Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T11:26:14.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Priming and alignment: Mechanism or consequence?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2004

Sarah Brown-Schmidt  and
Michael K. Tanenhaus
Sarah Brown-Schmidt*
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, River Campus, Rochester, NY14627http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/sschmidt/http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/mtan/mtan.html
Michael K. Tanenhaus*
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, River Campus, Rochester, NY14627http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/sschmidt/http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/mtan/mtan.html
*
sschmidt@bcs.rochester.edu
sschmidt@bcs.rochester.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We agree with Pickering & Garrod's (P&G's) proposal that dialogue is an important empirical and theoretical test bed for models of language processing. However, we offer two cautionary notes. First, the enterprise will require explicit computational models. Second, such models will need to incorporate both joint and separate speaker and hearer commitments in ways that go beyond priming and alignment.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 2004 , pp. 193 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

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.)

References

Note

1. We use the word “thee” to indicate a disfluent pronunciation of the word “the” (and not in the old English usage as a pronoun).