ArticleBrain sciences2020
Morpheme Analysis Associated with German Noun Plural Endings among Second Language (L2) Learners Using Event-Related Potentials (ERPs).
Article in Brain sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper aims to examine the morpho-syntactic process of noun plural endings, "-n" and "-s", in adult second language (L2) learners using event-related potentials (ERPs). German noun plural endings consist of many inflectional forms. They are one of the difficulties faced by German L2 learners. We recorded an electroencephalogram (EEG) study of German L2 learners by dividing study subjects into low and high L2 learners according to the learning level. We examined what ERP components were associated with L2 language processing. All participants were Korean German L2 learners who had achieved varying levels of proficiency. As a result of our analysis, we confirmed different morpho-syntactic processing between the two groups. First, N400 was detected at any learning level. It confirmed language processing supportive of the Full-Listing Model for irregular endings. Second, we confirmed left anterior negativity (LAN), as detected in both low and high proficiency L2 learners. LAN is supportive of a Full-Parsing Model for regular endings, as it was detected in both low and high proficiency L2 learners. However, P600 was detected in highly proficient L2 learners only. It implies that high proficiency learners differ from low proficiency L2 learners. P600 is processed in a reparsing process after recognition of grammatical errors. Based on this result, more active use of a Dual Mechanism Model is possible as learning levels improve. It confirms that improvement in L2 learners results in an approach to cognitive processing similar to that of German first language (L1) speakers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.