Element contents
Series: Elements in Psycholinguistics
Structural Priming in Sentence Production
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 January 2025
Summary
This Element provides an overview of structural priming research across the three main populations on which experimental priming studies have concentrated: adult monolingual speakers, first language learners, second language learners, and bilinguals. Priming studies with monolingual adults were originally designed to inform psycholinguistic models of grammatical encoding in language production. Thanks to the the implicit nature of the task, priming has turned out to be suitable for experimentally addressing questions about linguistic representation and use at the sentence level in speakers of any age. The view that priming is a form of implicit learning has sparked an interest in exploring continuity and life-long learning in language, opening up rich research areas in second language acquisition and bilingualism. Priming rightly deserves to be a part of every language scientist's tool kit.
Keywords
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in PsycholinguisticsOnline ISBN: 9781009236713Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 16 January 2025
References
Ahn, D., & Ferreira, V. (2024). Shared vs. separate structural representations: Evidence from cumulative cross-language structural priming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 174–190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baker, M. C. (1988). Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baker, M. C. (1996). On the structural positions of themes and goals. In Rooryck, J. & Zaring, L. (Eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon (pp. 7–34). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, M. C. (1997). Thematic roles and syntactic structure. In Haegeman, L. (Ed.), Elements of Grammar (pp. 73–137). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bencini, G. M. L. (2002). The representation and processing of argument structure constructions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Bencini, G. M. L. (2013). Psycholinguistics. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 379–396). Oxford: Oxford Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bencini, G. M. L. (2017). Speech errors as a window on language and thought: A cognitive science perspective. Altre Modernità, special issue, Errors: Communication and Its Discontents, 243–262.Google Scholar
Bencini, G. M. L. (2020). Developing convergence: Towards an integrated developmental model of language representation and processing in children and adults. In Cardinaletti, A., Branchini, C., Giusti, G., & Volpato, F. (Eds.), Language acquisition, processing and bilingualism: Selected papers from the Romance Turn VII (pp. 12–46). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.Google Scholar
Bencini, G. M. L., & Goldberg, A. E. (2000). The contribution of argument structure constructions to sentence meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 640–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bencini, G. M. L., & Valian, V. V. (2008). Abstract sentence representations in 3-year-olds: Evidence from language production and comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernolet, S., Colleman, T., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2014). The ‘sense boost’ to dative priming: Evidence for sense-specific verb-structure links. Journal of Memory and Language, 76, 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernolet, S., Collina, S., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2016). The persistence of syntactic priming revisited. Journal of Memory and Language, 91, 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernolet, S., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2010). Does verb bias modulate syntactic priming? Cognition, 114, 455–461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2007). Shared syntactic representations in bilinguals: Evidence for the role of word-order repetition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 931–949.Google ScholarPubMed
Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2009). Persistence of emphasis in language production: A cross-linguistic approach. Cognition, 112, 300–317.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2013). From language-specific to shared syntactic representations: The influence of second language proficiency on syntactic sharing in bilinguals. Cognition, 127, 287–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bock, J. K. (1982). Toward a cognitive psychology of syntax: Information processing contributions to sentence formulation. Psychological Review, 89, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, J. K. (1986a). Meaning, sound, and syntax: Lexical priming in sentence production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 575–586.Google Scholar
Bock, J. K. (1986b). Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 355–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, J. K. (1989). Closed-class immanence in sentence production. Cognition, 31, 163–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bock, J. K. (1995). Sentence production: From mind to mouth. In Miller, J. L. & Eimas, P. D. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and cognition: Speech, language, and communication (vol. 11, pp. 181–216). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bock, J. K., & Ferreira, V. S. (2014). Syntactically speaking. In Goldrick, M., Ferreira, V. S., & Miozzo, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language production (pp. 21–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bock, J. K., & Griffin, Z. M. (2000). The persistence of structural priming: Transient activation or implicit learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 129, 177–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bock, J. K., & Kroch, A. (1989). The isolability of syntactic processing. In Carlson, G. N. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (Eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing (pp. 157–196). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, J. K., & Levelt, W. J. (1994). Language production: Grammatical encoding. In Gernsbacher, M. A. (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 945–984). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bock, J. K., & Loebell, H. (1990). Framing sentences. Cognition, 35, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bock, J. K., Loebell, H., & Morey, R. (1992). From conceptual roles to structural relations: Bridging the syntactic cleft. Psychological Review, 99, 150–171.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bock, J. K., Dell, G. S., Chang, F., & Onishi, K. H. (2007). Persistent structural priming from language comprehension to language production. Cognition, 104, 437–458.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borer, H. (2005). In name only: Structuring sense, vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borer, H., & Wexler, K. (1987). The maturation of grammar. In Roeper, T. & Williams, E. (Eds.), Parameter setting. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Borer, H., & Wexler, K. (1992). Bi-unique relations and the maturations of grammatical principles. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 10, 147–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branigan, H. (2007). Syntactic priming. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branigan, H., & Mclean, J. (2016). What children learn from adults’ utterances: An ephemeral lexical boost and persistent syntactic priming in adult-child dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 91, 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branigan, H., Mclean, J., & Jones, M. (2005). A blue cat or a cat that is blue? Evidence for abstract syntax in children’s noun phrases. In Brugos, A., Clark-Cotton, M. R., & Ha, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 109–121), Somerville: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Branigan, H. P., & Pickering, M. J. (2017). An experimental approach to linguistic representation. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, article e282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Cleland, A. A. (2000). Syntactic coordination in dialogue. Cognition, 75, B13–B25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., Liversedge, S. P., Stewart, A. J., & Urbach, T. P. (1995). Syntactic priming: Investigating the mental representation of language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 489–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., McLean, J. F., & Cleland, A. A. (2007). Syntactic alignment and participant role in dialogue. Cognition, 104, 163–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., Stewart, A. & McLean, J. (2000). Syntactic priming in spoken production: Linguistic and temporal interference. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1297–1302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bresnan, J., & Kanerva, J. (1989). Locative inversion in Chicheŵa: A case study of factorization in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 1–50.Google Scholar
Cai, Z. G., Pickering, M. J., Yan, H., & Branigan, H. P. (2011). Lexical and syntactic representations in closely related languages: Evidence from Cantonese–Mandarin bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 431–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cai, Z. G., Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (2012). Mapping concepts to syntax: Evidence from structural priming in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 833–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cai, Z. & Zhao, N. (2024). Structural priming: An experimental paradigm for mapping linguistic representations. Language and Linguistics Compass, 18, article e12507. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, F. (2002). Symbolically speaking: A connectionist model of sentence production. Cognitive Science, 26, 609–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, F. (2009). Learning to order words: A connectionist model of heavy NP shift and accessibility effects in Japanese and English. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 374–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, F., Bock, K., & Goldberg, A. E. (2003). Can thematic roles leave traces of their places? Cognition, 90, 29–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, F., Dell, G. S., Bock, J. K., & Griffin, Z. (2000). Structural priming as implicit learning: Comparison of models of sentence production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 217–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, F., Dell, G. S., & Bock, J. K. (2006). Becoming syntactic. Psychological Review, 113, 234–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, F., Janciauskas, M., & Fitz, H. (2012). Language adaptation and learning: Getting explicit about implicit learning. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, B., Jia, Y., Wang, Z., Dunlap, S., & Shin, J. A. (2013). Is word-order similarity necessary for cross-linguistic structural priming? Second Language Research, 29, 375–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, X., Hartsuiker, R. J., Muylle, M., Slim, M. S., & Chi Zhang, C. (2022). The effect of animacy on structural Priming: A replication of Bock, Loebell and Morey (1992). Journal of Memory and Language, 127, article 104354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2022.104354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cleland, A. A., & Pickering, M. J. (2003). The use of lexical and syntactic information in language production: Evidence from the priming of noun-phrase structure. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 214–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, N. J., & Squire, L. R. (1980). Preserved learning and retention of pattern-analyzing skill in amnesia: Dissociation of knowing how and knowing that. Science, 210, 207–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costa, A., Caramazza, A., & Sebastian-Galles, N. (2000). The cognate facilitation effect: Implications for models of lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1283–1296.Google ScholarPubMed
Coyle, J. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2008). Patterns of experience with verbs affect long-term cumulative structural priming. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 967–970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Bot, K. (1992). A bilingual production model: Levelt’s “speaking” model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13, 1–24.Google Scholar
Deen, K. (2011). The acquisition of the passive. In de Villiers, J. & Roeper, T. (Eds.), Handbook of generative approaches to language acquisition (pp. 155–188). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dell, G. S., & Chang, F. (2014). The P-chain: Relating sentence production and its disorders to comprehension and acquisition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369, article 20120394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dell, G. S., Oppenheim, G. M., & Kittredge, A. K. (2008). Saying the right word at the right time: Syntagmatic and paradigmatic interference in sentence production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 583–608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dell, G., & Reich, P. A. (1981). Stages in sentence production: An analysis of speech error data. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 611–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Saffran, E. M., & Gagnon, D. A. (1997). Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers. Psychological Review, 104, 801–838.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Desmet, T., & Declercq, M. (2006). Cross-lingustic priming of syntactic hierarchical configuration information. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 610–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D. (1989). On the semantic content of the notion “thematic role.” In Chierchia, G., Partee, B. H., & Turner, R. (Eds.), Properties, types, and meaning (pp. 69–129). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67, 547–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Facipieri, C., Vann, M., & Bencini, G. M. L. (2022). Shared syntactic representations in non-native languages. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of Experimental Linguistics (pp. 57–60). Athens: ExLing Society.Google Scholar
Ferreira, V. S., & Bock, J. K. (2006). The functions of structural priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 1011–1029.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferreira, V. S., Morgan, A., & Slevc, R. L. (2018). Grammatical encoding. In Rueschemeyer, S. A. & Gaskell, G. M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics, 2nd ed. (pp. 432–457). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ferreira, V. S., and Slevc, L. R. (2007). Grammatical encoding. In Gaskell, M. G. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 453–470). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ferreira, V. S., Bock, K., Wilson, M. P., and Cohen, N. J. (2008). Memory for syntax despite amnesia. Psychological Science, 19, 940–946.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for Case. In Bach, E. & Harms, R. T. (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1–88). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 6, 222–254.Google Scholar
Fisher, C. (2002). The role of abstract syntactic knowledge in language acquisition: A reply to Tomasello (2000). Cognition, 82, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, C., Kyong-sun, J., & Scott, R. (2020). The developmental origins of syntactic bootstrapping. Trends in Cognitive Science, 12, 48–77.Google ScholarPubMed
Fisher, C., Gertner, Y., Scott, R., & Yuan, S. (2010). Syntactic bootstrapping. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1, 143–149.Google ScholarPubMed
Flett, S., Branigan, H. P., & Pickering, M. J. (2013). Are non-native structural preferences affected by native language preferences? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 751–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foltz, A., Knopf, K., Jonas, K., Jaecks, P., & Stenneken, P. (2020). Evidence for robust abstract syntactic representations in production before age three. First Language, 41, 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foltz, A., Thiele, K., Kahsnitz, D., & Stenneken, P. (2015). Children’s syntactic-priming magnitude: lexical factors and participant characteristics. Journal of Child Language, 42, 932–945.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, D., & Grodzinsky, Y. (1998). Children’s passive: A view from the by-phrase. Linguistic Inquiry, 29, 311–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fromkin, V. A. (1973a). Appendix. In Fromkin, V. A. (Ed.), Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence (pp. 243–269). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Fromkin, V. A. (1973b). The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. In Fromkin, V. A. (Ed.), Speech errors as linguistic evidence (pp. 215–241). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Gámez, P. B., & Vasilyeva, M. (2020). Shared syntactic representations in balanced bilinguals: Cross-linguistic priming with and without verb overlap. Language Learning and Development, 16, 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, M. F. (1975). The analysis of sentence production. In Bower, G. (Ed.), The psychology of Learning and Motivation (vol. 9, pp. 133–177). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Garrett, M. F. (1976). Syntactic processes in sentence production. In Wales, R. and Walker, E. L. (Eds.), New approaches to language mechanisms (pp. 231–256). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Garrett, M. F. (1980a). Levels of processing in sentence production. In Butterworth, B. (Ed.), Language Production (vol. 1, pp. 177–220). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Garrett, M. F. (1980b). The limits of accommodation: Arguments for independent processing levels in sentence production. In Fromkin, V. A. (Ed.), Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen and hand (pp. 263–271). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Garrett, M. F. (1982). Production of speech: Observations from normal and pathological language use. In Ellis, A. (Ed.), Normality and pathology in cognitive functions (pp. 19–76). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Garrett, M. F. (1988). Processes in language production. In Newmeyer, F. J. (Ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge survey, Ill. Language: Psychological and biological aspects (pp. 69–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, S., & Anderson, A. (1987). Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic coordination. Cognition, 27, 181–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gertner, Y., Fisher, C., & Eisengart, J. (2006). Learning words and rules: Abstract knowledge of word order in early sentence comprehension. Psychological Science, 17, 684–691.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2002). Surface generalizations: An alternative to alternations. Cognitive Linguistics, 13, 327–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2005). Syntactic priming: A corpus-based approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34, 365–399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gries, S. T. (2011). Studying syntactic priming in corpora: Implications of different levels of granularity. In Schönefeld, D. (Ed.), Converging evidence: Methodological and theoretical issues for linguistic research (pp. 143–165). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Koostra, G. (2017). Structural priming within and across languages: A corpus-based perspective. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20, 235–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, Z., & Weinstein-Tull, J. (2003). Conceptual structure modulates structural priming in the production of complex sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 537–555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, P. (2006). An introduction to English semantics and pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Gruber, J. (1965). Studies in lexical relations. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Hall, M. L., Ferreira, V. S., & Mayberry, R. I. (2015). Syntactic priming in American Sign Language. PLoS ONE, 10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harley, H. (2003). Possession and the double object construction. In Pica, P. (Ed.), Linguistic variation yearbook (vol. 2, pp. 31–70). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hartsuiker, R. J., & Bernolet, S. (2017). The development of shared syntax in second language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20, 219–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsuiker, R. J., Bernolet, S., Schoonbaert, S., Speybroeck, S., & Vanderelst, D. (2008). Syntactic priming persists while the lexical boost decays: Evidence from written and spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 214–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsuiker, R. J., Beerts, S., Loncke, M., Desmet, T., & Bernolet, S. (2016). Cross-linguistic structural priming in multilinguals: Further evidence for shared syntax. Journal of Memory and Language, 90, 14–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2008). Language integration in bilingual sentence production. Acta Psychologica, 128, 479–489.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartsuiker, R. J., Pickering, M. J., & Veltkamp, E. (2004). Is syntax separate or shared between-languages? Crosslinguistic syntactic priming in Spanish-English bilinguals. Psychological Science, 15, 409–414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heyselaar, E., Segaert, K., Walvoort, S. J. W., Kessels, R. P. C., & Hagoort, P. (2017). The role of procedural memory in the skill for language: Evidence from syntactic priming in patients with amnesia. Neuropsychologia, 101, 97–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heyselaar, E., Wheeldon, L., & Segaert, K. (2021). Structural priming is supported by different components of nondeclarative memory: Evidence from priming across the lifespan. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47, 820–837.Google ScholarPubMed
Hilpert, M. (2014). Construction grammar and its application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, T. (2017). Construction grammars. In Dancygier, B. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 310–329). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, T. (2022). Construction grammar: The structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.). (2013). The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huttenlocher, J., Vasilyeva, M., & Shimpi, P. (2004). Syntactic priming in young children. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 182–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. S. (2002). Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, C. N. (2018). Second language structural priming: A critical review and directions for future research. Second Language Research, 34, 539–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, C. N., & Ruf, H. T. (2017). The priming of word order in second language German. Applied Psycholinguistics, 38, 315–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, T. F., & Snider, N. E. (2013). Alignment as a consequence of expectation adaptation: Syntactic priming is affected by the prime’s prediction error given both prior and recent experience. Cognition, 127, 57–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaan, E., & Chun, E. (2018). Priming and adaptation in native speakers and second-language learners. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21, 228–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kantola, L., & van Gompel, R. P. (2011). Between- and within-language priming is the same: Evidence for shared bilingual syntactic representations. Memory and Cognition, 39, 276–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaschak, M. P. (2007). Long-term structural priming affects subsequent patterns of language production. Memory and Cognition, 35, 925–937.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaschak, M. P., & Borreggine, K. L. (2008). Is long-term structural priming affected by patterns of experience with individual verbs? Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 862–878.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaschak, M. P., Kutta, T. J., & Schatschneider, C. (2011). Long-term cumulative structural priming persists for (at least) one week. Memory and Cognition, 39, 381–388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaschak, M. P., Kutta, T. J., & Coyle, J. M. (2014). Long and short term cumulative structural priming effects. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3798, 1–23.Google Scholar
Kaschak, M. P., Loney, R. A., & Borreggine, K. L. (2006). Recent experience affects the strength of structural priming. Cognition, 99, B73–B82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kempen, G., & Hoenkamp, E. (1987). An incremental procedural grammar for sentence formulation. Cognitive Science, 11, 201–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempen, G., & Huijbers, P. (1983). The lexicalization process in sentence production and naming: Indirect election of words. Cognition, 14, 185–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khoe, Y. H., Tsoukala, C., Kootstra, G. J., & Frank, S. L. (2021). Is structural priming between different languages a learning effect? Modelling priming as error-driven implicit learning. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 38(4), 537–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kidd, E. (2012). Implicit statistical learning is directly associated with the acquisition of syntax. Developmental Psychology, 48, 171–184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2008). Learners’ production of passives during syntactic priming activities. Applied Linguistics, 29, 149–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kootstra, G. J., & Doedens, W. J. (2016). How multiple sources of experience influence bilingual syntactic choice: Immediate and cumulative cross-language effects of structural priming, verb bias, and language dominance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 710–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kootstra, G. J. & Muysken, P. (2017). Cross-linguistic priming in bilinguals: Multidisciplinary perspectives on language processing, acquisition, and change. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20, 215–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konopka, A. E., & Bock, K. (2009). Lexical or syntactic control of sentence formulation? Structural generalizations from idiom production. Cognitive Psychology, 58, 68–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Konopka, A. E., & Meyer, A. S. (2014). Priming sentence planning. Cognitive Psychology, 73, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1981). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topics, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J., & Kelter, S. (1982). Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 78–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1995). Unaccusativity at the syntax–lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (2005). Argument realization. Research Surveys in Linguistics Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litcofsky, K. A., & Van Hell, J. G. (2019). Bi-directional evidence linking sentence production and comprehension: A cross-modality structural priming study. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, article 1095.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loebell, H., & Bock, K. (2003). Structural priming across languages. Linguistics, 41, 791–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahowald, K., James, A., Futrell, R., & Gibson, E. (2016). A meta-analysis of syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 91, 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malhotra, G., Pickering, M. J., Branigan, H. P., & Bednar, J. A. (2008). On the persistence of structural priming: Mechanisms of decay and influence of word-forms. In Love, B. C., McRae, K. & Sloutsky, V. M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 657–662). Austin: Curran Associates.Google Scholar
Marantz, A. (2013). Verbal argument structure: Events and participants. Lingua, 130, 152–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messenger, K. (2021). The persistence of priming: Exploring long-lasting syntactic priming effects in children and adults. Cognitive Science, 45, article e13005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Messenger, K., Branigan, H. P., & McLean, J. F. (2011). Evidence for (shared) abstract structure underlying children’s short and full passives. Cognition, 121, 268–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messenger, K., Branigan, H. P., & McLean, J. F. (2012). Is children’s acquisition of the passive a staged process? Evidence from six-and nine-year-olds’ production of passives. Journal of Child Language, 39, 991–1016.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Messenger, K., Branigan, H. P., McLean, J. F., & Sorace, A. (2012). Is young children’s passive syntax semantically constrained? Evidence from syntactic priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 568–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKee, C., McDaniel, D., & Garrett, M. C. (2018). Children’s performance abilities: Language production. In Fernández, E. and Cairns, H. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 491–515). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
McDonough, K. (2006). Interaction and syntactic priming: English L2 speakers’ production of dative constructions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 179–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K., & Chaikitmongkol, W. (2010). Collaborative syntactic priming activities and EFL learners’ production of wh-questions. Canadian Modern Language Review-Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 66, 817–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K., & Mackey, A. (2008). Syntactic priming and ESL question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K., Trofimovich, P., & Neumann, H. (2015). Eliciting production of L2 target structures through priming activities. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 71, 75–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moutsopoulou, K. Pfeuffer, C. Kiesel, A. Yang, Q. & Waszak, F. (2019). How long is long-term priming? Classification and action priming in the scale of days. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 5, 1183–1199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (1998). The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 633–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M. J., Branigan, H. P., & McLean, J. F. (2002). Constituent structure is formulated in one stage. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 586–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M. J., & Ferreira, V. S. (2008). Structural priming: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 427–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 329–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Potter, M. C., & Lombardi, L. (1998). Syntactic priming in immediate recall of sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, G. (2008). Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first-phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M. & Levin, B. (1998). Building verb meanings. In Butt, M. and Geuder, W. (Eds.), The Projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 97–134). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (2008). The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity. Journal of Linguistics, 44, 129–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (2011). Lexical conceptual structure. In Von Heusinger, K., Maienborn, C., and Portner, P. (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning (vol. 1, pp. 418–438). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Reitter, D., Keller, F., & Moore, J. D. (2011). A computational cognitive model of syntactic priming. Cognitive Science, 35, 587–637.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reitter, D., & Moore, J. D. (2014). Alignment and task success in spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 76, 29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roelofs, A. (1992). A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. Cognition, 42, 107–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roelofs, A. (1993). Testing a non-decompositional theory of lemma retrieval in speaking: Retrieval of verbs. Cognition, 47, 59–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roelofs, A., & Ferreira, V. S. (2019). The architecture of speaking. In Hagoort, P. (Ed.), Human language: From genes and brains to behavior (pp. 35–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roland, D., & Jurafsky, D. (2002). Verb sense and verb subcategorization probabilities. In Merlo, P. & Stevenson, S. (Eds.), The lexical basis of sentence processing: Formal, computational, and experimental issues (pp. 325–345). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, C. F., Chang, F., Ambridge, B., Pine, J. M., & Lieven, E. V. (2012). The development of abstract syntax: Evidence from structural priming and the lexical boost. Cognition, 125, 49–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salamoura, A., & Williams, J. N. (2006). Lexical activation of cross-language syntactic priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9, 299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, C., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2003). Testing the abstractness of children’s linguistic representations: Lexical and structural priming of syntactic constructions in young children. Developmental Science, 6, 557–567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Savage, C., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Structural priming as implicit learning in language acquisition: The persistence of lexical and structural priming in 4-year-olds. Language Learning and Development, 2, 27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1979). Speech errors as evidence for a serial ordering mechanism in sentence production. In Cooper, W. E. & Walker, E. C. T. (Eds.), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett (pp. 295–342). Hillsdale: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Shimpi, P., Gámez, P., Huttenlocher, J., & Vasilyeva, M. (2007). Syntactic priming in 3- and 4-year-old children: Evidence for abstract representations of transitive and dative forms. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1334–1346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shin, J. A., & Christianson, K. (2009). Syntactic processing in Korean–English bilingual production: Evidence from cross-linguistic syntactic priming. Cognition, 112, 175–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shin, J. A., & Christianson, K. (2012). Structural priming and second language learning. Language Learning, 62, 931–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoonbaert, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2007). The representation of lexical and syntactic information in bilinguals: Evidence from syntactic priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking.” In Gumperz, J. & Levinson, S. C. (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Snyder, W. & Hyams, N. (2015). Minimality effects in children’s passives. In Domenico, E. Di, Hamann, C., & Matteini, S. (Eds.), Structures, strategies and beyond: Essays in honour of Adriana Belletti (pp. 343–368). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1992): First verbs: A case study of early grammatical development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2000a). Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition, 74, 209–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2000b). The item-based nature of children’s early syntactic development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 156–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, M. 2003: Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tooley, K. M., & Bock, K. (2014). On the parity of structural persistence in language production and comprehension. Cognition, 132, 101–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ungerer, T., & Hartmann, S. (2023). Constructionist approaches: Past, present, future. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valian, V. V. (1986). Syntactic categories in the speech of young children. Developmental Psychology, 22, 562–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valian, V. (2009). Abstract linguistic representations and innateness: The development of determiners. In Lewis, W. D., Karimi, S., Harley, H., & Farrar, S. O. (Eds.), Time and again: Theoretical perspectives on formal linguistics in honor of D. Terence Langendoen (pp. 189–206). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valian, V. V. (2016). When children don’t say what they know: Syntax acquisition and executive function. In Barner, D. and Barron, A. S. (Eds.), Core knowledge and conceptual change (pp. 261–276). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Gompel, R. P., & Arai, M. (2017). Structural priming in bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21, 448–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasilyeva, M., Waterfall, H., Gámez, P. B., & Gómez, L. G. (2010). Cross-linguistic syntactic priming in bilingual children. Journal of Child Language, 37, 1047–1064.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vernice, M., Pickering, M., & Hartsuiker, R. (2012). Thematic emphasis in language production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 631–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, P. (2013). Introducing psycholinguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weiner, E. J., & Labov, W. (1983). Constraints on the agentless passive. Journal of Linguistics, 19, 29–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeldon, L. R., & Konopka, A. (2023). Grammatical encoding for speech production. Cambridge Elements in Psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziegler, J., Bencini, G., Goldberg, A., & Snedeker, J. (2019). How abstract is syntax? Evidence from structural priming. Cognition, 193, article 104045.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziegler, J., & Snedeker, J. (2018). How broad are thematic roles? Evidence from structural priming. Cognition, 179, 221–240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziegler, J., Snedeker, J., & Wittenberg, E. (2018). Event structures drive semantic structural priming, not thematic roles: Evidence from idioms and light verbs. Cognitive Science, 42, 2918–2949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed