How ‘good-enough’ is second language comprehension? Morphological causative and suffixal passive constructions in Korean

Abstract The ‘good-enough’ processing account argues that, given the parallel activation of two parsing routes—algorithmic and heuristic parsing, the processor prefers heuristics over algorithms when unfolding incoming input. Literature on L2 ‘good-enough’ processing conjoins with this argument, also claiming that various factors may modulate how the L2 processor adjusts its way to heuristic or algorithmic parsing. The present study investigates how L2 learners with contrastive L1 backgrounds (Czech; English) achieve ‘good-enough’ comprehension in Korean, a popular L2 target but understudied for this topic. We focus on morphological causative and suffixal passive constructions, which differ in terms of the alignment between thematic roles and case-marking and the interpretive computation that verbal morphology invites. Participants joined acceptability judgement and self-paced reading tasks, with manipulation of word order (verb-final vs. verb-initial). Results from these tasks suggest two aspects of L2 comprehension. First, L1 and L2 comprehension do not qualitatively differ regarding ‘good-enough’ processing: the L2 processor utilises both parsing routes to reduce the burden of work at hand at the earliest opportunity. Second, the divergence of L1 and L2 processing behaviours during comprehension may originate from various factors surrounding L2 learners (e.g., L2 usage, L1–L2 interface, task types), anchoring the noisy representations of L2 knowledge.