A. Tú \ pausas \ el video \ mientras \ contestas \ el \ teléfono \ celular.
B. Tú \ pausas \ el video \ mientras \ contestan \ el \ teléfono \ celular.
C. Los editores \ pausan \ el video \ mientras \ contestan \ el \ teléfono \ celular.
D. Los editores \ pausan \ el video \ mientras \ contestas \ el \ teléfono \ celular.
In this sentence, someone is answering a phone call.
A. True
B. False
76. A. Tú \ mezclas \ los colores \ mientras \ pintas \ una \ obra \ de arte.
B. Tú \ mezclas \ los colores \ mientras \ pintan \ una \ obra \ de arte.
C. Los artistas \ mezclan \ los colores \ mientras \ pintan \ una \ obra \ de arte.
D. Los artistas \ mezclan \ los colores \ mientras \ pintas \ una \ obra \ de arte.
In this sentence, someone is using a blender.
A. True
B. False
77. A. Tú \ cocinas \ la salsa \ mientras \ conversas \ con \ amigos \ en la fiesta.
179

B. Tú \ cocinas \ la salsa \ mientras \ conversan \ con \ amigos \ en la fiesta.
C. Las hijas \ cocinan \ la salsa \ mientras \ conversan \ con \ amigos \ en la fiesta.
D. Las hijas \ cocinan \ la salsa \ mientras \ conversas \ con \ amigos \ en la fiesta.
In this sentence, someone is at a party.
A. True
B. False
78. A. Tú \ piensas \ en una mentira \ mientras \ esperas \ al \ director \ del departamento.
B. Tú \ piensas \ en una mentira \ mientras \ esperan \ al \ director \ del departamento.
C. Los maestros \ piensan \ en una mentira \ mientras \ esperan \ al \ director \ del
departamento.
D. Los maestros \ piensan \ en una mentira \ mientras \ esperas \ al \ director \ del
departamento.
In this sentence, someone is following someone.
A. True
B. False
79. A. Tú \ comunicas \ los resultados \ mientras \ presentas \ unos \ estudios \ en la
conferencia.
B. Tú \ comunicas \ los resultados \ mientras \ presentan \ unos \ estudios \ en la
conferencia.
C. Los científicos \ comunican \ los resultados \ mientras \ presentan \ unos \ estudios \ en
la conferencia.
D. Los científicos \ comunican \ los resultados \ mientras \ presentas \ unos \ estudios \ en
la conferencia.
In this sentence, someone is presenting results.
A. True
B. False
80. A. Tú \ tomas \ muchas fotos \ mientras \ observas \ a \ los \ animales salvajes.
B. Tú \ tomas \ muchas fotos \ mientras \ observan \ a \ los \ animales salvajes.
C. Los estudiantes \ toman \ muchas fotos \ mientras \ observan \ a \ los \ animales
salvajes.
D. Los estudiantes \ toman \ muchas fotos \ mientras \ observas \ a \ los \ animales
salvajes.
In this sentence, someone is typing on a computer.
A. True
B. False

180

APPENDIX C

Experiment Three Stimuli
1. A. Yo \ necesito \ ir a Schuler’s \ porque \ yo \ deseo \ un \ libro \ de historia.
B. Yo \ necesito \ ir a Schuler’s \ porque \ el chico \ desea \ un \ libro \ de historia.
C. El chico \ necesita \ ir a Schuler’s \ porque \ el chico \ desea \ un \ libro \ de historia.
D. El chico \ necesita \ ir a Schuler’s \ porque \ yo \ deseo \ un \ libro \ de historia.
In this sentence, someone wants a history book.
A. True
B. False
2. A. Yo \ limpio \ la casa \ porque \ yo \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
B. Yo \ limpio \ la casa \ porque \ la mamá \ espera \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
C. La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ la mamá \ espera \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
D. La mamá \ limpia \ la casa \ porque \ yo \ espero \ invitados \ por \ la noche.
In this sentence, someone is shopping.
A. True
B. False
3. A. Yo \ saco \ un préstamo \ porque \ yo \ pago \ por \ las clases \ en la universidad.
B. Yo \ saco \ un préstamo \ porque \ la madre \ paga \ por \ las clases \ en la universidad.
C. La madre \ saca \ un préstamo \ porque \ la madre \ paga \ por \ las clases \ en la
universidad.
D. La madre \ saca \ un préstamo \ porque \ yo \ pago \ por \ las clases \ en la universidad.
In this sentence, someone is taking out a loan.
A. True
B. False
4. A. Yo \ agarro \ el micrófono \ porque \ yo \ grabo \ la \ voz \ del cantante.
B. Yo \ agarro \ el micrófono \ porque \ la periodista \ graba \ la \ voz \ del cantante.
C. La periodista \ agarra \ el micrófono \ porque \ la periodista \ graba \ la \ voz \ del
cantante.
D. La periodista \ agarra \ el micrófono \ porque \ yo \ grabo \ la \ voz \ del cantante.
In this sentence, someone is presenting a paper.
A. True
B. False
5. A. Yo \ deposito \ el cheque \ porque \ yo \ cobro \ el \ salario \ de la compañía.
B. Yo \ deposito \ el cheque \ porque \ la cajera \ cobra \ el \ salario \ de la compañía.
181

C. La cajera \ deposita \ el cheque \ porque \ la cajera \ cobra \ el \ salario \ de la
compañía.
D. La cajera \ deposita \ el cheque \ porque \ yo \ cobro \ el \ salario \ de la compañía.
In this sentence, someone is receiving a paycheck.
A. True
B. False
6. A. Yo \ grito \ de felicidad \ porque \ yo \ marco \ dos \ puntos \ por cada gol.
B. Yo \ grito \ de felicidad \ porque \ el jugador \ marca \ dos \ puntos \ por cada gol.
C. El jugador \ grita \ de felicidad \ porque \ el jugador \ marca \ dos \ puntos \ por cada
gol.
D. El jugador \ grita \ de felicidad \ porque \ yo \ marco \ dos \ puntos \ por cada gol.
In this sentence, someone is playing tennis.
A. True
B. False
7. A. Yo \ corto \ el césped \ porque \ yo \ arreglo \ la \ casa \ para la venta.
B. Yo \ corto \ el césped \ porque \ el jardinero \ arregla \ la \ casa \ para la venta.
C. El jardinero \ corta \ el césped \ porque \ el jardinero \ arregla \ la \ casa \ para la venta.
D. El jardinero \ corta \ el césped \ porque \ yo \ arreglo \ la \ casa \ para la venta.
In this sentence, someone is cleaning a house.
A. True
B. False
8. A. Yo \ investigo \ el crimen \ porque \ yo \ testifico \ en \ la corte \ como experto.
B. Yo \ investigo \ el crimen \ porque \ el agente \ testifica \ en \ la corte \ como experto.
C. El agente \ investiga \ el crimen \ porque \ el agente \ testifica \ en \ la corte \ como
experto.
D. El agente \ investiga \ el crimen \ porque \ yo \ testifico \ en \ la corte \ como experto.
In this sentence, someone is cooking dinner.
A. True
B. False
9. A. Yo \ trabajo \ mucho \ porque \ yo \ agoto \ el \ dinero \ ahorrado.
B. Yo \ trabajo \ mucho \ porque \ el empleado \ agota \ el \ dinero \ ahorrado.
C. El empleado \ trabaja \ mucho \ porque \ el empleado \ agota \ el \ dinero \ ahorrado.
D. El empleado \ trabaja \ mucho \ porque \ yo \ agoto \ el \ dinero \ ahorrado.
In this sentence, someone is using up saved money.
A. True
B. False

182

10. A. Yo \ compro \ unos cuadros \ porque \ yo \ decoro \ las \ paredes \ de la casa.
B. Yo \ compro \ unos cuadros \ porque \ el hombre \ decora \ las \ paredes \ de la casa.
C. El hombre \ compra \ unos cuadros \ porque \ el hombre \ decora \ las \ paredes \ de la
casa.
D. El hombre \ compra \ unos cuadros \ porque \ yo \ decoro \ las \ paredes \ de la casa.
In this sentence, someone is watching a movie.
A. True
B. False
11. A. Yo \ firmo \ el cheque \ mientras \ yo \ compro \ la \ comida \ en el supermercado.
B. Yo \ firmo \ el cheque \ mientras \ el padre \ compra \ la \ comida \ en el supermercado.
C. El padre \ firma \ el cheque \ mientras \ el padre \ compra \ la \ comida \ en el
supermercado.
D. El padre \ firma \ el cheque \ mientras \ yo \ compro \ la \ comida \ en el supermercado.
In this sentence, someone is signing a check.
A. True
B. False
12. A. Yo \ escucho \ la música \ mientras \ yo \ estudio \ la \ clase \ para mañana.
B. Yo \ escucho \ la música \ mientras \ la muchacha \ estudia \ la \ clase \ para mañana.
C. La muchacha \ escucha \ la música \ mientras \ la muchacha \ estudia \ la \ clase \ para
mañana.
D. La muchacha \ escucha \ la música \ mientras \ yo \ estudio \ la \ clase \ para mañana.
In this sentence, someone is planning a vacation.
A. True
B. False
13. A. Yo \ hablo \ por teléfono \ mientras \ yo \ explico \ el \ problema \ a la compañía.
B. Yo \ hablo \ por teléfono \ mientras \ el abogado \ explica \ el \ problema \ a la
compañía.
C. El abogado \ habla \ por teléfono \ mientras \ el abogado \ explica \ el \ problema \ a la
compañía.
D. El abogado \ habla \ por teléfono \ mientras \ yo \ explico \ el \ problema \ a la
compañía.
In this sentence, someone is explaining a problem.
A. True
B. False
14. A. Yo \ cambio \ unas frases \ mientras \ yo \ repaso \ los \ párrafos \ del libro.
B. Yo \ cambio \ unas frases \ mientras \ el editor \ repasa \ los \ párrafos \ del libro.
C. El editor \ cambia \ unas frases \ mientras \ el editor \ repasa \ los \ párrafos \ del libro.
183

D. El editor \ cambia \ unas frases\ mientras \ yo \ repaso \ los \ párrafos \ del libro.
In this sentence, someone is buying a car.
A. True
B. False
15. A. Yo \ miro \ el paisaje \ mientras \ yo \ manejo \ a \ la ciudad \ de México.
B. Yo \ miro \ el paisaje \ mientras \ el conductor \ maneja \ a \ la ciudad \ de México.
C. El conductor \ mira \ el paisaje \ mientras \ el conductor \ maneja \ a \ la ciudad \ de
México.
D. El conductor \ mira \ el paisaje \ mientras \ yo \ manejo \ a \ la ciudad \ de México.
In this sentence, someone is driving.
A. True
B. False
16. A. Yo \ dibujo \ una imagen \ mientras \ yo \ imagino \ una \ escena \ en el bosque.
B. Yo \ dibujo \ una imagen \ mientras \ la artista \ imagina \ una \ escena \ en el bosque.
C. La artista \ dibuja \ una imagen \ mientras \ la artista \ imagina \ una \ escena \ en el
bosque.
D. La artista \ dibuja \ una imagen \ mientras \ yo \ imagino \ una \ escena \ en el bosque.
In this sentence, someone is sending a text.
A. True
B. False
17. A. Yo \ lanzo \ una moneda \ mientras \ yo \ pienso \ el \ deseo \ enfrente de la fuente.
B. Yo \ lanzo \ una moneda \ mientras \ la maestra \ piensa \ el \ deseo \ enfrente de la
fuente.
C. La maestra \ lanza \ una moneda \ la maestra \ piensa \ el \ deseo \ enfrente de la
fuente.
D. La maestra \ lanza \ una moneda \ mientras \ yo \ pienso \ el \ deseo \ enfrente de la
fuente.
In this sentence, someone is throwing a coin.
A. True
B. False
18. A. Yo \ deletreo \ las palabras \ mientras \ yo \ completo \ los \ espacios \ en el
crucigrama.
B. Yo \ deletreo \ las palabras \ mientras \ la joven \ completa \ los \ espacios \ en el
crucigrama.
C. La joven \ deletrea \ las palabras \ mientras \ la joven \ completa \ los \ espacios \ en el
crucigrama.
D. La joven \ deletrea \ las palabras \ mientras \ yo \ completo \ los \ espacios \ en el
crucigrama.
184

In this sentence, someone is playing videogames.
A. True
B. False
19. A. Yo \ reviso \ los datos \ mientras \ yo \ finalizo \ los \ análisis \ de la investigación.
B. Yo \ reviso \ los datos \ mientras \ el científico \ finaliza \ los \ análisis \ de la
investigación.
C. El científico \ revisa \ los datos \ mientras \ el científico \ finaliza \ los \ análisis \ de la
investigación.
D. El científico \ revisa \ los datos \ mientras \ yo \ finalizo \ los \ análisis \ de la
investigación.
In this sentence, someone is finalizing a study.
A. True
B. False
20. A. Yo \ practico \ el discurso \ mientras \ yo \ memorizo \ la \ presentación \ para la clase.
B. Yo \ practico \ el discurso \ mientras \ la estudiante \ memoriza \ la \ presentación \
para la clase.
C. La estudiante \ practica \ el discurso \ mientras \ la estudiante \ memoriza \ la \
presentación \ para la clase.
D. La estudiante \ practica \ el discurso \ mientras \ yo \ memorizo \ la \ presentación \
para la clase.
In this sentence, someone is eating a McDonald’s.
A. True
B. False
21. A. Yo \ brindo \ por la boda \ cuando \ yo \ celebro \ con \ la pareja \ en el restaurante.
B. Yo \ brindo \ por la boda \ cuando \ la amiga \ celebra \ con \ la pareja \ en el
restaurante.
C. La amiga \ brinda \ por la boda \ cuando \ la amiga \ celebra \ con \ la pareja \ en el
restaurante.
D. La amiga \ brinda \ por la boda \ cuando \ yo \ celebro \ con \ la pareja \ en el
restaurante.
In this sentence, someone is at a restaurant.
A. True
B. False
22. A. Yo \ presto \ atención \ cuando \ yo \ escucho \ las \ preguntas \ del examen.
B. Yo \ presto \ atención \ cuando \ la mujer \ escucha \ las \ preguntas \ del examen.
C. La mujer \ presta \ atención \ cuando \ la mujer \ escucha \ las \ preguntas \ del examen.
D. La mujer \ presta \ atención \ cuando \ yo \ escucho \ las \ preguntas \ del examen.

185

In this sentence, someone types a letter.
A. True
B. False
23. A. Yo \ celebro \ en el bar \ cuando \ yo \ logro \ un \ ascenso \ en el trabajo.
B. Yo \ celebro \ en el bar \ cuando \ el jefe \ logra \ un \ ascenso \ en el trabajo.
C. El jefe \ celebra \ en el bar \ cuando \ el jefe \ logra \ un \ ascenso \ en el trabajo.
D. El jefe \ celebra \ en el bar \ cuando \ yo \ logro \ un \ ascenso \ en el trabajo.
In this sentence, someone is a bar.
A. True
B. False
24. A. Yo \ observo \ las estrellas \ cuando \ yo \ trabajo \ en \ el \ observatorio.
B. Yo \ observo \ las estrellas \ cuando \ el director \ trabaja \ en \ el \ observatorio.
C. El director \ observa \ las estrellas \ cuando \ el director \ trabaja \ en \ el \ observatorio.
D. El director \ observa \ las estrellas \ cuando \ yo \ trabajo \ en \ el \ observatorio.
In this sentence, someone is in a library.
A. True
B. False
25. A. Yo \ utlizo \ tapones \ cuando \ yo \ disparo \ la \ pistola \ en el campo de tiro.
B. Yo \ utlizo \ tapones \ cuando \ la soldada \ dispara \ la \ pistola \ en el campo de tiro.
C. La soldada \ utliza \ tapones \ cuando \ la soldada \ dispara \ la \ pistola \ en el campo
de tiro.
D. La soldada \ utliza \ tapones \ cuando \ yo \ disparo \ la \ pistola \ en el campo de tiro.
In this sentence, someone shoots a gun.
A. True
B. False
26. A. Yo \ escalo \ la montaña \ cuando \ yo \ acampo \ en \ el parque \ nacional.
B. Yo \ escalo \ la montaña \ cuando \ la exploradora \ acampa \ en \ el parque \ nacional.
C. La exploradora \ escala \ la montaña \ cuando \ la exploradora \ acampa \ en \ el parque
\ nacional.
D. La exploradora \ escala \ la montaña \ cuando \ yo \ acampo \ en \ el parque \ nacional.
In this sentence, someone flies a plane.
A. True
B. False
27. A. Yo \ detesto \ las tareas \ cuando \ yo \ olvido \ las \ respuestas \ de las preguntas.
186

B. Yo \ detesto \ las tareas \ cuando \ el niño \ olvida \ las \ respuestas \ de las preguntas.
C. El niño \ detesta \ las tareas \ cuando \ el niño \ olvida \ las \ respuestas \ de las
preguntas.
D. El niño \ detesta \ las tareas \ cuando \ yo \ olvido \ las \ respuestas \ de las preguntas.
In this sentence, someone hates homework.
A. True
B. False
28. A. Yo \ evito \ las controversias \ cuando \ yo \ expreso \ opiniones \ en \ público.
B. Yo \ evito \ las controversias \ cuando \ la chica \ expresa \ opiniones \ en \ público.
C. La chica \ evita \ las controversias \ cuando \ la chica \ expresa \ opiniones \ en \
público.
D. La chica \ evita \ las controversias \ cuando \ yo \ expreso \ opiniones \ en \ público.
In this sentence, someone hugs someone else.
A. True
B. False
29. A. Yo \ apruebo \ el examen \ cuando \ yo \ tomo \ notas \ en \ cada clase.
B. Yo \ apruebo \ el examen \ cuando \ la estudiante \ toma \ notas \ en \ cada clase.
C. La estudiante \ aprueba \ el examen \ cuando \ la estudiante \ toma \ notas \ en \ cada
clase.
D. La estudiante \ aprueba \ el examen \ cuando \ yo \ tomo \ notas \ en \ cada clase.
In this sentence, someone is a student.
A. True
B. False
30. A. Yo \ capto \ una señal \ cuando \ yo \ giro \ el \ dial \ a la estación de la radio.
B. Yo \ capto \ una señal \ cuando \ el capitán \ gira \ el \ dial \ a la estación de la radio.
C. El capitán \ capta \ una señal \ cuando \ el capitán \ gira \ el \ dial \ a la estación de la
radio.
D. El capitán \ capta \ una señal \ cuando \ yo \ giro \ el \ dial \ a la estación de la radio.
In this sentence, someone hangs a picture.
A. True
B. False
31. A. Yo \ explico \ los errores \ después que \ yo \ califico \ el \ examen \ de Español.
B. Yo \ explico \ los errores \ después que \ el asistente \ califica \ el \ examen \ de
Español.
C. El asistente \ explica \ los errores \ después que \ el asistente \ califica \ el \ examen \
de Español.

187

D. El asistente \ explica \ los errores \ después que \ yo \ califico \ el \ examen \ de
Español.
In this sentence, someone grades exams.
A. True
B. False
32. A. Yo \ uso \ el detergente \ después que \ yo \ mancho \ el \ pantalón \ en el césped.
B. Yo \ uso \ el detergente \ después que \ el jugador \ mancha \ el \ pantalón \ en el
césped.
C. El jugador \ usa \ el detergente \ después que \ el jugador \ mancha \ el \ pantalón \ en
el césped.
D. El jugador \ usa \ el detergente \ después que \ yo \ mancho \ el \ pantalón \ en el
césped.
In this sentence, someone uses a microwave.
A. True
B. False
33. A. Yo \ utilizo \ la toalla \ después que \ yo \ lavo \ los \ platos \ en el restaurante.
B. Yo \ utilizo \ la toalla \ después que \ el camarero \ lava \ los \ platos \ en el restaurante.
C. El camarero \ utiliza \ la toalla \ después que \ el camarero \ lava \ los \ platos \ en el
restaurante.
D. El camarero \ utiliza \ la toalla \ después que \ yo \ lavo \ los \ platos \ en el restaurante.
In this sentence, someone washes dishes.
A. True
B. False
34. A. Yo \ termino \ el ejercicio \ después que \ yo \ encuentro \ la \ solución \ adecuada.
B. Yo \ termino \ el ejercicio \ después que \ la estudiante \ encuentra \ la \ solución \
adecuada.
C. La estudiante \ termina \ el ejercicio \ después que \ la estudiante \ encuentra \ la \
solución \ adecuada.
D. La estudiante \ termina \ el ejercicio \ después que \ yo \ encuentro \ la \ solución \
adecuada.
In this sentence, someone listens to music.
A. True
B. False
35. A. Yo \ festejo \ en el bar \ después que \ yo \ acabo \ las \ tareas \ de clase.
B. Yo \ festejo \ en el bar \ después que \ el hombre \ acaba \ las \ tareas \ de clase.
C. El hombre \ festeja \ en el bar \ después que \ el hombre \ acaba \ las \ tareas \ de clase.
D. El hombre \ festeja \ en el bar \ después que \ yo \ acabo \ las \ tareas \ de clase.
188

In this sentence, someone finishes homework.
A. True
B. False
36. A. Yo \ experimento \ problemas \ después que \ yo \ ignoro \ las \ quejas \ de los clientes.
B. Yo \ experimento \ problemas \ después que \ la jefa \ ignora \ las \ quejas \ de los
clientes.
C. La jefa \ experimenta \ problemas \ después que \ la jefa \ ignora \ las \ quejas \ de los
clientes.
D. La jefa \ experimenta \ problemas \ después que \ yo \ ignoro \ las \ quejas \ de los
clientes.
In this sentence, someone buys a book.
A. True
B. False
37. A. Yo \ inicio \ el proceso \ después que \ yo \ acepto \ los \ planes \ de los jefes.
B. Yo \ inicio \ el proceso \ después que \ el cliente \ acepta \ los \ planes \ de los jefes.
C. El cliente \ inicia \ el proceso \ después que \ el cliente \ acepta \ los \ planes \ de los
jefes.
D. El cliente \ inicia \ el proceso \ después que \ yo \ acepto \ los \ planes \ de los jefes.
In this sentence, someone begins a process.
A. True
B. False
38. A. Yo \ cocino \ la comida \ después que \ yo \ regreso \ a \ casa \ por la tarde.
B. Yo \ cocino \ la comida \ después que \ la chef \ regresa \ a \ casa \ por la tarde.
C. La chef \ cocina \ la comida \ después que \ la chef \ regresa \ a \ casa \ por la tarde.
D. La chef \ cocina \ la comida \ después que \ yo \ regreso \ a \ casa \ por la tarde.
In this sentence, someone buys a house.
A. True
B. False
39. A. Yo \ repaso \ los errores \ después que \ yo \ reviso \ todas \ las \ composiciones de los
niños.
B. Yo \ repaso \ los errores \ después que \ el profesor \ revisa \ todas \ las \
composiciones de los niños.
C. El profesor \ repasa \ los errores \ después que \ el profesor \ revisa \ todas \ las \
composiciones de los niños.
D. El profesor \ repaso \ los errores \ después que \ yo \ reviso \ todas \ las \
composiciones de los niños.

189

In this sentence, someone goes over errors.
A. True
B. False
40. A. Yo \ formulo \ preguntas \ después que \ yo \ converso \ con \ el \ agente de ventas.
B. Yo \ formulo \ preguntas \ después que \ la cliente \ conversa \ con \ el \ agente de
ventas.
C. La cliente \ formula \ preguntas \ después que \ la cliente \ conversa \ con \ el \ agente
de ventas.
D. La cliente \ formula \ preguntas \ después que \ yo \ converso \ con \ el \ agente de
ventas.
In this sentence, someone reads a newspaper.
A. True
B. False
41. A. Tú \ examinas \ la música \ porque \ tú \ tocas \ el \ piano \ como profesional.
B. Tú \ examinas \ la música \ porque \ los hombres \ tocan \ el \ piano \ como
profesional.
C. Los hombres \ examinan \ la música \ porque \ los hombres \ tocan \ el \ piano \ como
profesional.
D. Los hombres \ examinan \ la música \ porque \ tú \ tocas \ el \ piano \ como
profesional.
In this sentence, someone is playing a piano.
A. True
B. False
42. A. Tú \ visitas \ el museo \ porque \ tú \ tomas \ cursos \ de \ historia del arte.
B. Tú \ visitas \ el museo \ porque \ toman \ las jóvenes \ cursos \ de \ historia del arte.
C. Las jóvenes \ visitan \ el museo \ porque \ las jóvenes \ toman \ cursos \ de \ historia
del arte.
D. Las jóvenes \ visitan \ el museo \ porque \ tú \ tomas \ cursos \ de \ historia del arte.
In this sentence, someone is in a dormitory.
A. True
B. False
43. A. Tú \ reservas \ unos asientos \ porque \ tú \ acompañas \ al \ joven \ al concierto.
B. Tú \ reservas \ unos asientos \ porque \ las hermanas \ acompañan \ al \ joven \ al
concierto.
C. Las hermanas \ reservan \ unos asientos \ porque \ las hermanas \ acompañan \ al \
joven \ al concierto.
D. Las hermanas \ reservan \ unos asientos \ porque \ tú \ acompañas \ al \ joven \ al
concierto.

190

In this sentence, someone is reserving seats.
A. True
B. False
44. A. Tú \ bajas \ el volumen \ porque \ tú \ molestas \ a \ otros \ en el edificio.
B. Tú \ bajas \ el volumen \ porque \ los padres \ molestan \ a \ otros \ en el edificio.
C. Los padres \ bajas \ el volumen \ porque \ los padres \ molestan \ a \ otros \ en el
edificio.
D. Los padres \ bajas \ el volumen \ porque \ tú \ molestas \ a \ otros \ en el edificio.
In this sentence, someone is killing a spider.
A. True
B. False
45. A. Tú \ lloras \ de alegría \ porque \ tú \ realizas \ sueños \ de \ la niñez.
B. Tú \ lloras \ de alegría \ porque \ las estudiantes \ realizan \ sueños \ de \ la niñez.
C. Las estudiantes \ lloran \ de alegría \ porque \ las estudiantes \ realizan \ sueños \ de \ la
niñez.
D. Las estudiantes \ lloran \ de alegría \ porque \ tú \ realizas \ sueños \ de \ la niñez.
In this sentence, someone is crying.
A. True
B. False
46. A. Tú \ limitas \ los temas \ porque \ tú \ enseñas \ a \ estudiantes \ muy jóvenes.
B. Tú \ limitas \ los temas \ porque \ las maestras \ enseñan \ a \ estudiantes \ muy
jóvenes.
C. Las maestras \ limitan \ los temas \ porque \ las maestras \ enseñan \ a \ estudiantes \
muy jóvenes.
D. Las maestras \ limitan \ los temas \ porque \ tú \ enseñas \ a \ estudiantes \ muy
jóvenes.
In this sentence, someone is eating food.
A. True
B. False
47. A. Tú \ silencias \ el celular \ porque \ tú \ ignoras \ los \ problemas \ del trabajo.
B. Tú \ silencias \ el celular \ porque \ las turistas \ ignoran \ los \ problemas \ del trabajo.
C. Las turistas \ silencian \ el celular \ porque \ las turistas \ ignoran \ los \ problemas \ del
trabajo.
D. Las turistas \ silencian \ el celular \ porque \ tú \ ignoras \ los \ problemas \ del trabajo.
In this sentence, someone is silencing their phone.
A. True
B. False
191

48. A. Tú \ navegas \ por Internet \ porque \ tú \ investigas \ un \ caso \ de plagio.
B. Tú \ navegas \ por Internet \ porque \ las profesoras \ investigan \ un \ caso \ de plagio.
C. Las profesoras \ navegan \ por Internet \ porque \ las profesoras \ investigan \ un \ caso
\ de plagio.
D. Las profesoras \ navegan \ por Internet \ porque \ tú \ investigas \ un \ caso \ de plagio.
In this sentence, someone is typing a letter.
A. True
B. False
49. A. Tú \ hablas \ poco \ porque \ tú \ guardas \ un \ secreto \ del político.
B. Tú \ hablas \ poco \ porque \ los porteros \ guardan \ un \ secreto \ del político.
C. Los porteros \ hablan \ poco \ porque \ los porteros \ guardan \ un \ secreto \ del
político.
D. Los porteros \ hablan \ poco \ porque \ tú \ guardas \ un \ secreto \ del político.
In this sentence, someone is speaking very little.
A. True
B. False
50. A. Tú \ preparas \ las notas \ porque \ tú \ hablas \ con \ los padres \ esta noche.
B. Tú \ preparas \ las notas \ porque \ las maestras \ hablan \ con \ los padres \ esta noche.
C. Las maestras \ preparan \ las notas \ porque \ las maestras \ hablan \ con \ los padres \
esta noche.
D. Las maestras \ preparan \ las notas \ porque \ tú \ hablas \ con \ los padres \ esta noche.
In this sentence, someone is dancing.
A. True
B. False
51. A. Tú \ lavas \ los platos \ después que \ tú \ desayunas \ en \ casa \ por la mañana.
B. Tú \ lavas \ los platos \ después que \ los cocineros \ desayunan \ en \ casa \ por la
mañana.
C. Los cocineros \ lavan \ los platos \ después que \ los cocineros \ desayunan \ en \ casa \
por la mañana.
D. Los cocineros \ lavan \ los platos \ después que \ tú \ desayunas \ en \ casa \ por la
mañana.
In this sentence, someone eats breakfast.
A. True
B. False
52. A. Tú \ criticas \ la película \ después que \ tú \ contemplas \ las \ moralejas \ de los
personajes.

192

B. Tú \ criticas \ la película \ después que \ los autores \ contemplan \ las \ moralejas \ de
los personajes.
C. Los autores \ critican \ la película \ después que \ los autores \ contemplan \ las \
moralejas \ de los personajes.
D. Los autores \ critican \ la película \ después que \ tú \ contemplas \ las \ moralejas \ de
los personajes.
In this sentence, someone listens to the radio.
A. True
B. False
53. A. Tú \ empeoras \ la situación \ después que \ tú \ irritas \ al \ cliente \ enojado.
B. Tú \ empeoras \ la situación \ después que \ las nietas \ irritan \ al \ cliente \ enojado.
C. Las nietas \ empeoran \ la situación \ después que \ las nietas \ irritan \ al \ cliente \
enojado.
D. Las nietas \ empeoran \ la situación \ después que \ tú \ irritas \ al \ cliente \ enojado.
In this sentence, someone makes a situation worse.
A. True
B. False
54. A. Tú \ esperas \ una respuesta \ después que \ tú \ entregas \ la \ carta \ de resignación.
B. Tú \ esperas \ una respuesta \ después que \ las empleadas \ entregan \ la \ carta \ de
resignación.
C. Las empleadas \ esperan \ una respuesta \ después que \ las empleadas \ entregan \ la \
carta \ de resignación.
D. Las empleadas \ esperan \ una respuesta \ después que \ tú \ entregas \ la \ carta \ de
resignación.
In this sentence, someone laughs at a joke.
A. True
B. False
55. A. Tú \ calientas \ la comida \ después que \ tú \ regresas \ a \ casa \ muy tarde.
B. Tú \ calientas \ la comida \ después que \ las madres \ regresan \ a \ casa \ muy tarde.
C. Las madres \ calientan \ la comida \ después que \ las madres \ regresan \ a \ casa \ muy
tarde.
D. Las madres \ calientan \ la comida \ después que \ tú \ regresas \ a \ casa \ muy tarde.
In this sentence, someone returns home late.
A. True
B. False
56. A. Tú \ doblas \ la ropa \ después que \ tú \ organizas \ los \ cuartos \ de los jóvenes.

193

B. Tú \ doblas \ la ropa \ después que \ las niñeras \ organizan \ los \ cuartos \ de los
jóvenes.
C. Las niñeras \ doblan \ la ropa \ después que \ las niñeras \ organizan \ los \ cuartos \ de
los jóvenes.
D. Las niñeras \ doblan \ la ropa \ después que \ tú \ organizas \ los \ cuartos \ de los
jóvenes.
In this sentence, someone answers a question.
A. True
B. False
57. A. Tú \ cierras \ la puerta \ después que \ tú \ escuchas \ las \ voces \ de los vecinos.
B. Tú \ cierras \ la puerta \ después que \ los estudiantes \ escuchan \ las \ voces \ de los
vecinos.
C. Los estudiantes \ cierran \ la puerta \ después que \ los estudiantes \ escuchan \ las \
voces \ de los vecinos.
D. Los estudiantes \ cierran \ la puerta \ después que \ tú \ escuchas \ las \ voces \ de los
vecinos.
In this sentence, someone hears voices.
A. True
B. False
58. A. Tú \ llamas \ a la grúa \ después que \ tú \ paras \ el \ coche \ al lado de la calle.
B. Tú \ llamas \ a la grúa \ después que \ las agentes \ paran \ el \ coche \ al lado de la
calle.
C. Las agentes\ llaman \ a la grúa \ después que \ las agentes \ paran \ el \ coche \ al lado
de la calle.
D. Las agentes \ llaman \ a la grúa \ después que \ tú \ paras \ el \ coche \ al lado de la
calle.
In this sentence, someone visits Brazil.
A. True
B. False
59. A. Tú \ regresas \ a casa \ después que \ tú \ terminas \ el \ trabajo \ en la oficina.
B. Tú \ regresas \ a casa \ después que \ los trabajadores \ terminan \ el \ trabajo \ en la
oficina.
C. Los trabajadores \ regresan \ a casa \ después que \ los trabajadores \ terminan \ el \
trabajo \ en la oficina.
D. Los trabajadores \ regresan \ a casa \ después que \ tú \ terminas \ el \ trabajo \ en la
oficina.
In this sentence, someone finishes a job.
A. True
B. False
194

60. A. Tú \ creas \ una cuenta \ después que \ tú \ completas \ el \ formulario \ en línea.
B. Tú \ creas \ una cuenta \ después que \ las cajeras \ completan \ el \ formulario \ en
línea.
C. Las cajeras \ crean \ una cuenta \ después que \ las cajeras \ completan \ el \ formulario
\ en línea.
D. Las cajeras \ crean \ una cuenta \ después que \ tú \ completas \ el \ formulario \ en
línea.
In this sentence, someone bakes a cake.
A. True
B. False
61. A. Tú \ disfrutas \ el partido \ cuando \ tú \ ganas \ a \ los \ oponentes.
B. Tú \ disfrutas \ el partido \ cuando \ los niños \ ganan \ a \ los \ oponentes.
C. Los niños \ disfrutan \ el partido \ cuando \ los niños \ ganan \ a \ los \ oponentes.
D. Los niños \ disfrutan \ el partido \ cuando \ tú \ ganas \ a \ los \ oponentes.
In this sentence, someone is enjoying a game.
A. True
B. False
62. A. Tú \ levantas \ la mano \ cuando \ tú \ preguntas \ algo \ al \ profesor en clase.
B. Tú \ levantas \ la mano \ cuando \ las estudiantes \ preguntan \ algo \ al \ profesor en
clase.
C. Las estudiantes \ levantan \ la mano \ cuando \ las estudiantes \ preguntan \ algo \ al \
profesor en clase.
D. Las estudiantes \ levantan \ la mano \ cuando \ tú \ preguntas \ algo \ al \ profesor en
clase.
In this sentence, someone tells a story.
A. True
B. False
63. A. Tú \ visitas \ la escuela \ cuando \ tú \ participas \ en \ las \ reuniones de padres de
familia.
B. Tú \ visitas \ la escuela \ cuando \ los padres \ participan \ en \ las \ reuniones de padres
de familia.
C. Los padres \ visitan \ la escuela \ cuando \ los padres \ participan \ en \ las \ reuniones
de padres de familia.
D. Los padres \ visitan \ la escuela \ cuando \ tú \ participas \ en \ las \ reuniones de padres
de familia.
In this sentence, someone goes to a school.
195

A. True
B. False
64. A. Tú \ pasas \ la aspiradora \ cuando \ tú \ limpias \ la \ casa \ de los clientes.
B. Tú \ pasas \ la aspiradora \ cuando \ las criadas \ limpian \ la \ casa \ de los clientes.
C. Las criadas \ pasan \ la aspiradora \ cuando \ las criadas \ limpian \ la \ casa \ de los
clientes.
D. Las criadas \ pasan \ la aspiradora \ cuando \ tú \ limpias \ la \ casa \ de los clientes.
In this sentence, someone yells.
A. True
B. False
65. A. Tú \ llevas \ comida \ cuando \ tú \ trabajas \ para \ la \ compañía.
B. Tú \ llevas \ comida \ cuando \ los compañeros de cuarto \ trabajan \ para \ la \
compañía.
C. Los compañeros de cuarto \ llevan \ comida \ cuando \ los compañeros de cuarto \
trabajan \ para \ la \ compañía.
D. Los compañeros de cuarto \ llevan \ comida \ cuando \ tú \ trabajas \ para \ la \
compañía.
In this sentence, someone brings food.
A. True
B. False
66. A. Tú \ cambias \ de comida \ cuando \ tú \ empiezas \ una \ dieta \ recomendada.
B. Tú \ cambias \ de comida \ cuando \ los hombres \ empiezan \ una \ dieta \
recomendada.
C. Los hombres \ cambian \ de comida \ cuando \ los hombres \ empiezan \ una \ dieta \
recomendada.
D. Los hombres \ cambian \ de comida \ cuando \ tú \ empiezas \ una \ dieta \
recomendada.
In this sentence, someone finds money.
A. True
B. False
67. A. Tú \ coloreas \ las páginas \ cuando \ tú \ juegas \ con \ los \ hijos de mi amigo.
B. Tú \ coloreas \ las páginas \ cuando \ los adultos \ juegan \ con \ los \ hijos de mi
amigo.
C. Los adultos \ colorean \ las páginas \ cuando \ los adultos \ juegan \ con \ los \ hijos de
mi amigo.
D. Los adultos \ colorean \ las páginas \ cuando \ tú \ juegas \ con \ los \ hijos de mi
amigo.

196

In this sentence, someone plays with children.
A. True
B. False
68. A. Tú \ violas \ el pacto \ cuando \ tú \ mencionas \ el \ tema \ prohibido.
B. Tú \ violas \ el pacto \ cuando \ las periodistas \ mencionan \ el \ tema \ prohibido.
C. Las periodistas \ violan \ el pacto \ cuando \ las periodistas \ mencionan \ el \ tema \
prohibido.
D. Las periodistas \ violan \ el pacto \ cuando \ tú \ mencionas \ el \ tema \ prohibido.
In this sentence, someone grills a steak.
A. True
B. False
69. A. Tú \ patinas \ sobre hielo \ cuando \ tú \ visitas \ el \ lago \ en el invierno.
B. Tú \ patinas \ sobre hielo \ cuando \ los jugadores \ visitan \ el \ lago \ en el invierno.
C. Los jugadores \ patinan \ sobre hielo \ cuando \ los jugadores \ visitan \ el \ lago \ en el
invierno.
D. Los jugadores \ patinan \ sobre hielo \ cuando \ tú \ visitas \ el \ lago \ en el invierno.
In this sentence, someone visits a lake.
A. True
B. False
70. A. Tú \ ocasionas \ problemas \ cuando \ tú \ combinas \ las \ clases \ de los chicos y
chicas.
B. Tú \ ocasionas \ problemas \ cuando \ las directoras \ combinan \ las \ clases \ de los
chicos y chicas.
C. Las directoras \ ocasionan \ problemas \ cuando \ las directoras \ combinan \ las \
clases \ de los chicos y chicas.
D. Las directoras \ ocasionan \ problemas \ cuando \ tú \ combinas \ las \ clases \ de los
chicos y chicas.
In this sentence, someone prepares dinner.
A. True
B. False
71. A. Tú \ estornudas \ mucho \ mientras \ tú \ acaricias \ al \ animal \ en el zoológico.
B. Tú \ estornudas \ mucho \ mientras \ los fotógrafos \ acarician \ al \ animal \ en el
zoológico.
C. Los fotógrafos \ estornudan \ mucho \ mientras \ los fotógrafos \ acarician \ al \ animal
\ en el zoológico.
D. Los fotógrafos \ estornudan \ mucho \ mientras \ tú \ acaricias \ al \ animal \ en el
zoológico.
In this sentence, someone pets an animal.
197

A. True
B. False
72. A. Tú \ examinas \ la herida \ mientras \ tú \ cambias \ los \ vendajes \ en el hospital.
B. Tú \ examinas \ la herida \ mientras \ las enfermeras \ cambian \ los \ vendajes \ en el
hospital.
C. Las enfermeras \ examinan \ la herida \ mientras \ las enfermeras \ cambian \ los \
vendajes \ en el hospital.
D. Las enfermeras \ examinan \ la herida \ mientras \ tú \ cambias \ los \ vendajes \ en el
hospital.
In this sentence, someone rides the bus.
A. True
B. False
73. A. Tú \ limpias \ la cocina \ mientras \ tú \ preparas \ la \ comida \ para la fiesta.
B. Tú \ limpias \ la cocina \ mientras \ las mujeres \ preparan \ la \ comida \ para la fiesta.
C. Las mujeres \ limpian \ la cocina \ mientras \ las mujeres \ preparan \ la \ comida \ para
la fiesta.
D. Las mujeres \ limpian \ la cocina \ mientras \ tú \ preparas \ la \ comida \ para la fiesta.
In this sentence, someone is preparing food.
A. True
B. False
74. A. Tú \ miras \ el puntaje \ mientras \ tú \ nadas \ en \ los \ concursos.
B. Tú \ miras \ el puntaje \ mientras \ las nadadoras \ nadan \ en \ los \ concursos.
C. Las nadadoras \ miran \ el puntaje \ mientras \ las nadadoras \ nadan \ en \ los \
concursos.
D. Las nadadoras \ miran \ el puntaje \ mientras \ tú \ nadas \ en \ los \ concursos.
In this sentence, someone is playing golf.
A. True
B. False
75. A. Tú \ pausas \ el video \ mientras \ tú \ contestas \ el \ teléfono \ celular.
B. Tú \ pausas \ el video \ mientras \ los editores \ contestan \ el \ teléfono \ celular.
C. Los editores \ pausan \ el video \ mientras \ los editores \ contestan \ el \ teléfono \
celular.
D. Los editores \ pausan \ el video \ mientras \ tú \ contestas \ el \ teléfono \ celular.
In this sentence, someone is pausing a video.
A. True
B. False

198

76. A. Tú \ mezclas \ los colores \ mientras \ tú \ pintas \ una \ obra \ de arte.
B. Tú \ mezclas \ los colores \ mientras \ los artistas \ pintan \ una \ obra \ de arte.
C. Los artistas \ mezclan \ los colores \ mientras \ los artistas \ pintan \ una \ obra \ de arte.
D. Los artistas \ mezclan \ los colores \ mientras \ tú \ pintas \ una \ obra \ de arte.
In this sentence, someone is joking.
A. True
B. False
77. A. Tú \ cocinas \ la salsa \ mientras \ tú \ conversas \ con \ amigos \ en la fiesta.
B. Tú \ cocinas \ la salsa \ mientras \ las hijas \ conversan \ con \ amigos \ en la fiesta.
C. Las hijas \ cocinan \ la salsa \ mientras \ las hijas \ conversan \ con \ amigos \ en la
fiesta.
D. Las hijas \ cocinan \ la salsa \ mientras \ tú \ conversas \ con \ amigos \ en la fiesta.
In this sentence, someone is cooking salsa.
A. True
B. False
78. A. Tú \ piensas \ en una mentira \ mientras \ tú \ esperas \ al \ director \ del departamento.
B. Tú \ piensas \ en una mentira \ mientras \ los maestros \ esperan \ al \ director \ del
departamento.
C. Los maestros \ piensan \ en una mentira \ mientras \ los maestros \ esperan \ al \
director \ del departamento.
D. Los maestros \ piensan \ en una mentira \ mientras \ tú \ esperas \ al \ director \ del
departamento.
In this sentence, someone is racing cars.
A. True
B. False
79. A. Tú \ comunicas \ los resultados \ mientras \ tú \ presentas \ unos \ estudios \ en la
conferencia.
B. Tú \ comunicas \ los resultados \ mientras \ los científicos \ presentan \ unos \ estudios
\ en la conferencia.
C. Los científicos \ comunican \ los resultados \ mientras \ los científicos \ presentan \
unos \ estudios \ en la conferencia.
D. Los científicos \ comunican \ los resultados \ mientras \ tú \ presentas \ unos \ estudios
\ en la conferencia.
In this sentence, someone is presenting some studies.
A. True
B. False

199

80. A. Tú \ tomas \ muchas fotos \ mientras \ tú \ observas \ a \ los \ animales salvajes.
B. Tú \ tomas \ muchas fotos \ mientras \ los estudiantes \ observan \ a \ los \ animales
salvajes.
C. Los estudiantes \ toman \ muchas fotos \ mientras \ los estudiantes \ observan \ a \ los \
animales salvajes.
D. Los estudiantes \ toman \ muchas fotos \ mientras \ tú \ observas \ a \ los \ animales
salvajes.
In this sentence, someone is swimming in a pool.
A. True
B. False

200

APPENDIX D

Nonnative Background Questionnaire
Participant No: _______________________
What is your gender?
MALE

FEMALE

OTHER

How old are you? ____________________

PREFER NOT TO SAY

PREFER NOT TO SAY

Are you a native speaker of English?
YES

NO

Are you a native speaker of Spanish?
YES

NO

Have you ever studied abroad in a Spanish speaking country for 6 weeks or more?
YES

NO

If yes, where? _______________________
How many years have you studied Spanish (include high school)? ________________________
Please list all Spanish classes that you have taken at MSU:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Are you currently enrolled in a Spanish class at MSU?
YES

NO

201

If yes, which class/classes?: ____________________
Have you taken a speaking/reading/listening proficiency test as part of the MSU Flagship
Proficiency Initiative?
YES

NO

If yes, what were your scores on:
Speaking: _____________

Reading: _________________ Listening: ____________

I prefer not to say

I don’t remember, but did take the tests.

Do you speak any other languages other than Spanish and English?
YES

NO

If yes, please fill out the chart below and check all that apply:
Which language?

I’ve taken a

I grew up in a

I am a native

(Please write)

language class/ or

household that

speaker of this

language classes

speaks this

language.

for this language.

language.

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

202

APPENDIX E

Native Background Questionnaire
Participant No: _______________________
What is your gender?
MALE

FEMALE

OTHER

How old are you? ____________________

PREFER NOT TO SAY

PREFER NOT TO SAY

Are you a native speaker of English?
YES

NO

Are you a native speaker of Spanish?
YES

NO

Did you move to the United States after 13 years of age?
YES

NO

At what age did you move to the United States? __________________ PREFER NOT TO SAY
Are you currently enrolled in a Spanish class at MSU?
YES

NO
If yes, which class/classes?: ____________________

Do you speak any other languages other than Spanish and English?
YES

NO

203

If yes, please fill out the chart below and check all that apply:
Which language?
(Please write)

I’ve taken a
language class/ or
language classes
for this language.

I grew up in a
household that
speaks this
language.

I am a native
speaker of this
language.

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

Is there anything else I should know about your language background?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

204

REFERENCES

205

REFERENCES

Adger, D. (2003). Core syntax: A minimalist approach (Vol. 33). Oxford University Press.
Aguado-Orea, J., & Pine, J. (2015). Comparing different models of the development of verb
inflection in early childhood Spanish. PLOS One, 10(3), 1-21.
Ariel, A. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London: Routledge.
Austin, J. (2012). Markedness, input frequency, and the acquisition of inflection: Evidence from
Basque/Spanish bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingualism, 17(3), 259-283.
Baayen, R. H., & Davidson, D. J. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects
for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 390-412.
Bartning, I. (2000). Gender agreement in L2 French: Pre-advanced vs advanced learners. Studia
linguistica, 54(2), 225-237.
Bayley, R., & Pease-Álvarez, L. (1996). Null and expressed pronoun variation in Mexicandescent children’s Spanish. In J. Arnold, R. Blake, & B. Davidson (Eds.), Sociolinguistic
Variation: Data, Theory, and Analysis (pp. 85-99). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of
Language and Information.
Bejar, S. (2003). Phi-syntax: A theory of agreement. University of Toronto.
Bobaljik, J. (2006). Where's Phi? In D. Harbour, D. Adger, & S. Bejar (Eds.), Phi-Theory: Phi
features across interfaces and modules (pp. 295-328). Oxford University Press.
Bruhn de Garavito, J. (2003). The (dis)association between morphology and syntax: the case of
L2 Spanish. In S. Montrul, & F. Ordoñez (Eds.), Linguistic theory and language
development in Hispanic languages (pp. 398–417). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Clahsen, H. (1988). Parameterized grammatical theory and language acquisition. In Linguistic
theory in second language acquisition (pp. 47-75). Netherlands: Springer.
Clahsen, H., Aveledo, F., & Roca, I. (2002). The development of regular and irregular verb
inflection in Spanish child language. Child Language, 29, 591-622.
Cowper, E. (2005). The geometry of interpretable features: Infl in English and Spanish.
Language , 81(1), 10-46.
Dekydtspotter, L., & Renaud, C. (2009). On the contrastive analysis of features in second
language acquisition: uninterpretable gender on past participles in English—French
processing. Second Language Research, 25(2), 255-267.
206

Ellis, N., & Sagarra, N. (2010). The bounds of adult language acquisition. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 32(4), 553-580.
García-Alcaraz, E., & Bel, A. (2014). The acquisition of co-referential properties of pronouns in
bilingual and L2 Spanish speakers. Online Proceedings Supplement of the 39th Annual
Boston University Conference on Language Development. Boston.
Givón, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: The functional domain of switch reference. In J.
Haiman, & P. Munro (Eds.), Switch reference and universal grammar (pp. 51-81).
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gundel, J., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring
expressions in discourse. Language, 69, 274–307.
Hanson, R. (2000). Pronoun acquisition and the morphological feature geometry. Calgary
Working Papers in Linguistics, 22, 1-14.
Harley, R., & Ritter, E. (2002). Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis.
Language, 78, 482-526.
Harley, R., & Ritter, H. (2000). Underspecification and universal defaults for person and number
features. Actes de l’ACL/CLA conference proceedings (pp. 111-122). Ottawa: Cahiers
Linguistiques d’Ottawa.
Hawkins, R. (2005). Explaining full and partial success in the acquisition of second language
Grammatical properties. Second Language, 4(0), 7-25.
Hawkins, R., & Chan, C. (1997). The partial availability of universal grammar in second
language acquisition: The failed functional features hypothesis. Second Language
Research, 13, 187-226.
Haznedar, B., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Are there optional infinitives in child L2 acquisition. In
Proceedings of the 21st annual Boston University conference on language development
(Vol. 21, pp. 257-68). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Herschensohn, J. (2001). Missing inflection in second language French: accidental infinitives
and other verbal deficits. Second Language Research, 17(3), 273-305.
Hopp, H. (2010). Ultimate attainment in L2 inflection: Performance similarities between nonnative and native speakers. Lingua, 120, 901-931.
Instituto Cervantes. (2016). Diplomas of Spanish as a Foreign Language. Retrieved from
http://www.dele.org/

207

Isabelli, C. (2008, May). First noun principle of L1 transfer principle in SLA? Hispania, 91(2),
465-478.
Jegerski, J. (2014). Self-paced reading. In J. Jegerski, & B. VanPatten (Eds.), Research methods
in second language psycholinguistics (pp. 20-49). New York, NY: Routledge.
Jegerski, J., VanPatten, B., & Keating, G. (2016). Relative clause attachment preferences in early
and late Spanish-English bilinguals. Advances in Spanish as a Heritage Language, 49,
81-99.
Johnson, V., Villiers, J., & Seymour, H. (2005). Agreement without understanding? The case of
third-person singular /s/ . First Language, 25(3), 317-330.
Keating, G. (2009). Sensitivity to violations of gender agreement in native and nonnative
Spanish: An eye-movement investigation. Language Learning, 59, 503-535.
Keating, G., & Jegerski, J. (2015). Experimental designs in sentence processing research. Studies
in Second Language Acquisition, 37(1), 1-32.
Lardiere, D. (1998). Case and tense in the ‘fossilized’ steady state. Second Language Research,
14, 1-26.
Lardiere, D. (2000). Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition. In J. Archibald
(Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 102–129). Oxford:
Blackwell.
Lardiere, D. (2007). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lardiere, D. (2008). Feature assembly in second language acquisition. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, &
H. Goodluck (Eds.), The role of formal features in second language acquisition (pp. 106–
140). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lardiere, D. (2009). Some thoughts on the contrastive analysis of features in L2 acquisition.
Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.
LoCoco, V. (1987). Learner comprehension of oral and written sentences in German and
Spanish: The importance of word order. In B. VanPatten, T. Dvorak, & J. Lee (Eds.),
Foreign Language Learning: A Research Perspective (pp. 119-129). Cambridge:
Newbury House.
Lopez Prego, B. (2012). Examining the nature of variability in gender and number agreement in
native and non-native Spanish.
Mandell, P. (2013). Do L2 Spanish learners attend to verb morphology? The TFLTA Journal, 2028.

208

McCarthy, C. (2008). Morphological variability in the comprehension of agreement: An
argument for representation over computation. Second Language Research, 24(4), 459486.
McCarthy, C. (2012). Modeling morphological variation and development: Person and number
in L2 Spanish. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2(1), 25-53.
McDonald, J. (2000). Grammaticality judgments in a second language: Influences of age of
acquisition and native language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21(3), 395-423.
McDonald, J. (2006). Beyond the critical period: Processing-based explanations for poor
grammaticality judgment performance by late second language learners. Journal of
Memory and Language, 55(3), 381-401.
Montalbetti, M. (1984). After binding. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Montrul, S. (2011). Multiple interfaces and incomplete acquisition. Lingua, 121, 591-604.
Ortiz López, L. (2011). Spanish in contact with Haitian Creole. In M. Díaz-Campos (Ed.), The
Handbook of Hispanic Sociolinguistics. West Sussex, UK: Blackwell.
Pinto, M. (2013). Tracking reference with null subjects. Linguistics in the Netherlands , 134-145.
Prévost, P., & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language
acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 16(2),
103–133.
Renaud, C. (2010). On the nature of agreement in English-French acquisition: A processing
investigation in the verbal and nominal domains. Indiana University.
Renaud, C. (2014). A processing investigation of the accessibility of the uninterpretable gender
feature in L2 French and L2 Spanish adjective agreement. Linguistic Approaches to
Bilingualism, 4(2), 222-255.
Roberts, L., Gullberg, M., & Indefrey, P. (2008). Online pronoun resolution in L2 discourse.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 333-357.
Rothman, J. (2008). How pragmatically odd! Interface delays and pronominal subject
distribution in L2 Spanish. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 1(2), 317-340.
Rothman, J. (2009). Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences?: L2 pronominal subjects
and the syntax-pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 951-973.
Rothman, J., & Iverson, M. (2007). The syntax of null subjects in L2 Spanish: Comparing two
L2 populations under different exposure. RESLA, 185-214.

209

Scherag, A., Demuth, L., Rosler, F., Neville, H., & Roder, B. (2004). The effects of late
acquisition of L2 and the consequences of immigration on L1 for semantic and morphosyntactic language aspects. Cognition, 93(3), B97-B108.
Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. (1994). Word order and nominative case in nonnative language
acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German Interlanguage. In T. Hoekstra,
& B. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar: Papers in
honor of Kenneth Wexler from 1991 GLOW workshops (pp. 317-368). Philadelphia, PA:
John Benjamins .
Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model.
Second Language Research, 12(1), 40-72.
Shin, N., & Cairns, H. (2012). The development of NP selection in school-age children:
Reference and Spanish subject pronouns. Language Acquisition, 19(1), 3-38.
Shin, N., & Otheguy, R. (2009). Shifting sensitivity to continuity of reference: Subject pronoun
use in Spanish in New York City. In M. Lacorte, & J. Leeman (Eds.), Español en Estados
Unidos y en otros contextos: Cuestiones sociolingüísticas, políticas y pedagógicas (pp.
111–136). Madrid: Iberoamericana.
Slabakova, R., Kempchinsky, P., & Rothman, J. (2012). Clitic-doubled left dislocation and focus
fronting in L2 Spanish: A case of successful acquisition at the syntax– discourse
interface. Second Language Research, 28(3), 319-343.
Sorace, A. (2004). Native language attrition and developmental instability at the syntaxdiscourse interface: Data, interpretations and methods. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 7(02), 143-145.
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second
Language Research, 22(3), 339-368.
Spinner, P. (2013). The second language acquisition of number and gender in Swahili: A feature
reassembly approach. Second Language Research, 29(4), 455-479.
Tanner, D. (2011). Agreement mechanisms in native and nonnative language processing:
Electrophysiological correlates of complexity interference. Dissertation. University of
Washington.
Tight, D. (2012). The first noun principle and ambitransitive verbs. Hispania, 95(1), 103-115.
Tokowicz, N., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to
violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies
in Second Language Acquistion, 27(2), 173-204.

210

Tsimpli, I., & Sorace, A. (2006). Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntaxsemantics
and syntax-discourse phenomena. BUCLD Proceedings 30, 30. Chicago.
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1994). Direct access to X’-theory: Evidence from Korean
and Turkish adults learning German. In Language Acquisition Studies in Generative
Grammar (pp. 265-316). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1996). Gradual development of L2 phrase structure.
Second Language Research, 12(1), 7-39.
Valenzuela, E. (2006). L2 ultimate attainment and the syntax -discourse interface: The
acquisition of topic constructions in non-native spanish and english. Dissertation.
VanPatten, B. (1984). Learners’ comprehension of clitic pronouns : More evidence for a word
order strategy. Hispanic Linguistics, 57-67.
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to content and form in the input: an experiment in
consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287-301.
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research.
Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing.
VanPatten, B. (2003). From input to output: A teacher’s guide to second language acquisition.
Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
VanPatten, B. (2012). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten, &
J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 115-137). New York,
NY: Routledge.
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 225-243.
VanPatten, B., & Keating, G. (2007). Getting tense: Lexical preference, L1 transfer and native
and non-native processing of temporal reference. AAAL. Costa Mesa.
VanPatten, B., Keating, G., & Leeser, M. (2012). Missing verbal inflections as a representational
problem: Evidence from self-paced reading. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism,
2012, 109-140.
White, L. (2003). Fossilization in steady-state L2 grammars: Persistent problems with
inflectional morphology . Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6, 129-141.
White, L., Valenzuela, E., Kozlowska-Macgregor, M., & Leung, Y. (2004). Gender and number
agreement in nonnative Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25(1), 105–133.

211