Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T23:48:11.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A usage-based cognitive linguistic (re-)interpretation of priming evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2017

Franziska Günther
Franziska Günther*
Affiliation:
Department of English and American Studies, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, 80799 Munich, Germany. franziska.guenther@anglistik.uni-muenchen.dewww.anglistik.uni-muenchen.de/personen/wiss_ma/guenther/index.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Usage-based cognitive linguistic (UBCL) theories offer a unifying interpretation of the different (structural vs. [more] lexical) priming effects reported by Branigan & Pickering (B&P), and they provide an ideal basis for explaining contextual influences on priming. However, they also call into question B&P's claim that priming “provides evidence that is directly informative about mental representation” (sect. 1.5, para. 1).

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e291
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.)

References

Croft, W. (2001) Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2003) Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(5):219–24. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, A. E. (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Günther, F. (2016) Constructions in cognitive contexts: Why individuals matter in linguistic relativity research. de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Konopka, A. E. & Bock, K. (2009) Lexical or syntactic control of sentence formulation? Structural generalizations from idiom production. Cognitive Psychology 58(1):68–101. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.05.002.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar: Vol. 1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2000) A dynamic usage-based model. In: Usage-based models of language, ed. Barlow, M. & Kemmer, S., pp. 1–63. CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2008) Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pickering, M. J. & Ferreira, V. S. (2008) Structural priming: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin 134(3):427–59. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.427 Google Scholar
Schmid, H. -J. (2015) A blueprint of the entrenchment-and-conventionalization model. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 3(1):3–25. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2015-0002.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A. & Flach, S. (2016) The corpus-based perspective on entrenchment. In: Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning: How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge, ed. Schmid, H.-J., pp. 101–28. de Gruyter Mouton & the American Psychological Association. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/15969-006.Google Scholar
The Five Graces Group (Beckner, C., Blythe, R. A., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., Ellis, N. C., Holland, J., Ke, J., Larsen-Freeman, D. & Schoenemann, T.) (2009) Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. In: Language as a complex adaptive system, ed. Ellis, N. C. & Larsen-Freeman, D., pp. 1–26. Wiley-Blackwell. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00533.x.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2006) Construction grammar for kids. Constructions 1:1–23. Available at: http://journals.linguisticsociety.org/elanguage/constructions/article/download/26/26-84-1-PB.pdf.Google Scholar