以競爭模型為框架的中文語句處理研究肯定了中文生命性的語言線索效度大於語序，然夠用就好理論卻認為「原型施事者＋動詞＋原型受事者」的淺層結構與合理性才是人類慣常處理語句的策略，否定了生命性的效果。另一方面，淺層結構假說認為無論熟練度高低學習者都僅會使用詞彙語意資訊及淺層結構來理解目標語語句，無法深層處理；而競爭模型的二語研究則認為學習者的處理策略會隨著熟練度增加而趨近於母語。本研究以中文母語者及法語為母語的中級與高級華語學習者為對象，檢視他們在理解不同可逆性、合理性的中文主動句、把字句與被動句時所使用的模式。結果發現，中文母語者大致會運用「原型施事者＋動詞＋原型受事者」的淺層結構來理解語句，然句中論元間施動力的階層差異 (包含生命性對比) 與合理性一樣會促進困難句的理解以及和句式交互作用，母語者也似乎仍會展現出深層的處理，這些是夠用就好理論沒預測到的效果；學習者的結果指出，中級學習者與高級學習者都會用「原型施事者＋動詞＋原型受事者」的語序策略理解中文語句，然語意資訊對中級學習者的影響較大，高級學習者則能不受語意資訊影響，較一致地使用此語序策略，但兩組學習者的作答正確率皆沒有表現出中文母語者可逆性及合理性分別和句式的交互作用，他們亦無法如母語者區分出論元施動力階層的微妙差異，其把字句的反應時間結果亦無法顯現出母語者相異於主動句的深層處理，故部分符合淺層結構假說的預測，二語學習者沒有母語者深層的句法表徵。然而實驗結果顯示學習者在熟練度提升後，其中文語句的處理愈加傾向母語者，學習者到了高級不僅在以語序的詮釋上與母語者相似，反應時間也顯示出趨近於母語者的生命性對比效果，加以學習者能夠感知到把字句與被字句不同頻率因而有不同的處理模式，說明學習者能感知到所處目標語語言環境的變化，逐漸發展出趨近於目標語的處理策略，於是競爭模型也得到了支持。

The sentence processing study in the framework of Competition model reveals that the cue strengths of animacy are larger than word order in Mandarin Chinese, while Good-enough theory denies the effect of animacy, upholding that the shallow structure of "Proto-agent-verb-proto-patient" and plausibility are the strategies that humans use to comprehend the sentence. On the other hand, Shallow structure hypothesis argues that regardless of their proficiency and native language, the second language learner relies on lexical-semantic information during processing of the target language. Their syntactic representation is not as detailed as the native speakers. But Competition model predicts that L2er’s proficiency can be more and more native-like as the increase of proficiency. The current study examines the processing strategy of active sentence, ba-construction, and passive sentences in different plausibility and reversibility conditions by Mandarin native speakers and French L2 learners of Chinese. The results show that Mandarin native speakers utilize the shallow structure of "Proto-agent-verb-proto-patient" to comprehend the sentence. However, the difference of power hierarchy between the two arguments (including contrast of animacy) is found to have a similar effect with plausibility. The difference of power hierarchy and the plausibility can both accelerate the comprehension of difficult structures and interact with the sentence structure. Moreover, the native speakers appear to show a deep processing. These results are not predicted by Good-enough theory. L2ers’ results show that both intermediate and advanced learners use the word order strategy of "Proto-agent-verb-proto-patient" to comprehend Mandarin sentences. But, the lexical-semantic information has greater influence on intermediate learners than advanced learners. Advanced learners can use the word order strategy more consistently. Nonetheless, none of the L2ers' results show an interaction between reversibility and structure and between plausibility and structure like native speakers. Furthurmore, L2 learners not only cannot distinguish the difference of power hierarchy between two arguments, they cannot process differently two actives but structurally different sentence: SVO and ba-construction like native speakers, either. Therefore, the results of L2 learners partly fit the predictions of Shallow structure hypothesis: L2ers’ syntactic representation is not as deep as native speakers. Nevertheless, as the increase of proficiency, learners’ L2 processing strategies are more and more native-like because of using word order strategy and their animacy contrast effect. L2ers’formation of syntactic strategies can be affected by input frequencies and animacy contrast embedded in the sentences in question, which also fits the prediction of Competition Model.

Akker, E., & Cutler, A. (2003) .Prosodic cues to semantic structure in native and nonnative listening. Unpublished manuscript, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen.
Andrews, Ogden & Halford, GS. (2017) .Resolving Conflicts Between Syntax and Plausibility in Sentence Comprehension.Advances in cognitive psychology, 13 (1) ,
11-27.
Belikova, Alyona & White, Lydia (2009) . Evidence for the fundamental difference hypothesis or not? Island constraints revisited. Studies in Second Language Research, 31, 199-223
Bley-Vroman, R. (1990) . The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis 20, 3–49.
Bornkessel, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2006) . The extended argument dependency model:A neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. Psychological Review, 113, 787–821.
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2009a) . The role of prominence information in the real time comprehension of transitive constructions: A cross-linguistic approach. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3, 19–58.
Caramazza, A., & Zurif, E. (1976). Dissociation of algorithmic and heuristic processes in language comprehension: Evidence from aphasia. Brain and Language, 3, 572–582.
Chan, A., Lieven, E. and 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
Chen, E., West, W. C., Waters, G., & Caplan, D. (2006) . Determinants of BOLD signal correlates of processing object-extracted relative clauses. Cortex, 42, 591–604.
Chen, J.Y & Hsu, D.B. (2017) . Learners’ Acquisition of Comprehension Strategies in Mandarin Chinese, 18:3,Language and Linguistics, 327–354.
Chomsky, Noam. (1965) .Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J. F., & Ferreira, F. (2001) . Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 368–407.
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006) .Grammatical processing in language learners.Applied Psycholinguistics , 27, 3-42
Demiral, S.B., Schlesewsky, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2008) . On the universality of language comprehension strategies: Evidence from Turkish. Cognition, 106, 484-500.
Felser, C., Roberts, L., Gross, R., & Marinis, T. (2003) . The processing of ambiguous sentences by first and second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 453–489.
Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C.J. (1986) .The independence of syntactic processing.Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348-368.
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.
Ferreira, F., Christianson, K., & Hollingworth, A. (2001) . Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: Implications for models of sentence processing and reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 3–20.
Ferreira, F., Bailey, K. G. D., & Ferraro, V. (2002) . Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 11–15.
Ferreira, F. (2003) .The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences.Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164-203.
Ferreira, F., Christianson, K., & Hollingworth, A. (2001) . Misinterpretations ofgarden-path sentences: Implications for models of sentence processing and reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30 (1) , 3-20.
Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982) . Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178–210.
Gibson, E., Bergen, L., & Piantadosi, S. T. (2013) . Rational integration of noisy evidence and prior semantic expectations in sentence interpretation. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 8051-8056.
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.
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.
Huang et al. (2013). Children’s assignment of grammatical roles in the online processing of Mandarin passive sentences.Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 589–606.
Hsu, Dong-Bo. (to appear) . Second language learner’s use of good-enough representation in grammatical processing. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics.
Kail, M. (1989) . Cue validity, cue cost, and processing types in sentence comprehension in French and Spanish. In: B. Macwhinney and E. Bates (eds) The Cross-Linguistic Study of Sentence Processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 77-117.
Kilborn, K., & Cooreman, A. (1987) . Sentence interpretation strategies in adult Dutch–English bilinguals.Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 415–431.
Kuperberg, G. R., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D., & Holcomb, P. J. (2003) .Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 117-129.
Li, E Bates, B MacWhinney. (1993) . Processing a language without inflections: A reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language,32, 169-192.
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994) . The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703.
McEnery, A., Xiao, Z., & Mo, L. (2003) . Aspect marking in English and Chinese: Using the Lancaster Corpus of Mandarin Chinese for contrastive language study. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 18, 361–378.
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E., & Kliegl, R. (1984) . Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Memory and Language,
23, 127–150.
MacWhinney, B& Bates, E. (1989) .The Crosslinguistic Study of Sentence Processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Marinis, T.,Roberts, L., Felser,C.,&Clahsen, H. (2005) .Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 53–78.
Miao, X-C (1981) . Word order and semantic strategies in Chinese sentence comprehension. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 8, 109-122.
Miao, X-C., Chen, G.,&Ying, H.(1986) .Sentences comprehension in Chinese. In M. Zhu (Ed.) , Studies in child language development. Shanghai:East China Normal
University Press.
Morett, L., & MacWhinney, B. (2013) . Syntactic transfer in English-speaking Spanish learners. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 132-151.
Nakano, H., C. Saron, and TY.Swaab. (2009) . Speech and span: Working memory capacity impacts the use of animacy but not of world knowledge during spoken sentence comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 2886-2898.
Paczynski, M. &Kuperberg GR. (2012) . Multiple influences of semantic memory on sentence processing: distinct effects of semantic relatedness on violations of real-world event/state knowledge and animacy selection restrictions. Journal of Memory and Language,67 (4) , 426–448.
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, 24, 501–528.
Philipp, M., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Bisang, W., & Schlesewsky, M. (2008) . The role of animacy in the real time comprehension of Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from auditory event-related brain potentials. Brain and Language, 105, 112-133.
Rayner, K., Carlson, M., & Frazier, L. (1983) . The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 358-374.
Segalowitz, N. (2003) . Automaticity and second languages. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.) , The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382–388). Oxford: Blackwell.
Slobin, D. I. (1966) . Grammatical transformations and sentence comprehension in childhood and adulthood. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5, 219–227.
Steinhauer, K., Alter, K., & Friederici, A. D. (1999) . Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nature, 2, 191–196.
Sun, C.-F.& Givon, T. (1985) . On the so-called SOV word order in Mandarin Chinese: a quantified text study and its implications. Language 61, 329–351.
Su, I-Ru. (2001) . Transfer of sentence processing strategies: A comparison of L2 learners of Chinese and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22 (1) ,83-112.
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.
Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Kello, C. (1993) . Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths.
Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 528–553.
Trueswell, J.C., Tanenhaus, M.K. &Garnsey, S.M. (1994) . Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic disambiguation.Journal of Memory and Language,33, 285-318.
Ullman, M. (2001) . The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model.Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 105–122.
Warren,T., Milburn, E., Patson, N, &Dickey, M. (2015) . Comprehending the Impossible: What Role Do Selectional Restriction Violations Play? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30 (8), 932-939.
Weckerly, J., & Kutas, M. (1999) . An electrophysiological analysis of animacy effects in the processing of object relative sentences. Psychophysiology,36 (5),
559–570.
Wei, H.-M. (1989) . Word order in Mandarin Chinese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University.
Wulfeck, B., Juarez, L., Bates, E., & Kilborn, K. (1986) . Sentence interpretation strategies in healthy and aphasic adults. In J. Vaid (Ed.) , Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguistic and neuropsychological perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Yoon, J., Campanelli, L., Goral, M., Marton, K., Eichorn, N., and Obler, L. K. (2015) . The effect of plausibility on sentence comprehension among older adults and its relation to cognitive functions. Exp. Aging Res. 41, 272–302.