We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 November 2017
Branigan & Pickering (B&P) propose that the structural priming paradigm is a Royal Road to linguistic representations of any kind, unobstructed by influences of psychological processes. In my view, however, they are too optimistic about the versatility of the paradigm and, more importantly, its ability to provide direct evidence about the nature of stored linguistic representations.
Target article
An experimental approach to linguistic representation
Related commentaries (30)
A usage-based cognitive linguistic (re-)interpretation of priming evidence
Acceptability judgments still matter: Deafness and documentation
Action sequences instead of representational levels
Can structural priming answer the important questions about language?
Considering experimental and observational evidence of priming together, syntax doesn't look so autonomous
Converging on a theory of language through multiple methods
Developmental psycholinguistics teaches us that we need multi-method, not single-method, approaches to the study of linguistic representation
Don't forget the neurobiology: An experimental approach to linguistic representation
Don't shoot the giant whose shoulders we are standing on
Horses for courses: When acceptability judgments are more suitable than structural priming (and vice versa)
If priming is graded rather than all-or-none, can reactivating abstract structures be the underlying mechanism?
Microscopic and macroscopic approaches to the mental representations of second languages
Moving beyond the priming of single-language sentences: A proposal for a comprehensive model to account for linguistic representation in bilinguals
On the nature of structure in structural priming
Priming is swell, but it's far from simple
Priming methods in semantics and pragmatics
Setting the empirical record straight: Acceptability judgments appear to be reliable, robust, and replicable
Structural priming can inform syntactic analyses of partially grammaticalized constructions
Structural priming is a useful but imperfect technique for studying all linguistic representations, including those of pragmatics
Structural priming is most useful when the conclusions are statistically robust
Structural priming is not a Royal Road to representations
Structural priming supports grammatical networks
Structural priming, action planning, and grammar
Syntactic levels, lexicalism, and ellipsis: The jury is still out
The limitations of structural priming are not the limits of linguistic theory
The logic of syntactic priming and acceptability judgments
The malleability of linguistic representations poses a challenge to the priming-based experimental approach
The relationship between priming and linguistic representations is mediated by processing constraints
The syntax of priming
What structural priming can and cannot reveal
Author response
Structural priming and the representation of language