Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-4ws75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T00:15:13.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Horses for courses: When acceptability judgments are more suitable than structural priming (and vice versa)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2017

Ben Ambridge
Ben Ambridge*
Affiliation:
Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 7ZA, United Kingdom; ESRC International Centre for Language and Communicative Development (LuCiD). ben.ambridge@liverpool.ac.uk www.benambridge.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although structural priming is often the most suitable paradigm, it sometimes misses effects that are detected by more sensitive acceptability-judgment tasks, thus yielding incorrect conclusions. For example, Branigan & Pickering's (B&P's) claim that “syntactic representations do not contain semantic information” (sect. 2.1, para. 2), while supported by structural-priming studies of the passive, is undermined by an acceptability-judgment study of this construction.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e284
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ambridge, B., Bidgood, A., Pine, J. M., Rowland, C. F. & Freudenthal, D. (2016) Is passive syntax semantically constrained? Evidence from adult grammaticality judgment and comprehension studies. Cognitive Science 40(6):1435–59. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12277.Google Scholar
Messenger, K., Branigan, H. P. & McLean, J. F. (2012a) Is children's acquisition of the passive a staged process? Evidence from six- and nine-year-olds' production of passives. Journal of Child Language 39(5):991–1016.Google Scholar
Messenger, K., Branigan, H. P., McLean, J. F. & Sorace, A. (2012b) Is young children's passive syntax semantically constrained? Evidence from syntactic priming. Journal of Memory and Language 66(4):568–87. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.03.008.Google Scholar
Pinker, S., Lebeaux, D. S. & Frost, L. A. (1987) Productivity and constraints in the acquisition of the passive. Cognition 26(3):195–267.Google Scholar