Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Nov;37(6):1503-14.
doi: 10.1037/a0024350. Epub 2011 Jul 18.

Saying what's on your mind: working memory effects on sentence production

Affiliations

Saying what's on your mind: working memory effects on sentence production

L Robert Slevc. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2011 Nov.

Abstract

The role of working memory (WM) in sentence comprehension has received considerable interest, but little work has investigated how sentence production relies on memory mechanisms. Three experiments investigated speakers' tendency to produce syntactic structures that allow for early production of material that is accessible in memory. In Experiment 1, speakers produced accessible information early less often when under a verbal WM load than when under no load. Experiment 2 found the same pattern for given-new ordering (i.e., when accessibility was manipulated by making information given). Experiment 3 addressed the possibility that these effects do not reflect WM mechanisms but rather increased task difficulty by relying on the distinction between verbal and spatial WM: Speakers' tendency to produce sentences respecting given-new ordering was reduced more by a verbal than by a spatial WM load. These patterns show that accessibility effects do in fact reflect accessibility in verbal WM and that representations in sentence production are vulnerable to interference from other information in memory.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Proportion of prepositional dative (PD) sentences produced in Experiment 1 as a function of cue-type (i.e., which post-verbal argument was made accessible: theme or goal) and WM load (none or 2-word load). Note that the Y-axis does not start at zero and error bars represent standard errors.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Proportion of prepositional dative (PD) sentences produced in Experiment 2 as a function of cue-givenness (i.e., which post-verbal argument was given information: theme or goal) and WM load (no load or 2-word load). Note that the Y-axis does not start at zero and error bars represent standard errors.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Proportion of prepositional dative (PD) sentences produced in Experiment 3 as a function of cue-type (i.e., which post-verbal argument was given information: theme or goal) and type of WM-task (spatial load vs. verbal load). Note that the Y-axis does not start at zero and error bars represent standard errors.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Agresti A. Categorical Data Analysis. 2. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
    1. Ariel M. The function of accessibility in a theory of grammar. Journal of Pragmatics. 1991;16:443–463.
    1. Arnold JE. How speakers refer: The role of accessibility. Language and Linguistics Compass. 2010;4:187–203.
    1. Arnold JE, Griffin ZM. The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: Everyone counts. Journal of Memory & Language. 2007;56:521–536. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Arnold JE, Wasow T, Losongco A, Ginstrom R. Heavyness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language. 2000;76:28–55.

Publication types