TY - JOUR
T1 - Horses for courses
T2 - When acceptability judgments are more suitable than structural priming (and vice versa)
AU - Ambridge, B.
N1 - Ambridge, Ben 2018/1/19
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Although structural priming is often the most suitable paradigm, it sometimes misses effects that are detected by more sensitive acceptability-judgment tasks, thus yielding incorrect conclusions. For example, Branigan & Pickering's (B&P's) claim that "syntactic representations do not contain semantic information" (sect. 2.1, para. 2), while supported by structural-priming studies of the passive, is undermined by an acceptability-judgment study of this construction.
AB - Although structural priming is often the most suitable paradigm, it sometimes misses effects that are detected by more sensitive acceptability-judgment tasks, thus yielding incorrect conclusions. For example, Branigan & Pickering's (B&P's) claim that "syntactic representations do not contain semantic information" (sect. 2.1, para. 2), while supported by structural-priming studies of the passive, is undermined by an acceptability-judgment study of this construction.
KW - Animals Horses Judgment Linguistics Semantics
U2 - 10.1017/S0140525X17000322
DO - 10.1017/S0140525X17000322
M3 - Article
SN - 1469-1825
VL - 40
SP - e284
JO - Behavioral and Brain Sciences
JF - Behavioral and Brain Sciences
ER -