Language Generativity, Response Generalization, and Derived Relational Responding

Abstract

Language generativity can be described as the ability to produce sentences never before said, and to understand sentences never before heard. One process often cited as underlying language generativity is response generalization. However, though the latter seems to promise a technical understanding of the former at a process level, an investigation of definitions and approaches to the term "response generalization" that appear in the literature suggests that it does not do so. We argue that a more promising candidate for the role of key process underlying language generativity is derived relational responding. We introduce the latter concept and describe empirical research showing its connection with language. We subsequently present a relational frame theory (RFT) conceptualization of derived relations as contextually controlled generalized relational responding. We then review a series of recent studies on derived manding in developmentally delayed children and adults that arguably demonstrate the applied utility of a derived relations-based approach with respect to the phenomenon of generative language.

Matrix Training and Verbal Generativity in Children with Autism

“…This is perhaps the most unique and important feature of language and has been referred to as generative language (e.g., Goldstein 1984;Lutzker and Sherman 1974;Stewart, McElwee, and Ming 2013), linguistic productivity (Hockett 1960;Malott 2003;Whaley and Malott 1971), generative grammar (Chomsky 1959), or recombinative generalization (e.g., Goldstein 1983a;Goldstein 1983b;Goldstein 1984;Goldstein and Brown 1989;Goldstein and Mousetis 1989). According to Lutzker and Sherman (1974), "generative language simply means the appearance of novel language responses within the language repertoire of the child that have not been modeled or directly trained, but that may be related to other language responses" (p. 447).…”

“…According to Lutzker and Sherman (1974), "generative language simply means the appearance of novel language responses within the language repertoire of the child that have not been modeled or directly trained, but that may be related to other language responses" (p. 447). The basic behavioral processes underlying generative language have yet to be clarified to everyone's satisfaction, but generative language should not be confused with simple stimulus or response generalization because correct novel response sequences are no more physically similar to the training sequences than are incorrect response sequences (Stewart et al 2013).…”

Covert verbal mediation in arbitrary matching to sample

“…Stewart, McElwee, and Ming () objected to Horne and Lowe's () focus on mediation, stating “the fact that naming and joint control both require an additional mediational process to explain derived stimulus relations in comparison to RFT can be seen as a weakness of the former” (p. 143). Similarly, Stromer () expressed concern about Horne and Lowe's verbal mediation account.…”

The transfer of Cfunc contextual control through equivalence relations

“…Investigating the transfer of contextual control is key to understanding how stimulus functions can be appropriately modulated in novel contexts. This might be relevant for a behavior‐analytic explanation of language (Stewart, McElwee, & Ming, ; Wulfert & Hayes, 1988), especially to account for the extension of specific meanings to novel words and contexts—as observed in the use of metaphors, for example (e.g., Stewart, Barnes‐Holmes, Hayes, & Lipkens, ). To extend findings on this issue, the present study aimed to investigate the transfer of Cfunc contextual control through equivalence relations.…”