@article{SekerinaSauermann2015, author = {Sekerina, Irina A. and Sauermann, Antje}, title = {Visual attention and quantifier-spreading in heritage Russian bilinguals}, series = {Second language research}, volume = {31}, journal = {Second language research}, number = {1}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {0267-6583}, doi = {10.1177/0267658314537292}, pages = {75 -- 104}, year = {2015}, abstract = {It is well established in language acquisition research that monolingual children and adult second language learners misinterpret sentences with the universal quantifier every and make quantifier-spreading errors that are attributed to a preference for a match in number between two sets of objects. The present Visual World eye-tracking study tested bilingual heritage Russian-English adults and investigated how they interpret of sentences like Every alligator lies in a bathtub in both languages. Participants performed a sentence-picture verification task while their eye movements were recorded. Pictures showed three pairs of alligators in bathtubs and two extra objects: elephants (Control condition), bathtubs (Overexhaustive condition), or alligators (Underexhaustive condition). Monolingual adults performed at ceiling in all conditions. Heritage language (HL) adults made 20\% q-spreading errors, but only in the Overexhaustive condition, and when they made an error they spent more time looking at the two extra bathtubs during the Verb region. We attribute q-spreading in HL speakers to cognitive overload caused by the necessity to integrate conflicting sources of information, i.e. the spoken sentences in their weaker, heritage, language and attention-demanding visual context, that differed with respect to referential salience.}, language = {en} } @article{LaurinavichyuteSekerinaAlexeevaetal.2019, author = {Laurinavichyute, Anna and Sekerina, Irina A. and Alexeeva, Svetlana and Bagdasaryan, Kristine and Kliegl, Reinhold}, title = {Russian Sentence Corpus: Benchmark measures of eye movements in reading in Russian}, series = {Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society}, volume = {51}, journal = {Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York}, issn = {1554-351X}, doi = {10.3758/s13428-018-1051-6}, pages = {1161 -- 1178}, year = {2019}, abstract = {This article introduces a new corpus of eye movements in silent readingthe Russian Sentence Corpus (RSC). Russian uses the Cyrillic script, which has not yet been investigated in cross-linguistic eye movement research. As in every language studied so far, we confirmed the expected effects of low-level parameters, such as word length, frequency, and predictability, on the eye movements of skilled Russian readers. These findings allow us to add Slavic languages using Cyrillic script (exemplified by Russian) to the growing number of languages with different orthographies, ranging from the Roman-based European languages to logographic Asian ones, whose basic eye movement benchmarks conform to the universal comparative science of reading (Share, 2008). We additionally report basic descriptive corpus statistics and three exploratory investigations of the effects of Russian morphology on the basic eye movement measures, which illustrate the kinds of questions that researchers can answer using the RSC. The annotated corpus is freely available from its project page at the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/x5q2r/.}, language = {en} } @article{ParshinaLaurinavichyuteSekerina2021, author = {Parshina, Olga and Laurinavichyute, Anna and Sekerina, Irina A.}, title = {Eye-movement benchmarks in heritage language reading}, series = {Bilingualism : language and cognition}, volume = {24}, journal = {Bilingualism : language and cognition}, number = {1}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, address = {Cambridge}, issn = {1366-7289}, doi = {10.1017/S136672892000019X}, pages = {69 -- 82}, year = {2021}, abstract = {This eye-tracking study establishes basic benchmarks of eye movements during reading in heritage language (HL) by Russian-speaking adults and adolescents of high (n = 21) and low proficiency (n = 27). Heritage speakers (HSs) read sentences in Cyrillic, and their eye movements were compared to those of Russian monolingual skilled adult readers, 8-year-old children and L2 learners. Reading patterns of HSs revealed longer mean fixation durations, lower skipping probabilities, and higher regressive saccade rates than in monolingual adults. High-proficient HSs were more similar to monolingual children, while low-proficient HSs performed on par with L2 learners. Low-proficient HSs differed from high-proficient HSs in exhibiting lower skipping probabilities, higher fixation counts, and larger frequency effects. Taken together, our findings are consistent with the weaker links account of bilingual language processing as well as the divergent attainment theory of HL.}, language = {en} } @article{HanneSekerinaVasishthetal.2011, author = {Hanne, Sandra and Sekerina, Irina A. and Vasishth, Shravan and Burchert, Frank and De Bleser, Ria}, title = {Chance in agrammatic sentence comprehension what does it really mean? Evidence from eye movements of German agrammatic aphasic patients}, series = {Aphasiology : an international, interdisciplinary journal}, volume = {25}, journal = {Aphasiology : an international, interdisciplinary journal}, number = {2}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hove}, issn = {0268-7038}, doi = {10.1080/02687038.2010.489256}, pages = {221 -- 244}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Background: In addition to the canonical subject-verb-object (SVO) word order, German also allows for non-canonical order (OVS), and the case-marking system supports thematic role interpretation. Previous eye-tracking studies (Kamide et al., 2003; Knoeferle, 2007) have shown that unambiguous case information in non-canonical sentences is processed incrementally. For individuals with agrammatic aphasia, comprehension of non-canonical sentences is at chance level (Burchert et al., 2003). The trace deletion hypothesis (Grodzinsky 1995, 2000) claims that this is due to structural impairments in syntactic representations, which force the individual with aphasia (IWA) to apply a guessing strategy. However, recent studies investigating online sentence processing in aphasia (Caplan et al., 2007; Dickey et al., 2007) found that divergences exist in IWAs' sentence-processing routines depending on whether they comprehended non-canonical sentences correctly or not, pointing rather to a processing deficit explanation. Aims: The aim of the current study was to investigate agrammatic IWAs' online and offline sentence comprehension simultaneously in order to reveal what online sentence-processing strategies they rely on and how these differ from controls' processing routines. We further asked whether IWAs' offline chance performance for non-canonical sentences does indeed result from guessing. Methods Procedures: We used the visual-world paradigm and measured eye movements (as an index of online sentence processing) of controls (N = 8) and individuals with aphasia (N = 7) during a sentence-picture matching task. Additional offline measures were accuracy and reaction times. Outcomes Results: While the offline accuracy results corresponded to the pattern predicted by the TDH, IWAs' eye movements revealed systematic differences depending on the response accuracy. Conclusions: These findings constitute evidence against attributing IWAs' chance performance for non-canonical structures to mere guessing. Instead, our results support processing deficit explanations and characterise the agrammatic parser as deterministic and inefficient: it is slowed down, affected by intermittent deficiencies in performing syntactic operations, and fails to compute reanalysis even when one is detected.}, language = {en} }