The Competition Model has served as a functional explanation of cross-linguistic influence and transfer for more than 30 years. A large number of studies have used the Competition Model to frame investigations of sentence processing strategies in different types of bilingual and multilingual speakers. Among the different bilingual speakers investigated, Mandarin Chinese and English bilinguals represent a clear testing ground for the claims of the Competition Model. This is because of purportedly stark contrasts in sentence processing strategies between the two languages. Previous studies investigating sentence processing strategies of English L2 and Mandarin L2 bilinguals suggests forward transfer of L1 cues to the L2, moderated by L2 proficiency. In this paper, we argue for replication of two of these studies, namely Liu, Bates, and Li (1992) and Su (2001). These studies continue to be cited today as evidence of differences between English and Mandarin sentence processing strategies which is in turn taken as support for the predictions of the Competition Model. However, both studies presented methodological limitations in terms of measures of proficiency, participant and stimuli selection, and the statistical analysis. We suggest approximate replication of both of these studies and provide suggestions for how such replications might be conducted.

30 多年来，竞争模型一直是跨语言影响和转移的功能解释。大量研究使用竞争模型对不同类型的双语和多语说话者的句子处理策略进行框架调查。在所调查的不同双语使用者中，普通话和英语双语者代表了竞争模型主张的明确试验场。这是因为据称两种语言之间的句子处理策略存在鲜明对比。先前调查英语 L2 和普通话 L2 双语者的句子处理策略的研究表明，L1 线索向 L2 的前向转移受到 L2 熟练程度的调节。在本文中，我们主张复制其中两项研究，即 Liu、Bates、和李（1992）和苏（2001）。这些研究今天继续被引用为英语和普通话句子处理策略之间差异的证据，这反过来又被视为对竞争模型预测的支持。然而，这两项研究在熟练程度、参与者和刺激选择以及统计分析方面都存在方法学局限性。我们建议对这两项研究进行近似复制，并就如何进行此类复制提供建议。参与者和刺激选择，以及统计分析。我们建议对这两项研究进行近似复制，并就如何进行此类复制提供建议。参与者和刺激选择，以及统计分析。我们建议对这两项研究进行近似复制，并就如何进行此类复制提供建议。