ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Lang. Sci.
Sec. Psycholinguistics
This article is part of the Research TopicInsights in Psycholinguistics: 2025View all 14 articles
Lexical versus structural cue use in L2 prediction: Structural computation ability shapes what information learners rely on
Provisionally accepted- 1Waseda Daigaku, Shinjuku, Japan
- 2Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
- 3Osaka Daigaku, Suita, Japan
- 4Miyagi Gakuin Joshi Daigaku, Sendai, Japan
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
This study examines whether second language (L2) sentence processing is governed by the same underlying mechanisms as native language processing or whether it relies on qualitatively distinct mechanisms. Using the visual-world paradigm and permutation analyses, we compared native English speakers and Japanese second language (L2) learners of English in processing globally ambiguous filler-gap dependencies (e.g., Where did Lizzie tell someone that she was going to catch butterflies?). By distinguishing L2 learners based on their comprehension accuracy for unambiguous filler-gap sentences, we identified systematic variation in the mechanisms guiding predictive processing. High-accuracy learners exhibited anticipatory eye-movement patterns comparable to those of native speakers, consistent with the use of structurally guided predictive dependency formation. In contrast, low-accuracy learners also showed predictive behavior, but this prediction was driven primarily by lexical or surface-level regularities rather than structural information. Importantly, neither the structure-based prediction observed in the high-accuracy group nor the lexical cue-based predictive observed in the low-accuracy group can be attributed to direct transfer from Japanese. Together, these results support a gradient view of L2 sentence processing in which qualitatively different predictive mechanisms coexist and may shift as a function of learners’ structural computation ability, rather than a simple contrast between non-predictive and native-like processing.
Keywords: Eye-tracking, Filler-gap dependencies, incremental parsing, L2 sentence processing, Permutation analysis
Received: 28 Nov 2025; Accepted: 02 Feb 2026.
Copyright: © 2026 Nakamura, Flynn, Miyamoto and Yusa. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Chie Nakamura
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
