| dc.description.abstract | It is well-known that it is unlikely for adult learners of English as a second language (ESL) to reach native-like proficiency in using inflectional morphemes such as third person singular -s, plurals, and regular past ed, resulting in variable use. Variability is welldocumentedin stable and developing grammars, as well as in the oral and writtenproduction of adult and child ESL learners. Although variability has been extensively investigated within the generative approach to second language acquisition research, its causes are still unknown. Two competing hypotheses can be identified in the secondlanguage (L2) acquisition literature, which diverge on the status of second language abstract representation. Nonetheless, both hypotheses do not take into account the role of processing in L2 performance, which is crucial for the successful acquisition of a language. In fact, little is known about how language learners comprehend or producelanguage in real time. Despite the fact that there is growing evidence on how first language (L1) learners process language, little is known about how L2 learners produce and comprehend language. It is thus necessary to investigate the causes of inflectional variability in Brazilian Portuguese learners of English from a processing perspective. The hypothesis under investigation is that high proficient non-native speakers of English are,just like native speakers, sensitive to violations of tense/ agreement, evidenced by significant differences between reading times of sentences in two conditions. If learners are insensitive to violations, knowledge of inflectional morphology is not automatically available, and learners will face problems acquiring it. This dissertation reports on an experimental study whose objective was to investigate L2 learners sensitivity to past and present inflectional morphemes in an online task. Two self-paced reading experiments were conducted in which the reading times of L2 learners were measured and compared with the reading times of native controls. Sentences varied on the use or absence of inflectional morphemes. DMDX was used to present and record data. Participants were grouped according to their proficiency level. The statistical analysis showed that nonnative speakers of English are not sensitive to inflectional morphemes. The results are discussed in light of Distributed Morphology and previous studies on production and processing of inflectional morphemes. The use of the self-paced reading paradigm to investigate morphological sensitivity is also discussed. Issues for future studies are presented. | |
