This article provides a selective review of recent sentence processing studies that have investigated non-native speakers’ real-time comprehension of different types of discontinuous dependency in English as a second language (L2). Taken together, the results from these studies reveal a fairly systematic pattern, with L2 learners tending to show native-like processing performance for ’forwards-looking’ dependencies but not for ’backwards-looking’ ones. Forwards-looking dependencies to be considered here include different kinds of wh-dependency, and backwards-looking ones include reflexive binding, anaphoric pronouns, and antecedent-contained deletions. I will explore possible reasons for the observed differences between forwards and backwards-looking syntactic dependencies in L2 processing by considering the nature of the different types of search process involved, and the necessity of accessing or computing detailed syntactic representations for successful dependency formation.

This paper investigates Korean-learners' strategies for inferring Japanese kanji readings from Korean kanji readings, paying careful attention to the orthographic and lexical distance between the Japanese and Korean languages. The specific purpose of this paper is to clarify the reason and cause for the successes and failures of strategies by examining what tendencies Korean learners exhibit when choosing one of several Japanese readings corresponding to a Korean reading. Results showed that Korean learners tend to make choices based on the on-reading of the Japanese kanji which is psychologically most similar to the Korean reading. They also revealed that Korean learners tend to base their decisions on easy kanji learned in the early stages of Japanese-learning such as N3 or lower levels of the Japanese Language Proficiency Test. Moreover, in the situation where such a basis is not found, Korean learners tend to adopt the Japanese Kanji with a reading resembling a Korean reading.

This study investigated Thai learners' abilities to detect the ungrammaticality of English sentences with null arguments. Thai, particularly in informal contexts, differs from English in that Thai allows null arguments in subject and object positions. A Grammaticality Judgment (GJ) task was employed and Thai participants were to identify ungrammatical sentences in which either subjects or objects were missing and make corrections. Based on previous L2 findings and L1 facts, we predicted that (1) null subjects would be identified and corrected at a higher rate than null objects, and (2) null subjects/objects in single clauses would be identified and corrected at a higher rate than null subjects/objects in embedded clauses. A grammaticality judgment task (GJ) was conducted with 100 Thai high school and college students. They were divided into four proficiency levels by means of an English placement test. Results from Repeated Measures ANOVAs confirmed both predictions. The results support the role of input consistency and the role of L1 null arguments in the learning of English non-null arguments. In respect of proficiency, post-hoc tests revealed significant differences between groups. This study suggests that L2 learners associate elements allowing null objects in the L1 with L2 null objects and that sensitivity to non-null arguments increases with higher proficiency in L2 acquisition.