How language production shapes language form and comprehension

Language production processes can provide insight into how language comprehension works and language typology—why languages tend to have certain characteristics more often than others. Drawing on work in memory retrieval, motor planning, and serial order in action planning, the Production-Distribution-Comprehension (PDC) account links work in the fields of language production, typology, and comprehension: (1) faced with substantial computational burdens of planning and producing utterances, language producers implicitly follow three biases in utterance planning that promote word order choices that reduce these burdens, thereby improving production fluency. (2) These choices, repeated over many utterances and individuals, shape the distributions of utterance forms in language. The claim that language form stems in large degree from producers' attempts to mitigate utterance planning difficulty is contrasted with alternative accounts in which form is driven by language use more broadly, language acquisition processes, or producers' attempts to create language forms that are easily understood by comprehenders. (3) Language perceivers implicitly learn the statistical regularities in their linguistic input, and they use this prior experience to guide comprehension of subsequent language. In particular, they learn to predict the sequential structure of linguistic signals, based on the statistics of previously-encountered input. Thus, key aspects of comprehension behavior are tied to lexico-syntactic statistics in the language, which in turn derive from utterance planning biases promoting production of comparatively easy utterance forms over more difficult ones. This approach contrasts with classic theories in which comprehension behaviors are attributed to innate design features of the language comprehension system and associated working memory. The PDC instead links basic features of comprehension to a different source: production processes that shape language form.

[1]  S. Suter Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children , 2005, European Journal of Pediatrics.

[2]  M. MacDonald,et al.  Pragmatic constraint on the interpretation of complex noun phrases in Spanish and English. , 1999 .

[3]  George A. Miller,et al.  Introduction to the Formal Analysis of Natural Languages , 1968 .

[4]  E. Newport,et al.  Science Current Directions in Psychological Statistical Learning : from Acquiring Specific Items to Forming General Rules on Behalf Of: Association for Psychological Science , 2022 .

[5]  P. O'Seaghdha,et al.  Phrasal Ordering Constraints in Sentence Production: Phrase Length and Verb Disposition in Heavy-NP Shift , 1998 .

[6]  Thomas Wasow,et al.  Remarks on grammatical weight , 1997, Language Variation and Change.

[7]  J. K. Bock,et al.  Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation , 1985, Cognition.

[8]  Edward A Wasserman,et al.  Pigeons and people select efficient routes when solving a one-way "traveling salesperson" task. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[9]  R. M. Warren,et al.  Phonemic restorations based on subsequent context , 1974 .

[10]  L Frazier,et al.  Constraint satisfaction as a theory of sentence processing , 1995, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[11]  Elissa L. Newport,et al.  The Role of Stress and Position in Determining First Words , 1992 .

[12]  Jane E Raymond,et al.  Learned Predictiveness Speeds Visual Processing , 2012, Psychological science.

[13]  Christoph Scheepers,et al.  Referential and Visual Cues to Structural Choice in Visually Situated Sentence Production , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[14]  V. Ferreira,et al.  The functions of structural priming , 2006, Language and cognitive processes.

[15]  Steven T. Piantadosi,et al.  The communicative function of ambiguity in language , 2011, Cognition.

[16]  David Lightfoot,et al.  The development of language , 1999 .

[17]  P. Smolensky,et al.  Learning biases predict a word order universal , 2012, Cognition.

[18]  C. Van Petten,et al.  Prediction during language comprehension: benefits, costs, and ERP components. , 2012, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[19]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution , 1994 .

[20]  Rick Dale,et al.  Listeners invest in an assumed other’s perspective despite cognitive cost , 2011, Cognition.

[21]  M. Pickering,et al.  Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension? , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[22]  John Hale,et al.  Uncertainty About the Rest of the Sentence , 2006, Cogn. Sci..

[23]  Mark S. Seidenberg Connectionist Models in Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience : Critical Periods and the Paradox of Success , 2005 .

[24]  M. Pickering,et al.  Conceptual influences on word order and voice in sentence production: Evidence from Japanese , 2011 .

[25]  G. Dell,et al.  Effect of Ambiguity and Lexical Availability on Syntactic and Lexical Production , 2000, Cognitive Psychology.

[26]  C M Connine,et al.  Interactive use of lexical information in speech perception. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  E. Newport,et al.  When learners surpass their models: The acquisition of American Sign Language from inconsistent input , 2004, Cognitive Psychology.

[28]  W. Chafe Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view , 1976 .

[29]  M. Tarr,et al.  FFA: a flexible fusiform area for subordinate-level visual processing automatized by expertise , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[30]  Victor Kuperman,et al.  of construction probability on word durations during spontaneous incremental sentence production , 2012 .

[31]  S. Levinson,et al.  The myth of language universals: language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. , 2009, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[32]  D. Jin Generating variable birdsong syllable sequences with branching chain networks in avian premotor nucleus HVC. , 2009, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[33]  Michael Ramscar,et al.  Linguistic Self-Correction in the Absence of Feedback: A New Approach to the Logical Problem of Language Acquisition , 2007, Cogn. Sci..

[34]  Mark C. Smith,et al.  Horizontal information flow in spoken sentence production. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[35]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Experience and sentence processing: Statistical learning and relative clause comprehension , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[36]  D. Plaut,et al.  Doing without schema hierarchies: a recurrent connectionist approach to normal and impaired routine sequential action. , 2004, Psychological review.

[37]  G. Hickok,et al.  Recency preference in the human sentence processing mechanism , 1996, Cognition.

[38]  Jeffrey D. Karpicke Retrieval-Based Learning , 2012 .

[39]  F. Ferreira,et al.  How incremental is language production? Evidence from the production of utterances requiring the computation of arithmetic sums , 2002 .

[40]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  (Not) Hearing Optional Subjects: The Effects of Pragmatic Usage Preferences. , 2012, Journal of memory and language.

[41]  A. J. Hull,et al.  INFORMATION, ACOUSTIC CONFUSION AND MEMORY SPAN. , 1964, British journal of psychology.

[42]  D. Slobin,et al.  The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition , 2000 .

[43]  T. Givón,et al.  Function, structure, and language acquisition. , 1985 .

[44]  T. Shallice,et al.  CONTENTION SCHEDULING AND THE CONTROL OF ROUTINE ACTIVITIES , 2000, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[45]  Nick Chater,et al.  Finite models of infinite language: A connectionist approach to recursion , 2001 .

[46]  J. Bresnan,et al.  Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English , 2010 .

[47]  G. Dell,et al.  Language production and serial order: a functional analysis and a model. , 1997, Psychological review.

[48]  T Florian Jaeger,et al.  On language 'utility': processing complexity and communicative efficiency. , 2011, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[49]  T. Hartley,et al.  A Linguistically Constrained Model of Short-Term Memory for Nonwords ☆ , 1996 .

[50]  P. Frasconi,et al.  Learning first-pass structural attachment preferences with dynamic grammars and recursive neural networks , 2003, Cognition.

[51]  G. Dell,et al.  Becoming syntactic. , 2006, Psychological review.

[52]  H E Wanner,et al.  An ATN approach to comprehension , 1978 .

[53]  R. Jackendoff Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution , 2002 .

[54]  Thomas A. Farmer,et al.  Early Occipital Sensitivity to Syntactic Category Is Based on Form Typicality , 2010, Psychological science.

[55]  Daniel J. Acheson,et al.  Verbal working memory and language production: Common approaches to the serial ordering of verbal information. , 2009, Psychological bulletin.

[56]  E. Kaiser Taking Action: A Cross-Modal Investigation of Discourse-Level Representations , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[57]  S. Kirby,et al.  Language evolution in the laboratory , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[58]  Nelson Cowan,et al.  Working Memory Capacity , 2005 .

[59]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Reversing the hands of time: changing the mapping from seeing to saying. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[60]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[61]  F. Newmeyer Language Form And Language Function , 1998 .

[62]  Janet Dean Fodor,et al.  The diagnosis and cure of garden paths , 1994 .

[63]  Gustavo Deco,et al.  Sequential Memory: A Putative Neural and Synaptic Dynamical Mechanism , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[64]  Gerhard Jäger,et al.  Priming and unidirectional language change , 2008 .

[65]  Eugene Galanter,et al.  Handbook of mathematical psychology: I. , 1963 .

[66]  M. MacDonald Distributional Information in Language Comprehension, Production, and Acquisition: Three Puzzles and a Moral , 2013 .

[67]  Z. Harris,et al.  Foundations of language , 1941 .

[68]  Joseph Paul Stemberger,et al.  Speech errors in early child language production , 1989 .

[69]  A. Samuel,et al.  First Impressions and Last Resorts , 2008, Psychological science.

[70]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution , 1994 .

[71]  Harald Clahsen,et al.  How children process over-regularizations: Evidence from event-related brain potentials* , 2007, Journal of Child Language.

[72]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Reassessing working memory: comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). , 2002, Psychological review.

[73]  W. Labov,et al.  Constraints on the agentless passive , 1983, Journal of Linguistics.

[74]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Toward a Cognitive Psychology of Syntax: Information Processing Contributions to Sentence Formulation , 1982 .

[75]  M. MacDonald,et al.  Word Order Doesn't Matter: Relative Clause Production in English and Japanese , 2009 .

[76]  Raymond J. Mooney,et al.  Induction of First-Order Decision Lists: Results on Learning the Past Tense of English Verbs , 1995, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[77]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Alternatives to the combinatorial paradigm of linguistic theory based on domain general principles of human cognition , 2005 .

[78]  Steven C Dakin,et al.  An oblique effect for local motion: psychophysics and natural movie statistics. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[79]  Alexandra A. Cleland,et al.  Syntactic priming in written production: Evidence for rapid decay , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[80]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Challenges to recent theories of cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Evidence from Dutch. In D. Hillert (Ed.), Sentence processing: A cross-linguistic perspective. CA: Academic Press, San Diego, 1998. , 1998 .

[81]  J. Hawkins Efficiency and complexity in grammars , 2004 .

[82]  V. Ferrera Task-dependent modulation of the sensorimotor transformation for smooth pursuit eye movements. , 2000, Journal of neurophysiology.

[83]  B. Keysar,et al.  When do speakers take into account common ground? , 1996, Cognition.

[84]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Predicting the dative alternation , 2007 .

[85]  Kevin Diependaele,et al.  How lingering representations of abandoned context words affect speech production. , 2012, Acta psychologica.

[86]  Evan Kidd,et al.  The acquisition of relative clauses: Processing, typology and function , 2011 .

[87]  A. Goldberg Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language , 2006 .

[88]  Susan Kemper,et al.  Tracking Talking: Dual Task Costs of Planning and Producing Speech for Young versus Older Adults , 2011, Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition.

[89]  Jon Andoni Duñabeitia,et al.  Subject relative clauses are not universally easier to process: Evidence from Basque , 2010, Cognition.

[90]  Charles Chien-Jer Lin,et al.  The Processing Foundation of Head-Final Relative Clauses , 2008 .

[91]  J R Anderson,et al.  Retrieval of information from long-term memory. , 1983, Science.

[92]  Alan Garnham,et al.  Late Closure in Context , 1998 .

[93]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Parallel distributed processing: explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1: foundations , 1986 .

[94]  F. Ferreira,et al.  Conceptual accessibility and sentence production in a free word order language (Odawa) , 2005, Cognition.

[95]  Robin K. Morris,et al.  Processing Subject and Object Relative Clauses: Evidence from Eye Movements , 2002 .

[96]  F. Ferreira Choice of Passive Voice is Affected by Verb Type and Animacy , 1994 .

[97]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  A Theory of Human Memory: Self-Organization and Performance of Sensory-Motor Codes, Maps, and Plans , 1982 .

[98]  F. Chang,et al.  “Long before short” preference in the production of a head-final language , 2001, Cognition.

[99]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Accent and reference resolution in spoken-language comprehension , 2002 .

[100]  Jean E. Fox Tree,et al.  Pronouncing “the” as “thee” to signal problems in speaking , 1997, Cognition.

[101]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Word chunk frequencies affect the processing of pronominal object-relative clauses , 2007, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[102]  Silvia P. Gennari,et al.  Semantic indeterminacy in object relative clauses. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[103]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  Linking production and comprehension processes: The case of relative clauses , 2009, Cognition.

[104]  K. Lashley The problem of serial order in behavior , 1951 .

[105]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Abstract Structural Representations of Goal-Directed Behavior , 2010, Psychological science.

[106]  Richard Hudson,et al.  The difficulty of (so-called) self-embedded structures * , 1996 .

[107]  Rebecca J. Panagos Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children , 1998 .

[108]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Linguistic familiarity in short-term memory: A role for (co-)articulatory fluency? , 2008 .

[109]  Steven A. Jax,et al.  The problem of serial order in behavior: Lashley's legacy. , 2007, Human movement science.

[110]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  From Usage to Grammar: The Mind's Response to Repetition , 2007 .

[111]  E. Newport,et al.  Getting it right by getting it wrong: When learners change languages , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[112]  Maria Babyonyshev,et al.  The Complexity of Nested Structures in Japanese. , 1999 .

[113]  P. MacNeilage,et al.  On the origin of internal structure of word forms. , 2000, Science.

[114]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  Linearization in Describing Spatial Networks , 1982 .

[115]  Kazuo Fujita,et al.  Flexible route selection by pigeons (Columba livia) on a computerized multi-goal navigation task with and without an "obstacle". , 2011, Journal of comparative psychology.

[116]  Maryellen C MacDonald,et al.  When language comprehension reflects production constraints: Resolving ambiguities with the help of past experience , 2009, Memory & cognition.

[117]  J. Kimball Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language , 1973 .

[118]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  Constraint Satisfaction Accounts of Lexical and Sentence Comprehension , 2006 .

[119]  B. Postle Working memory as an emergent property of the mind and brain , 2006, Neuroscience.

[120]  Silvia P. Gennari,et al.  Animacy and competition in relative clause production: A cross-linguistic investigation , 2012, Cognitive Psychology.

[121]  F P Roth,et al.  Accelerating language learning in young children , 1984, Journal of Child Language.

[122]  William O’Grady,et al.  Relative clauses Processing and acquisition * , 2011 .

[123]  F. Ferreira Effects of length and syntactic complexity on initiation times for prepared utterances , 1991 .

[124]  R. Jackendoff Linguistics in Cognitive Science: The state of the art , 2007 .

[125]  E. Gibson Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies , 1998, Cognition.

[126]  Jeanette Altarriba,et al.  The effect of semantic relatedness on immediate serial recall and serial recognition , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[127]  Franklin Chang,et al.  Learning to order words: A connectionist model of heavy NP shift and accessibility effects in Japanese and English , 2009 .

[128]  Edward Gibson,et al.  Consequences of the Serial Nature of Linguistic Input for Sentenial Complexity , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[129]  Yiya Chen,et al.  Let’s you do that: Sharing the cognitive burdens of dialogue , 2007 .

[130]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Sentence processing: A tutorial review. , 1987 .

[131]  D. Lightfoot The development of language , 1999 .

[132]  D. Sternad,et al.  Decomposition of variability in the execution of goal-oriented tasks: three components of skill improvement. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[133]  G. A. Miller,et al.  Finitary models of language users , 1963 .

[134]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  The emergence of grammaticality in connectionist networks. , 1999 .

[135]  Ariel Rokem,et al.  A model of encoding and decoding in V1 and MT accounts for motion perception anisotropies in the human visual system , 2009, Brain Research.

[136]  R. Levy Expectation-based syntactic comprehension , 2008, Cognition.

[137]  G. A. Miller,et al.  Verbal context and the recall of meaningful material. , 1950, The American journal of psychology.