ArticleFrontiers in language sciences2026
Spoken sentence comprehension in Mandarin-English bilinguals: a case against the universal processing advantage of subject-relatives.
Article in Frontiers in language sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: This study investigates sentence comprehension in Mandarin-English bilinguals, focusing on whether the widely reported, yet contested, subject-relative processing advantage extends to bilingual speakers. We evaluate which theoretical accounts, based on syntactic structure and canonicity, best explain cross-linguistic patterns of sentence processing. Methods: Using a sentence-picture matching task, we examined the comprehension of canonical (e.g., actives) and non-canonical (e.g., passives) sentence structures in English and Mandarin for bilingual speakers of varying ages and Mandarin and English proficiency levels across two separate studies ( Results: In English, bilingual participants exhibited a robust canonical sentence advantage across studies, with better comprehension of subject-relative over object-relative sentences and active over passive sentences, mirroring monolingual processing patterns. However, in Mandarin, comprehension patterns were less robust and more variable. While subject-relative and object-relative comprehension did not significantly differ at the group level, passive vs. active sentences consistently posed greater difficulty and increased performance variability across both studies, particularly among lower-performing individuals. Discussion: These results suggest that sentence comprehension is shaped by language-specific constraints rather than a universal subject-relative advantage. Findings align with unified theoretical accounts that incorporate canonicity-based and structural factors, including word order, syntactic structure, and experience-, usage-, and frequency-based influences. Our results highlight the complex interplay between the aforementioned factors that differ across languages, with implications for both theoretical linguistics and clinical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.