1. Robert J. Hartsuiker Martin J. Pickering
Lexical guidance in sentence production: When do repeated verbs boost syntactic priming?
Robert J. Hartsuiker
Martin J. Pickering

2. Message-to-Sentence: One to many
The cowboy is giving a banana to the burglar
The cowboy is giving the burglar a banana
Rob says that the cowboy the burglar a banana gives
Rob says that the cowboy a banana to the burglar gives
Rob says that the cowboy a banana gives to the burglar

3. What drives sentence structure?
Role of Mental Lexicon
Linguistic theories (Chomsky, 1995; Pollard & Sag, 1994)
Psycholinguistic accounts (Bock & Levelt, 1994; Garrett, 1980; Vigliocco & Hartsuiker, 2002).
Message: Lexical selection, Function assignment
Properties of lexical items determine structure

4. Is lexical guidance absolute?
Syntactic priming: tendency to re-use previously processed sentence structure (e.g., Bock, 1986; Bock & Griffin, 2000; Branigan et al., 2000; Ferreira, 2003; Hartsuiker & Westenberg, 2000; Pickering & Branigan, 1998; Potter & Lombardi, 1998)
For example, sentence completion tasks:
PO-prime: ‘The mechanic showed the torn overall...’
DO-prime: ‘The mechanic showed the race driver …’
Target: ‘The nun showed …’
Occurs independently of lexical overlap; but enhanced if prime and target share head (Verb, Pickering & Branigan, 1998; Noun, Cleland & Pickering, 2003)

5. Why verb-repetition effects?
MESSAGE
Give (X, Y, Z)
Show (X, Y, Z)
LEMMA
GIVE
SHOW PO DO

6. Are all structural decisions head-driven?
If so:
Word-order variations also affected by lexical overlap
Lexical overlap effect in head-final constructions

7. Experiment 1
Hartsuiker & Westenberg (2000): priming of auxiliary - participle order, e.g., The man called the police because his wallet stolen was / was stolen
Their study: different verbs (participle and auxiliary) condition only. 15% priming.
Current study: replication with same verb condition

8. Experiment 1 DIFFERENT-VERBS Participle-final PRIME
De verdachte beweerde dat hij door de politie schandelijk was __
The suspect claimed that he by the police scandalously was ____
SAME-VERBS Participle-final PRIME
De verdachte gaf toe dat hij het slachtoffer op zijn hoofd had ____
The suspect admitted that he the victim on his head had ____
TARGET
Vader vloekte luidkeels nadat hij met een hamer op zijn duim ____
Father cursed loudly after he with a hammer on his thumb ____

9. Results Expt 1 % aux-final response 15% priming (*)
No effect of lexical overlap (Fs < 1)
No Prime x Overlap interaction (Fs < 1)
Lexical overlap does not affect word order priming

10. Experiment 2: Datives Head-final
DO-prime
laten zien
De chauffeur verklaarde dat hij de agent _____ rijbewijs
The driver declared that he the officer___ (show, licence)
PO-Prime
De chauffeur verklaarde dat hij het rijbewijs _____ agent
The driver declared that he the licence___ (show, officer)
TARGET
Oscar
cameraman
De actrice zei dat ze _____ laten zien
The actrice said that she ___ (Oscar, camera man, show)

11. Experiment 2: Results % DO responses 10% priming (*)
No effect of lexical overlap (Fs < 1)
No Priming x Overlap interaction (Fs < 1)
Lexical overlap does not affect structural decision in head-final construction?

12. Experiment 3: Datives Head-first
DO-Prime
De chauffeur overhandigde de agent_____ rijbewijs
The driver handed the officer___ (licence)
PO-Prime
De chauffeur overhandigde het rijbewijs_____ agent
The driver handed the officer___ (officer)
Target cameraman
De actrice overhandigde _____ Oscar
The actrice handed ___ (camera man, Oscar)

13. Experiment 3: Results %DO No significant priming
No effect of lexical overlap (Fs < 1)
No Priming x Overlap interaction (Fs < 1)
Lexical overlap does not affect structural decision in head-first construction!

14. Completion term effect?
DO-IO IO-DO
Oscar camera man
The actrice presented camera man Oscar
Did the order in which terms were listed affect structural decisions?

15. Order Effects % DO Massive order of mention effect (22-32%)
Placement of VERB (Experiment 2) irrelevant
=> Word accessibility overrides priming and lexical overlap effects

16. Implications
Limits in extent that links verb-combinatorial nodes determine sentence structure
A more potent determinant appears to be availability of arguments (Experiment 2-3)
Consistent with availability hypothesis:
Conceptual accessibility effects on inversions (Bock & Warren, 1985)
Effects of position referent on picture (e.g., Hartsuiker & Kolk, 1998; Hartsuiker et al., 1999)

17. Implications
Limits in extent that links verb-combinatorial nodes determine sentence structure
No verb-repetition effect in word-order alternation (Expt 1)
Suggests word-order computed at stage in which identity of lexical items no longer plays a role (cf. Hartsuiker & Westenberg, 2000)