Empirical evidence for an inflationist lexicon

Although generative and construction grammars both assume that some linguistic forms are stored/retrieved as wholes while others are strung together from simpler part, they differ with respect to the units that may be stored in the lexicon, and therefore in the rules that combine them. Within the generative framework, the determining factor for storage is regularity. In contrast, for construction grammarians frequency of use is an important factor determining whether a form is stored as a whole or (de)composed on-line. We present empirical evidence from self-paced reading, sentence recall, and chunk production experiments showing that speakers are sensitive to the frequency of use of regular, non-idiomatic multi-word sequences (at the end of ), thus suggesting that they are stored/retrieved as wholes (favoring the constructionist view). However, these frequency effects could rather reflect speeded/practiced rule-based (de)composition. Results from our chunk recall experiment with event-related potential recordings suggest that (some aspects) of such multi-word sequences may be holistically stored/retrieved.

[1]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: the reduction of don't in English , 1999 .

[2]  Morris Halle,et al.  Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection , 1993 .

[3]  N. Snider,et al.  More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases , 2010 .

[4]  W. Levelt Accessing words in speech production: Stages, processes and representations , 1992, Cognition.

[5]  M. Posner,et al.  Establishing a time‐line of word recognition: evidence from eye movements and event‐related potentials , 1998, Neuroreport.

[6]  Alison Wray,et al.  Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries , 2008 .

[7]  S. Pinker,et al.  Combination and structure, not gradedness, is the issue , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[8]  Alan S. Blinder,et al.  Thoughts on the Laffer Curve , 1981 .

[9]  Noam Chomsky A minimalist program for linguistic theory , 1992 .

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

[11]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Imaging the past: Neural activation in frontal and temporal regions during regular and irregular past-tense processing , 2005, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[12]  C. Westbury,et al.  Processing Advantages of Lexical Bundles: Evidence from Self-Paced Reading and Sentence Recall Tasks. , 2011 .

[13]  Dawn Nordquist,et al.  Investigating elicited data from a usage-based perspective , 2009 .

[14]  Jean-Christophe Verstraete,et al.  Review of Joan Bybee & Paul J. Hopper (2001) Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (Amsterdam: Benjamins) , 2005 .

[15]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Effects of word length and frequency on the human event-related potential , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[16]  Friedemann Pulvermüller,et al.  Early semantic context integration and lexical access as revealed by event-related brain potentials , 2007, Biological Psychology.

[17]  D. Biber,et al.  Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English , 1999 .

[18]  L. Pylkkänen,et al.  Tracking the time course of word recognition with MEG , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  Joana Cholin,et al.  The mental syllabary in speech production: An integration of different approaches and domains , 2008 .

[20]  Steven G. Luke,et al.  Effects of plausibility on structural priming. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  S. Sereno,et al.  The frequency-predictability interaction in reading: it depends where you're coming from. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure , 2001 .

[23]  John Sinclair,et al.  Corpus, Concordance, Collocation , 1991 .

[24]  Aaron J. Newman,et al.  An ERP study of regular and irregular English past tense inflection , 2007, NeuroImage.

[25]  R. Weinert Formulaicity and usage-based language: linguistic, psycholinguistic and acquisitional manifestations , 2010 .

[26]  Nick C. Ellis,et al.  Formulaic language in native speakers: Triangulating psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and education , 2009 .

[27]  R. H. Baayen,et al.  Storage and computation in the mental lexicon , 2005 .

[28]  S. Pinker,et al.  The past and future of the past tense , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[29]  A. Goldberg The nature of generalization in language , 2009 .

[30]  Alec Marantz,et al.  The minimalist program , 1995 .

[31]  Yosef Grodzinsky,et al.  Neuroimaging of syntax and syntactic processing , 2006, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[32]  Y. Miyashita,et al.  A syntactic specialization for Broca's area. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[34]  Robert J. Hartsuiker,et al.  Does verb bias modulate syntactic priming? , 2010, Cognition.

[35]  M. MacDonald,et al.  Experience and grammatical agreement: Statistical learning shapes number agreement production , 2010, Cognition.

[36]  Alfonso Caramazza,et al.  A tale of two frequencies: Determining the speed of lexical access for Mandarin Chinese and English compounds , 2008 .

[37]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Morphological Processes in language Comprehension , 2007 .