September 01, 2025
Talk, AMLaP 2025, Prague, Czech Republic
Abstract
Background Saccadic targeting during reading integrates visual, linguistic, and motor planning processes [1, 2]. While second language (L2) learners may develop native-like fixation durations in their L2 [3], it is unclear whether spatial adaptations extend to their first language (L1), especially when scripts are vastly different. This study investigates whether advanced English proficiency and exposure reshape saccadic precision and landing stability during L2 English reading, and whether these patterns transfer, to L1 Chinese reading. Method Forty Chinese university students were categorised into Advanced and Upper Intermediate L2 English learner groups using Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis of English vocabulary size, IELTS scores, and years of residence in the UK [4]. Participants read 24 matched Chinese (38–71 words each, M = 55.9, SD = 10.3) and English (44–98 words each, M = 70.7, SD = 12.9) texts in a counterbalanced order while their eye movements were recorded. Relative Landing Positions (RLPs) were computed using the x-coordinate of the first fixation relative to word centre, capturing both central tendency and dispersion. Results In L1 Chinese reading, both groups demonstrated highly stable, centre-based RLPs that did not vary with word length, aligning with native-like saccadic patterns [5, 6]. In contrast, during L2 English reading, both groups showed increasingly leftward RLPs of the first fixation from word centre as word length increased, consistent with spatial undershoot patterns attributed to oculomotor constraints or motor planning strategies. This spatial undershoot occurred despite the Advanced group showing native-like fixation durations, indicating that temporal and spatial components of eye movement control may be governed by different mechanisms. Discussion The present findings highlight a dissociation between temporal fluency and spatial targeting in bilingual reading. While L2 proficiency and exposure may support native-like fixations, they do not affect saccadic targeting. The persistence of L1 Chinese saccadic patterns suggests that spatial aspects of eye movement control are script-specific and relatively resistant to change [3], particularly when the scripts of the two languages differ markedly. These findings suggest that L1-based saccadic routines persist in L2 reading, highlighting the need for bilingual models to account for the limited cross-script adaptability of spatial oculomotor control.