在第二和外國語言學習當中，一個很重要的議題是學習者的母語會不會影響他們的外語學習，如果會又如何影響他們外語學習。競爭模型 (Competition Model) 對於第二語言處理的主張是母語的處理策略存在第二語言的學習過程中，但隨著學習者的程度提高，漸漸改用目標語母語者的解讀策略。另一派認為普遍語法 (Universal Grammar) 不但體現在第一語言習得，也存在在第二語言學習，所以在二語學習也受到普遍語法的影響，淺層結構假說 (Shallow Structure Hypothesis) 認為母語的深層處理句法能力無法轉移到第二語言上。
本研究調查中文、西班牙文母語者在其母語對簡單及物句的語言處理，實驗句子中只有語序、有生性線索，並設計名詞指稱偏好以瞭解合理性是否影響處理。除了兩個語言的母語者，也調查學習者處理中文、西班牙文的情形，實驗結果發現中文母語者處理中文時，語序結構是最重要的線索。西班牙文母語者處理沒有型態線索的西班牙文句子，也是依賴語序結構。
西班牙文母語者處理中文時，其表現受到程度的影響，初級受試者依照NVN結構策略、普世模型解讀句子，而中高級受試者也是依照NVN結構解讀，但在非標準式中顯著降低對普世模型的依賴，逐漸使用中文OSV解讀非標準式。中文母語者處理西班牙文時，其表現較不受到程度的影響，因NVN結構策略、普世模型而選擇施事者。本研究中兩個語言的初級、中高級學習者在目標語都沒有辦法有深層處理的表現，符合淺層結構假說的預測，而較難與競爭模型的主張一致。

One of the most important questions for foreign language learning is whether the native language of learners affects learning of other languages. Advocates of “competition model” say that the processing strategy used in native language has an impact on learning foreign languages. Scholars who do not agree with competition model argue that second language learning is affected by “universal grammar” which is the same for both native and second language learning. This study investigates how Chinese and Spanish native speakers process their own native languages with simple transitive sentences. It examines whether plausibility has any impact on processing. It also looks at how learners process Chinese and Spanish. The experiments conducted to support this study showed that word order is the most important cue when processing Chinese and that word order is the most important clue when processing Spanish without morphological cue. When Spanish speakers comprehend Chinese, their performance is influenced by their second language levels of proficiency. The processing strategies of beginners are NVN Strategy which is argued to be a universal pattern and universal pattern. While processing canonical sentences, higher- intermediate learners use NVN strategy. For non-canonical sentences, their reliance on universal pattern decreases significantly. When Chinese speakers process Spanish, their performance does not show significant difference between the two proficiency levels. They choose agent based on NVN structure and universal pattern. The performance of beginners and higher- intermediate learners in two languages in this study did not follow predications derived from competition model.

Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1981). Second language acquisition from a functionalist perspective: Pragmatic, semantic, and perceptual strategies. In H. Winitz (Ed.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences Conference on Native and Foreign Language Acquisition (pp. 190–214). New York: Academy Press
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar. In E. Wanner & L. Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of art (pp. 173–218). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bates, E, MacWhinney B., Caselli C., Devescovi A., Natale F., & Venza V. (1984). A cross-linguistic study of the development of sentence interpretation strategies. Child Development 55, 341–354.
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1989). Functionalism and the competition model. In B. MacWhinney & E. Bates (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 3–73). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bates, E., McNew, S., MacWhinney, B., Devescovi, A., & Smith, S. (1982). Functional constraints on sentence-processing: A cross-linguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245–299.
Belikova Alyona & White Lydia. (2009). Evidence for fundamental difference hypothesis or not? Island constraint revisited. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 199-223
Chan A, Lieven e, Tomasello M. (2009). Children's Understanding of the Agent-Patient relations in the Transitive construction: Cross Linguistic comparisons between Cantonese, German and English. Cognitive Linguistics, 20(2), 267-300.
Chao, Y. R. (1968). A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Chen, H.-C. (1992). Lexical processing in bilingual or multilingual speakers. In R. J. Harris (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp. 253–264). New York: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J. F., & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 368–407.
Clashen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3-42.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24, 37–53.
Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.
Erickson, T. D., & Mattson, M. E. (1981). From words to meaning: A semantic illusion. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 540–551.
Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164–203.
Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. M. (1990). Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 16, 555–568.
Gass, S. (1987). The resolution of conflicts among competing systems: A bidirectional perspective. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 329–350.
Garnham, A., & Oakhill, J. (1987). Interpreting elliptical verb phrases. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 611–625.
Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Adaptive thinking: Rationality in the real world. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P.M., & ABC Research Group (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York: Oxford University Press.
Harrington, M. (1987). Processing transfer: Language-specific processing strategies as a source of interlanguage variation. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 351–377.
Heilenman, L., & McDonald, J. (1993). Processing strategies in L2 learners of French: The role of
transfer. Language Learning, 43, 507–557.
Hernandez, A., Bates, E., & Avila, L. (1994). On-line sentence interpretation in Spanish-English bilinguals: What does it mean to be “in between”? Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 417–446.
Kail, M. (1989). Cue validity, cue cost, and processing types in sentence comprehension in French and Spanish. In B. MacWhinney & E. Bates (Eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kamas, E. N., Reder, L. M., & Ayers, M. S. (1996). Partial matching in the Moses illusion: Response bias not sensitivity. Memory Cognition, 24, 687–699.
Kilborn, K., & Cooreman, A. (1987). Sentence interpretation strategies in adult Dutch–English
bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 415–431.
Li, C., & Thompson, S. (1976). Subject and topic: A new typology for language. In C. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic.
Li, P. (1989). What cues can Chinese speakers use in sentence processing? Paper presented at the workshop on cross-linguistic studies of sentence processing, Department of Psychology, Carnegie-Mellon University.
Li, P., MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (1991). Processing a language without morphology: An on-line study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. CRL Technical Report 9102, University of California, San Diego.
Li, P., Bates, E., Liu, H., & MacWhinney, B. (1992). Cues as functional constraints on sentence processing in Chinese. In H. C. Chen &O. Tzeng (Eds.), Language processing in Chinese. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Li, P., Bates, E., Liu, H., & MacWhinney, B. (1993). Processing a language without inflections: A
reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language,
32, 169–192.
Liu, H., Bates, E.,& Li, P. (1992). Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Chinese. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13, 451–484.
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E., & Kligel, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 127–150.
MacWhinney, B. (1985). Hungarian language acquisition as an exemplification of a general model of grammatical development. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Vol. 2. Theoretical issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. Mac-
Whinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157–193). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Magiste, E. (1984). Stroop tasks and dichotic translation: The development of interference patterns
in bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10,
304–315.
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27.
Matessa, M. & Anderson, J. (2000). Modeling focused learning in role assignment. Language and Cognitive Processes 15(3), 263–292.
McDonald, J. (1987). Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Dutch. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 379–413.
McDonald, J., & Heilenman, K. (1991). Determinants of cue strength in adult first and second
language speakers of French. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12, 313–348.
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic
ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703.
Miao, X. (1981). Word order and semantic strategies in Chinese sentence comprehension. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 8, 23–33.
Miao, X. (1986). The effects of word order and semantics in Chinese sentence comprehension. In Zhu, M. S. (ed.), Er tong yu yan fa zhan yan jiu (Research on children’s language development). Shang-hai: Hua dong shi fan da xue chu ban she.
Morett, L., MacWhinney, B. (2013). Syntactic transfer in english-speaking Spanish learners. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(1), 132-151.
Su, I. (2001a). Transfer of sentence processing strategies: A comparison of L2 learners of Chinese and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 83–112.
Sasaki, Y. (1991). English and Japanese interlanguage comprehension strategies: An analysis based
on the Competition Model. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12, 47–73.
Sasaki, Y. (1994). Paths of processing strategy transfers in learning Japanese and English as foreign languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 43–72.
Sanford, A. J. (1999). Word meaning and discourse processing: A tutorial review. In S. Garrod, & M.
Pickering (Eds.), Language processing (pp. 301–334). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
Sanford, A. J. (2002). Context, attention, and depth of processing during interpretation. Mind Language, 17, 188–206.
Steinhauer, K., Alter, K., & Friederici, A. D. (1999). Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nature, 2, 191–196.
Su, I. (2001b). Context effects on sentence processing: A study based on the Competition Model. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 167–189.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632–1634.
Tokowicz, N., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 173–204.
Tokowicz,N.,&Warren, T. (2010). Beginning adult L2 learners’ sensitivity to morphosyntactic violations: A self-paced reading study. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1092–1106.
Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (2001). Sentence comprehension: The integration of habits and rules.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Von Berger, E., Wulfeck, B., Bates, E., & Fink, N. (1993). Developmental changes in realtime sentence processing (Tech. Rept. No. 9201). La Jolla: University of California, San Diego, Center for Research in Language, Project in Cognitive Neurodevelopment.
Wulfeck, B., Juarez, L., Bates, E., & Kilborn, K. (1986). Sentence interpretation strategies in healthy and aphasic bilingual adults. In J. Vaid (Ed.), Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguists and neuropsychologicalperspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.