Skip to main content
Log in

Structural Priming as Implicit Learning: A Comparison of Models of Sentence Production

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Structural priming reflects a tendency to generalize recently spoken or heard syntactic structures to different utterances. We propose that it is a form of implicit learning. To explore this hypothesis, we developed and tested a connectionist model of language production that incorporated mechanisms previously used to simulate implicit learning. In the model, the mechanism that learned to produce structured sequences of phrases from messages also exhibited structural priming. The ability of the model to account for structural priming depended on representational assumptions about the nature of messages and the relationship between comprehension and production. Modeling experiments showed that comprehension-based representations were important for the model's generalizations in production and that nonatomic message representations allowed a better fit to existing data on structural priming than traditional thematic-role representations.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Bock, J. K. (1986). Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 355–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, J. K. (1989). Closed-class immanence in sentence production. Cognition, 31, 163–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, J. K. (in preparation). Priming production from comprehension: Evidence for a performance grammar.

  • Bock, J. K., & Griffin, Z. M. (in press). The persistence of structural priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.

  • Bock, J. K., & Loebell, H. (1990). Framing sentences. Cognition, 35, 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, J. K., Loebell, H., & Morey, R. (1992). From conceptual roles to structural relations: Bridging the syntactic cleft. Psychological Review, 99, 150–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyland, J. T., & Anderson, J. R. (1998). Evidence that syntactic priming is long-lasting. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1205). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Cleland, A. A. (1999, March). Syntactic coordination in dialogue. Paper presented at the Twelfth Annual CUNY Sentence Processing Conference, New York, NY.

  • Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Cleland, A. A. (in press). Syntactic priming in written production: Evidence for rapid decay. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

  • Chang, F., Bock, J. K., & Goldberg, A. E. (in progress). Mapping structural priming.

  • Cleeremans, A., & McClelland, J. (1991). Learning the structure of event sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 235–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67, 3, 547–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elman, J. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14, 179–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elman, J. (1993). Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small. Cognition, 48, 71–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, F. (1994). Choice of passive voice is affected by verb type and animacy. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 715–736.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1–88). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, Z. M., & Bock, J. K. (in press). What the eyes say about speaking. Psychological Science.

  • Gropen, J., Pinker S., Hollander, M., Goldberg, R., & Wilson, R. (1989). The learnability and acquisition of the dative alternation in English. Language, 65, 2, 203–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartsuiker, R. J., Kolk, H. H. J., & Huiskamp, P. (1999). Priming word order in sentence production. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 129–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, M. L., & Goldberg, A. E. (1999) Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society. Syntactic Priming: Purely Syntactic?

  • Jackendoff, R. S. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W. J. M., & Kelter, S. (1982). Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 78–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, B., & Hovav, M. R. (1996). Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (1998). The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 633–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, M. C., & Lombardi, L. (1998). Syntactic priming in immediate recall of sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 265–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saffran, E. M., & Martin, N. (1997). Effects of structural priming on sentence production in aphasics. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 877–882.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seger, C. A. (1994). Implicit learning. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 163–196.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chang, F., Dell, G.S., Bock, K. et al. Structural Priming as Implicit Learning: A Comparison of Models of Sentence Production. J Psycholinguist Res 29, 217–230 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005101313330

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005101313330

Keywords

Navigation