Role of surface and base structure in the perception of sentences

Mehler, Jacques; Carey, Peter

doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(67)80122-1

Cited by 67 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When the test sentences were false, however, the difference between 10th and 11th positions was not significant (t=0.546, p> .10, two-tailed, df = 75). The effect observed by Mehler and Carey (1967), in which a sentence with unexpected surface structure was misperceived, would seem to dered the latency distributions effectively normal and allowed a series of t tests to be carried out on the transformed data. Figure 1 shows 3 that for both sentence types and both truth values a practice effect obtained, in which latencies to successive sentences of the same structure and truth value declined quite regularly.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…McMahon (1963) and Wason (1959) found that it takes a subject less time to indicate that a true sentence is true than to indicate that a false sentence is false. Mehler and Carey (1967) demonstrated that for sentences in noise an unexpected change in the surface structure of a sentence causes great difficulties in perceiving that sentence. The present experiment employed lists of sentences similar to those of Mehler and Carey (1967) and required Ssto determine whether each sentence was true or false with respect to a picture.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mehler and Carey (1967) demonstrated that for sentences in noise an unexpected change in the surface structure of a sentence causes great difficulties in perceiving that sentence. The present experiment employed lists of sentences similar to those of Mehler and Carey (1967) and required Ssto determine whether each sentence was true or false with respect to a picture. The experiment provides information on the question of whether the time to process the veracity of sentences interacts with the time needed to process the surface structure of sentences.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The interaction of veracity and syntax in the processing of sentences1

Mehler

Carey

1968

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reaction times of 80 Ss in judging sentences true or false with respect to pictures were analyzed, and it was noted (a) that true sentences containing an expected surface structure required less time than false sentences of the same structure, (b) that latencies to true sentences containing an unexpected surface structure were longer than latencies to the same sentences when their structure was identical to that of previous sentences, and (c) that transitive-verb constructions appeared easier to judge than predicate nominatives of the same length. McMahon (1963) and Wason (1959) found that it takes a subject less time to indicate that a true sentence is true than to indicate that a false sentence is false. Mehler and Carey (1967) demonstrated that for sentences in noise an unexpected change in the surface structure of a sentence causes great difficulties in perceiving that sentence. The present experiment employed lists of sentences similar to those of Mehler and Carey (1967) and required Ssto determine whether each sentence was true or false with respect to a picture. The experiment provides information on the question of whether the time to process the veracity of sentences interacts with the time needed to process the surface structure of sentences. Although McMahon found that latencies to indicate correctly whether a sentence is true or false increase with certain grammatical transformations (e.g., passivization, negation), these findings do not determine whether there is an interaction between the computation of truth and the processing of syntax. Such an interaction is part of the general problem of the relation of syntax and semantics in the understanding of sentences.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The interaction of veracity and syntax in the processing of sentences1

Mehler

Carey

1968

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mehler and Carey (1967) found that auditory presentation of many sentences of a particular syntactic form (e.g., They are forecasting cyclones vs. They are recurring mistakes) facilitated processing of sentences with the same form.…”

Section: Early Evidence For Priming Of Comprehensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These results suggest that participants construct the (inappropriate) modifier analysis when reading sentences such as (14a), and that this inappropriate analysis facilitated subsequent processing of modifier sentences. These effects are probably less likely to be strategic than Mehler and Carey (1967), because the effect is based on an abandoned analysis.…”

Section: Carlson (2001) Had Participants Interpret Sentences Such As mentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural priming: A critical review.

Pickering¹,

Ferreira²

2008

Psychological Bulletin

753

576

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Repetition is a central phenomenon of behavior, and researchers make extensive use of it to illuminate psychological functioning. In the language sciences, a ubiquitous form of such repetition is structural priming, a tendency to repeat or better process a current sentence because of its structural similarity to a previously experienced ("prime") sentence (Bock, 1986). The recent explosion of research in structural priming has made it the dominant means of investigating the processes involved in the production (and increasingly, comprehension) of complex expressions such as sentences. This review considers its implications for the representation of syntax and the mechanisms of production, comprehension, and their relationship. It then addresses the potential functions of structural priming, before turning to its implications for first language acquisition, bilingualism, and aphasia We close with theoretical and empirical recommendations for future investigations. KeywordsSyntax; Priming; Grammatical structure; Language production; Language comprehension A central phenomenon in experimental psychology is repetition -when we perform an action that is the same in some respects as an action we have performed before, or that we have observed others perform before. Repetition is central because it can reflect the operation of many different underlying psychological mechanisms. It can reflect learning and development (as we acquire a capability, we begin to repeat the products of that capability), imitation (we can repeat others' behavior to accomplish social as well as learning and development goals), and (lack of) executive control (when repetitive behavior reflects a perseverative tendency and so an inability to inhibit a previous and now potent response). Repetition is also inversely related to creativity, in that when we repeat a previous behavior, we forgo the opportunity to create a novel behavior instead.In the past couple of decades, research in the language sciences has revealed a new and striking form of repetition that we here call structural priming. When people talk or write, they tend to repeat the underlying basic structures that they recently produced or experienced others produce. This phenomenon has been the subject of heavy empirical scrutiny. Some of this scrutiny has been because, as in other domains in cognitive psychology (e.g., priming in the word-recognition literature; e.g., McNamara, 2005), the tendency to be affected by the repetition of aspects of knowledge can be used to diagnose the nature of that knowledge. So in this case, the tendency to repeat aspects of sentence structure helps researchers identify some of the representations that people construct when producing or comprehending language. As Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Martin Pickering, Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, 7 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, United Kingdom. Email: martin.pickering@ed.ac.uk. we shall see, much structural priming is unusually abstract, evidently ...

show abstract

Learning From Verbal Discourse in Educational Media: A Review of the Literature

Carroll¹

1971

ETS Research Bulletin Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Role of surface and base structure in the perception of sentences

Cited by 67 publications

References 2 publications

The interaction of veracity and syntax in the processing of sentences1

The interaction of veracity and syntax in the processing of sentences1

Structural priming: A critical review.

Learning From Verbal Discourse in Educational Media: A Review of the Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About