Skip to main content

A Synthesis of Some Recent Work in Sentence Production

  • Chapter
Linguistic Structure in Language Processing

Part of the book series: Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics ((SITP,volume 7))

Abstract

Research into the psychological mechanisms underlying the syntactic processes deployed during sentence production seems to have begun in earnest with the appearance of Garrett (1975). While previous works had noted the existence of speech errors produced by normals involving linguistic units larger than phonemes, those works tended to focus on sound errors (additions, deletions, etc. of phonemes) and on the implications of such errors for phonological processing (cf., for instance, Fromkin, 1971). In contrast, Garrett’s (1975) article is chiefly concerned with distinguishing properties of word and stem errors from those of sound errors in order to argue for the deployment of two specifically syntactic levels of representation in production. It is a tribute to the insight and carefulness of Garrett’s research that nearly every investigator working on syntactic production since that article has felt compelled either to base their own analyses on it or to contrast their accounts with those that Garrett has presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams, M. J. (1979). ‘Models of word recognition’. Cognitive Psychology 11, 133–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J. and Cooper, R. (1981). ‘Generalized quantifiers and natural language’. Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 159–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, T. (1983). ‘Monitoring via feedback in language production: Evidence from cutoffs’. Manuscript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, J. K. (1982). ‘Toward a cognitive psychology of syntax: Information processing contributions to sentence formulation’. Psychology Review 89, 1–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock, J. K. (1985). ‘Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation’. Cognition 21, 47–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock, J. K. (1986). ‘Prototypicality in a linguistic context: Effects on sentence structure’. Journal of Memory and Language 25, 59–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, D., Garrett, M., and Zurif, E. (1980). ‘Syntactic deficits in Broca’s aphasia’. In D. Caplan (Ed.), Biological Studies of Mental Processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. (1973). A First Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1970). ‘Remarks on nominalizations’. In R. Jacobs and P. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar. New York: Ginn and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H. and Stafford, R. A. (1969). ‘Memory for semantic features in the verb’. Journal of Experimental Psychology 80, 326–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A. M. and Loftus, E. F. (1975). ‘A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing’. Psychological Review 82, 407–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cottrell, G. W. and Small, S. L. (1983). ‘A connectionist schema for modelling word sense disambiguation’. Cognition and Brain Science 6, 89–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dell, G. S. (1985). ‘Positive feedback in hierarchical connectionist models: Applications to language production’. Cognitive Science 9, 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dell, G. S. (1986). ‘A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production’. Psychological Review 93, 283–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dell, G. S., Segal, J. S., and Bergman, E. (1985). ‘Effect of frequency and vocabulary type on phonological errors’. Paper presented at Psychonomic Society annual meeting, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fay, D. and Cutler, A. (1977). ‘Malapropisms and the structure of the mental lexicon’. Linguistic Inquiry 3, 505–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, J. A. and Ballard, D. H. (1982). ‘Connectionist models and their properties’. Cognitive Science 6, 205–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forster, K. I. (1976). ‘Accessing the mental lexicon’. In R. J. Wales and E. Walker (Eds.), New Approaches to Language Mechanisms. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromkin, V. A. (1971). ‘The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances’. Language 47, 27–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fromkin, V. A. (1973). Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence. The Hague: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, M. (1975). ‘The analysis of sentence production’. In G. Bower (Ed.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation, vol. 9. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, M. and Kean, M.-L. (1981). ‘Levels of representation and the analysis of speech errors’. In M. Aronoff and M.-L. Kean (Eds.), On Juncture. San Francisco: Amni Libri.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. F. (1954). ‘Learning as a function of word frequency’. American Journal of Psychology 67, 138–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harley, T. A. (1984). ‘A critique of top-down independent levels models of speech production: Evidence from non-plan-internal speech errors’. Cognitive Science 8, 191–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, R. J. and Brewer, W. F. (1973). ‘Deixis in memory for verb tense’. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12, 590–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, R. (1977). X̄ Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiparsky, P. (1982). ‘From cyclic phonology to lexical phonology’. In H. v.d. Hulst and N. Smith (Eds.), The Structure of Phonological Representations, Part I. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kučera, H. and Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational Analysis of Present-Day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuyłowicz, J. (1964). The Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapointe, S. (1983). ‘Markedness, the organization of linguistic information in speech production, and language acquisition’. To appear in F. Eckman, et al. (Eds.), Markedness. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapointe, S. (1985a). ‘A theory of verb form use in the speech of agrammatic aphasics’. Brain and Language 24, 100–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapointe, S. (1985b). ‘A model of syntactic phrase combination during speech production’. In S. Berman, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifteenth Northeast Linguistic Society Meeting. Distributed by GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapointe, S. (1986). ‘Structural fragment storage and retrieval in aphasic speech: a theoretical note’. Manuscript, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKay, D. G. (1982). ‘The problems of flexibility, fluency, and speed-accuracy tradeoff in skilled behavior’. Psychological Review 89, 483–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, J. L. and Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). ‘An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings’. Psychological Review 88, 375–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, G., Mazzucchi, A., Menn, L., and Goodglass, H. (1982). ‘Contrasting cases of Italian agrammatic aphasia without comprehension disorder’. Brain and Language 19, 65–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart, D. E. and McClelland, J. L. (1982). ‘An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model’. Psychological Review 89, 60–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarborough, D. L., Cortese, C. and Scarborough, H. S. (1977). ‘Frequency and repetition effects in lexical memory’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 3, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1984). Phonology and Syntax: The Relation Between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1979). ‘Speech errors as evidence for a serial-ordering mechanism in sentence production’. In W. Cooper and E. Walker (Eds.), Sentence Processing: Psycholinguistic Studies Presented to Merrill Garrett. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stemberger, J. (1982). ‘The lexicon in a model of language production’. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stemberger, J. (1984). ‘Structural errors in normal and agrammatic speech’. Cognitive Neuropsychology 1, 281–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stemberger, J. (1985). ‘An interactive activation model of language production’. In A. Ellis (Ed.), Progress in the Psychology of Language, Vol. 1. London: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stemberger, J. and MacWhinney, B. (1986). ‘Frequency and the lexical storage of regularly inflected forms’. Memory and Cognition 14, 17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M., Dell, G., and Carlson, G. (1987). ‘Context effects in lexical processing: A connectionist approach to modularity’. In J. Garfield (Ed.), Modularity in Knowledge Representations and Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M. and Lucas, M. (1986). ‘Context effects in lexical processing’. Cognition 25, 213–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1989 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lapointe, S.G., Dell, G.S. (1989). A Synthesis of Some Recent Work in Sentence Production. In: Carlson, G.N., Tanenhaus, M.K. (eds) Linguistic Structure in Language Processing. Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2729-2_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2729-2_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-55608-075-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-2729-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics