The Selection of Grammatical Features in Word Production: The Case of Plural Nouns in German

Schiller, Niels O.; Caramazza, Alfonso

doi:10.1006/brln.2001.2529

Cited by 27 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since plural targets also require the determiner die, there would never be a mismatch in the plural. Earlier evidence on the selection of number features (Schiller & Caramazza, 2002) supports this latter view.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…How can this difference in results be accounted for? One reason may be that gender agreement for adjectives, but not for determiners, involves the affixation of a bound 7 Previous experiments (Schiller & Caramazza, 2002) revealed that this effect is probably due to the fact that the distractor word interferes visually more with the presentation of a single picture (i.e., in the singular condition) than with the presentation of two identical pictures of the same object (i.e., in the plural condition). Except for Exp.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(A generalization of this hypothesis to all grammatical features might also predict a number congruency effect if selection of the value of number diacritics obeyed the same principles as the selection of gender features. However, we have pursued this issue elsewhere; see Schiller & Caramazza, 2002.) The predictions made by the DSIH are not straightforward, and depend on the way in which the number information of the distractor word is processed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Once again, this prediction rests on the assumption that the number feature for the determiner frames for the target noun and the distractor word are both determined extralexically; that is, by the number of objects in the picture and not the morphology of the distractor word. Support for this assumption comes from two experiments by Schiller and Caramazza (2002) in which the selection of the number feature was investigated in German with the picture-word interference task. In these experiments, no effect of number activation of the distractor words could be found, suggesting (a) that the selection of the number feature is not a competitive process and (b) that the number feature is set extra-lexically.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Grammatical feature selection in noun phrase production: Evidence from German and Dutch

Schiller

Caramazza

2003

Journal of Memory and Language

Self Cite

141

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we investigated grammatical feature selection during noun phrase production in German and Dutch. More specifically, we studied the conditions under which different grammatical genders select either the same or different determiners or suffixes. Pictures of one or two objects paired with a gender-congruent or a gender-incongruent distractor word were presented. Participants named the pictures using a singular or plural noun phrase with the appropriate determiner and/or adjective in German or Dutch. Significant effects of gender congruency were only obtained in the singular condition where the selection of determiners is governed by the targetÕs gender, but not in the plural condition where the determiner is identical for all genders. When different suffixes were to be selected in the genderincongruent condition, no gender congruency effect was obtained. The results suggest that the so-called gender congruency effect is really a determiner congruency effect. The overall pattern of results is interpreted as indicating that grammatical feature selection is an automatic consequence of lexical node selection and therefore not subject to interference from other grammatical features. This implies that lexical node and grammatical feature selection operate with distinct principles. Ó 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.Keywords: Speech production; Lexical access; Grammatical feature selection; Gender congruency This study investigates how words are accessed and uttered in the course of speech production. To produce speech, different types of lexical information, including semantic, grammatical, and phonological specifications have to be retrieved from long-term memory. Most of the research in the area of lexical access has focused on the retrieval of the phonological form of nouns. However, for the production of noun phrases, for instance, access to grammatical or syntactic features of words, such as case, number, or gender, is also needed. In German, for instance, each noun has a specific gender. Furthermore, adjectives modifying a noun require a gender-marked suffix that agrees with the gender of the noun. Take the German sentence ''Ein ðnom;sgÞ gr€ u unes ðnom;sgÞ Fenster ðnom;sgÞ des ðgen;sgÞ roten ðgen;sgÞ Hauses ðgen;sgÞ ist ðsgÞ schmutzig'' [A green window of the red house is dirty] as an example. 1The word Hauses is the genitive singular form of the neuter noun Haus (ÔhouseÕ). Since the determiner (e.g., das ÔtheÕ; genitive form: des Ôof theÕ) and the adjective (e.g., rot ÔredÕ) are syntactically dependent on the noun and thus

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Grammatical feature selection in noun phrase production: Evidence from German and Dutch

Schiller

Caramazza

2003

Journal of Memory and Language

Self Cite

141

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This result is consistent with data from the picture-word interference paradigm. Schiller and Caramazza (2002) found semantic interference for semantically related pictures and words, but no effect of mismatching number. Similarly, our results showed similar speech onsets for the number matching condition (m = 843 ms; SD = 225 ms), and the mismatching condition (m = 822 ms; SD = 208), as well as similar gaze durations for the matching condition (m = 672 ms; SD = 242 ms), and the mismatching condition (m = 662 ms; SD = 221 ms).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Effects of parallel planning on agreement production

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f oAn important issue in current psycholinguistics is how the time course of utterance planning affects the generation of grammatical structures. The current study investigated the influence of parallel activation of the components of complex noun phrases on the generation of subject-verb agreement. Specifically, the lexical interference account (Gillespie & Pearlmutter, 2011b;Solomon & Pearlmutter, 2004) predicts more agreement errors (i.e., attraction) for subject phrases in which the head and local noun mismatch in number (e.g., the apple next to the pears) when nouns are planned in parallel than when they are planned in sequence. We used a speeded picture description task that yielded sentences such as the apple next to the pears is red. The objects mentioned in the noun phrase were either semantically related or unrelated. To induce agreement errors, pictures sometimes mismatched in number. In order to manipulate the likelihood of parallel processing of the objects and to test the hypothesized relationship between parallel processing and the rate of agreement errors, the pictures were either placed close together or far apart. Analyses of the participants' eye movements and speech onset latencies indicated slower processing of the first object and stronger interference from the related (compared to the unrelated) second object in the close than in the far condition. Analyses of the agreement errors yielded an attraction effect, with more errors in mismatching than in matching conditions. However, the magnitude of the attraction effect did not differ across the close and far conditions. Thus, spatial proximity encouraged parallel processing of the pictures, which led to interference of the associated conceptual and/or lexical representation, but, contrary to the prediction, it did not lead to more attraction errors.

show abstract

Mental Lexicon Research in the New Millennium

Libben

Jarema

2002

Brain and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Selection of Grammatical Features in Word Production: The Case of Plural Nouns in German

Cited by 27 publications

References 35 publications

Grammatical feature selection in noun phrase production: Evidence from German and Dutch

Grammatical feature selection in noun phrase production: Evidence from German and Dutch

Effects of parallel planning on agreement production

Mental Lexicon Research in the New Millennium

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About