How native (L1) and non-native (L2) readers utilise syntactic constraints on linguistic dependency resolution during language comprehension is debated, with previous research yielding mixed findings. To address this discrepancy, we report two large-scale studies, using self-paced reading and grammaticality judgements, investigating subject-verb agreement and reflexives in L1 English speakers and Arabic learners of L2 English. We manipulated sentence grammaticality and the properties of ‘distractor’ constituents (The key(s) to the cabinet(s) were rusty) in two studies testing number in agreement and gender/number in reflexives. Study 1 showed that L2ers’ performance largely patterned with L1ers’. Although grammaticality effects were smaller for agreement in L2ers than in L1ers, proficiency modulated L2 performance. Study 2 revealed no significant between-group differences. Contrasting some L1 studies, significant distractor effects were only detected for reflexives in Study 1. Together, these results imply that L2ers compute syntactic dependencies similarly to L1ers, and potential differences might be driven by L2 proficiency.

中文翻译：

---

非母语句子处理中的一致性和反身


母语 （L1） 和非母语 （L2） 读者如何在语言理解过程中利用句法约束进行语言依赖关系解析存在争议，以前的研究得出的结果喜忧参半。为了解决这一差异，我们报告了两项大规模研究，使用自定进度阅读和语法判断，调查了 L1 英语使用者和 L2 英语阿拉伯语学习者的主谓一致性和反身性。我们在两项研究中操纵了句子语法和 '干扰物' 成分的性质 （The key（s） to the cabinet（s） were rusty） ），测试了一致性中的数字和反身词中的性别/数字。研究 1 表明，L2 员工的表现在很大程度上与 L1 员工的表现相似。尽管 L2 人对一致性的语法影响小于 L1 人，但熟练度调节了 L2 表现。研究 2 显示组间无显著差异。与一些 L1 研究相反，在研究 1 中仅对反射性检测到显着的干扰效应。总之，这些结果表明 L2 用户计算句法依赖关系的方式与 L1 用户类似，潜在的差异可能由 L2 熟练度驱动。