Resolving Relative Clause Ambiguity in Arabic: Evidence From Hijazi Speakers and L2 Learners of MSA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1702.20Keywords:
Hijazi Arabic, L1 transfer, Modern Standard Arabic, predicate proximity, relative clause attachmentAbstract
This study investigates how Hijazi Arabic native speakers and second-language (L2) learners of Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) resolve relative clause attachment ambiguity. While cross-linguistic work reports both high-attachment (NP1) and low-attachment (NP2) patterns, evidence for Arabic remains mixed and the role of diglossia underexplored. Sixteen Hijazi Arabic speakers and 29 MSA learners completed a sentence-interpretation task comprising ambiguous and unambiguous relative clauses. For Hijazi Arabic speakers, a paired t-test showed no significant difference in Hijazi Arabic and MSA, indicating a stable NP1 preference across varieties. Beginning L2 learners whose first language (L1) was English preferred NP2, while advanced learners shifted to NP1. L1 French speakers learning MSA exhibited a consistent NP1 pattern among beginners and advanced learners alike. A two-way ANOVA revealed significant effects of L1 and proficiency, and a significant interaction, reflecting a developmental shift for English speakers and stable target-like performance for French speakers. These findings support predicate proximity accounts of Arabic and challenge the shallow structure hypothesis, showing that L2 learners can acquire L2 parsing preferences. The study contributes to debates on transfer, convergence, and proficiency in L2 sentence processing.
References
Abdelghany, H., & Fodor, J. D. (1999). Low attachment of relative clauses in Arabic [Poster presentation]. Annual Meeting of the Architectures and Mechanisms of Language Processing (AmlaP).
Akal, T. (2021). Recency preference in ambiguous relative clause attachment in Turkish. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(S1), 139–159. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.903361
Aldosari, S. M. (2024). Relative clause attachment preference in Najdi Arabic monolinguals and Najdi Arabic learners of English. Critical Studies in Languages and Literature, 3(1), 15–40. https://doi.org/10.5455/CSLL.182607
Alharthy, F. (2025). Comparative constructions in Bisha Colloquial Arabic: a case study. Frontiers in Language Sciences, 4, 1560932. https://doi.org/10.3389/flang.2025.1560932
Aoun, J. E., Benmamoun, E., & Choueiri, L. (2010). The syntax of Arabic. Cambridge University Press.
Awwad, M. A. M. B. (1973). Relativization and related matters in classical, modern standard, and Palestinian colloquial Arabic (Publication No. 7403175) [Doctoral dissertation, Brown University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Bakir, M. J. (1980). Aspects of clause structure in Arabic: A study in word order variation in literary Arabic (Publication No. 8103370) [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Bidaoui, A., Foote, R., & Abunasser, M. (2016). Relative clause attachment in native and L2 Arabic. International Journal of Arabic Linguistics, 2(2), 75–95.
Brysbaert, M., & Mitchell, D. C. (1996). Modifier attachment in sentence parsing: Evidence from Dutch. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 49(3), 664–695. https://doi.org/10.1080/027249896392540
Carreiras, M., & Clifton, C. (1993). Relative clause interpretation preferences in Spanish and English. Language and Speech, 36(4), 353–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099303600401
Carreiras, M., & Clifton, C. (1999). Another word on parsing relative clauses: Eyetracking evidence from Spanish and English. Memory & Cognition, 27(5), 826–833. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198535
Cheng, Y., Rothman, J., & Cunnings, I. (2021). Parsing preferences and individual differences in nonnative sentence processing: Evidence from eye movements. Applied Psycholinguistics, 42(1), 129–151. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642000065X
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060206
Cuetos, F., & Mitchell, D. C. (1988). Cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the late closure strategy in Spanish. Cognition, 30(1), 73–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90004-2
Dekydtspotter, L., Donaldson, B., Edmonds, A. C., Fultz, A. L., & Petrush, R. A. (2008). Syntactic and prosodic computations in the resolution of relative clause attachment ambiguity by English-French learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(4), 453–480. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080728
Dinçtopal-Deniz, N. (2010). Relative clause attachment preferences of Turkish L2 speakers of English. In R. P. Leow, H. Campos, & D. Lardiere (Eds.), Research in second language processing and parsing (pp. 27–64). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.53.02din
Dobao, A. M. F. (2002). The effect of language proficiency on communication strategy use: A case study of Galician learners of English. Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies, 25, 53–75. https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.200210524
Dussias, P. E. (2003). Syntactic ambiguity resolution in L2 learners: Some effects of bilinguality on L1 and L2 processing strategies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(4), 529–557. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263103000238
Dussias, P. E. (2004). Parsing a first language like a second: The erosion of L1 parsing strategies in Spanish-English bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8(3), 355–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069040080031001
Dussias, P. E., & Sagarra, N. (2007). The effect of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002847
Ehrlich, K., Fernández, E., Fodor, J. D., Stenshoel, E., & Vinereanu, M. (1999). Low attachment of relative clauses: New data from Swedish, Norwegian and Romanian [Poster presentation]. 12th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing.
Felser, C., Roberts, L., Marinis, T., & Gross, R. (2003). The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(3), 453–489. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716403000237
Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 559–586). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Frenck-Mestre, C. (1997). Examining second language reading: An on-line look. In A. Sorace, C. Heycock, & R. Shillcock (Eds.), Proceedings of the GALA 1997 Conference on Language Acquisition (pp. 474–478). University of Edinburgh.
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2002). An on-line look at sentence processing in the second language. In R. R. Heredia & J. Altarriba (Eds.), Bilingual sentence processing (pp. 217–236). North-Holland.
Frenck-Mestre, C., & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 50(1), 119–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/027249897392251
Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N., Canseco-Gonzalez, E., & Hickok, G. (1996). Recency preference in the human sentence processing mechanism. Cognition, 59(1), 23–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00687-7
Grillo, N., & Costa, J. (2014). A novel argument for the universality of parsing principles. Cognition, 133(1), 156–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.05.019
Gutierrez-Ziardegi, E., Carreiras, M., & Laka, I. (2004). Bilingual sentence processing: Relative clause attachment in Basque and Spanish [Poster presentation]. 17th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing.
Hemforth, B., Fernandez, S., Clifton, C., Frazier, L., Konieczny, L., & Walter, M. (2015). Relative clause attachment in German, English, Spanish and French: Effects of position and length. Lingua, 166, 43–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.010
Hernández, A. E., Fernández, E. M., & Aznar-Besé, N. (2007). Bilingual sentence processing. In M. G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 371–384). Oxford University Press.
Ito, K., Koizumi, M., & Kiyama, S. (2021). How Native Japanese speakers solve ambiguous relative clauses in their L1 and L2: Evidence from the self-paced reading of Japanese and English. Buckeye East Asian Linguistics, 5, 4–12. https://kb.osu.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/67e3d0f7-009f-41ff-92b5-0c0fe6d592da/content
Kamide, Y., & Mitchell, D. C. (1997). Relative clause attachment: Nondeterminism in Japanese parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26(2), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025017817290
Karimi, M. N., Samadi, E., & Babaii, E. (2021). Relative clause attachment ambiguity resolution in L1-Persian learners of L2 English: The effects of semantic priming and proficiency. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 8(3), 153–185. https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2020.13469.1666
Kim, J. H. (2010). L1 transfer in L2 RC attachment. English Language and Linguistics, 16(3), 115–134. https://doi.org/10.17960/ell.2010.16.3.006
Kimball, J. (1973). Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language. Cognition, 2(1), 15–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(72)90028-5
Maia, M., Fernández, E. M., Costa, A., & Lourenço-Gomes, M. D. C. (2007). Early and late preferences in relative clause attachment in Spanish and Portuguese. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 6(1), 227–250. https://doi.org/10.5334/jpl.151
Marefat, H., & Farzizadeh, B. (2018). Relative clause ambiguity resolution in L1 and L2: Are processing strategies transferred? Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 125–161. https://www.magiran.com/p1892906
Marefat, H., & Meraji, M. (2005). Parsing preferences in structurally ambiguous relative clauses: L1 vs. L2. The International Journal of Humanities, 12(1), 111–127.
Miyao, M., & Omaki, A. (2006). No ambiguity about it: Korean learners of Japanese have a clear attachment preference. In D. Bamman & T. Magnitskaia (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 1–12). Cascadilla Press.
Mohammad, M. A. (1990). The problem of subject-verb agreement in Arabic: Towards a solution. In M. Eid (Ed.), Perspectives on Arabic linguistics: Papers from the First Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics (pp. 95–125). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.63.07moh
Papadopoulou, D., & Clahsen, H. (2003). Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A study of relative clause attachment in Greek. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(4), 501–528. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263103000214
Rah, A. (2009). Sentence processing in a second language: Ambiguity resolution in German learners of English [Doctoral dissertation, Universität zu Köln]. CORE. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/12010912.pdf
Shen, X. (2006). Late assignment of syntax theory: Evidence from Chinese and English [Doctoral dissertation, University of Exeter]. ProQuest. https://www.proquest.com/openview/d4437f46f15e3af2d6fda9f9f3a00a10/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=51922&diss=y
Soltan, U. (2007). On formal feature licensing in minimalism: Aspects of Standard Arabic morphosyntax [Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland]. Digital Repository at the University of Maryland. http://hdl.handle.net/1903/7581
Swets, B., Desmet, T., Hambrick, D. Z., & Ferreira, F. (2007). The role of working memory in syntactic ambiguity resolution: A psychometric approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(1), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.1.64
Uludağ, O. (2020). Transfer of L1 processing strategies to the interpretation of sentence-level L2 input: A cross-linguistic comparison on the resolution of relative clause attachment ambiguities. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 155–188. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.775796
Witzel, J., Witzel, N., & Nicol, J. (2012). Deeper than shallow: Evidence for structure-based parsing biases in second-language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33(2), 419–456. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716411000427
