ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2026
The Processing of English Applicative Constructions: Evidence from Eye-Tracking.
Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present study attempted to explore second language (L2) learners' processing of English applicative constructions in comparison to prepositional dative constructions. Specifically, we employed an online comprehension in an eye-tracking paradigm in which Chinese learners of English had to read sentences containing English applicative constructions and prepositional dative constructions. Results revealed that compared with the indirect objects in prepositional dative constructions, learners processed the indirect objects in English applicative constructions more slowly during the later stage. Additionally, factors such as thematic roles, verbal event types, and the learners' proficiency collectively affected the processing of English applicative constructions. The findings suggest that L2 learners experience greater difficulties integrating syntactic and semantic information in English applicative constructions. This study highlights the role of syntactic-semantic interface complexity in L2 processing and supports the Interface Heterogeneity Hypothesis, offering new insights for theories of bilingual language acquisition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42203991What 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.