Repetition reduction: Lexical repetition in the absence of referent repetition

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 829-843

  Lam, Tuan Q ^a   Watson, Duane G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Lexical retrieval; Prominence; Prosody; Reference; Repetition

Indexed keywords

ADULT; HUMAN; PHONETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

ADULT; HUMANS; PHONETICS; SPEECH; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84925558051     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0035780     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Almor, A. (1999). Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review, 106, 748-765. doi:10.1037/ 0033-295X.106.4.748
2. Arnold, J. E. (1998). Reference form and discourse patterns (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, Stanford, California.
3. Associated Press. (2010). From Harvard to the NBA, Jeremy Lin's Long Road. [Video file]. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/GfDsunxnq7c
4. Aylett, M., & Turk, A. (2004). The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech, 47, 31-56. doi:10.1177/00238309040470010201
5. Baker, R. E., & Bradlow, A. R. (2009). Variability in word duration as a function of probability, speech style, and prosody. Language and Speech, 52, 391-413. doi:10.1177/0023830909336575
6. Barbaro, M., & Corasaniti, N. (2013, July 24). Account of Weiner's online exchanges fits pattern. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www .nytimes.com
7. Bard, E. G., Anderson, A. H., Sotillo, C., Aylett, M., Doherty-Sneddon, G., & Newlands, A. (2000). Controlling the intelligibility of referring expressions in dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 1-22. doi:10.1006/jmla.1999.2667
8. Bard, E. G., & Aylett, M. P. (1999, August). The dissociation of deaccenting, givenness, and syntactic role in spontaneous speech. Paper presented at the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, San Francisco, California.
9. Bard, E. G., & Aylett, M. (2005). Referential form, duration, and modeling the listener in spoken dialogue. In J. Trueswell & M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Approaches to studying world-situated language use: Bridging the language-as-product and language-as-action traditions (pp. 173-191). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255-278. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
11. Bell, A., Brenier, J., Gregory, M., Girand, C., & Jurafsky, D. (2009). Predictability effects on durations of content and function words in conversational English. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 92-111. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2008.06.003
12. Bell, A., Jurafsky, D., Fosler-Lussier, E., Girand, C., Gregory, M. L., & Gildea, D. (2003). Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 1001-1024. doi:10.1121/1.1534836
13. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2007). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 4.5.14) [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.praat .org/
14. Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1482-1493. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.22.6.1482
15. Buxo-Lugo, A., Simmons, D., & Watson, D. G. (2013, March). Modeling word duration in language production. Poster session presented at the annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbia, South Carolina.
16. Buxo-Lugo, A., Toscano, J. C., & Watson, D. G. (2013, March). Task effects on prosodic prominence. Paper presented at the annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbia, South Carolina.
17. Clark, E. V. (1997). Conceptual perspective and lexical choice in acquisition. Cognition, 64, 1-37. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00010-3
18. Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(86)90010-7
19. Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283-321.
20. Dell, G. S., & O'Seaghdha, P. G. (1992). Stages of lexical access in language production. Cognition, 42, 287-314. doi:10.1016/0010- 0277(92)90046-K
21. Fine, A. B., & Jaeger, T. F. (2013). Evidence for implicit learning in syntactic comprehension. Cognitive Science, 37, 578-591. doi:10.1111/ cogs.12022
22. Fine, A. B., Jaeger, T. F., Farmer, T. A., & Qian, T. (2013). Rapid expectation adaptation during syntactic comprehension. PLoS ONE 8(10), e77661. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0077661
23. Fowler, C. A. (1988). Differential shortening of repeated context words produced in various communicative contexts. Language and Speech, 31, 307-319.
24. Fowler, C. A., & Housum, J. (1987). Talkers' signaling of "new" and "old" words in speech and listeners' perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 489-504. doi:10.1016/0749- 596X(87)90136-7
25. Gahl, S. (2008). "Thyme" and "time" are not homophones: The effect of lemma frequency on word durations in spontaneous speech. Language, 84, 474-496. doi:10.1353/lan.0.0035
26. Gahl, S., & Garnsey, S. M. (2004). Knowledge of grammar, knowledge of usage: Syntactic probabilities affect pronunciation variation. Language, 80, 748-775. doi:10.1353/lan.2004.0185
27. Galati, A., & Brennan, S. E. (2010). Attenuating repeated information: For the speaker, or for the addressee? Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 35-51. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.002
28. Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Fennema-Notestine, C., & Morris, S. K. (2005). Bilingualism affects picture naming but not picture classification. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1220-1234. doi:10.3758/BF03193224
29. Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B. J., & Gilliom, L. A. (1993). Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science, 17, 311-347. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1703_1
30. Griffin, Z. M., & Bock, J. K. (1998). Constraint, word frequency, and relationship between lexical processing levels in spoken word produc- tion. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 313-338. doi:10.1006/jmla .1997.2547
31. Heller, J., & Pierrehumbert, J. (2011, September). Word burstiness improves models of word reduction in spontaneous speech. Poster session presented at Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing 2011, Paris, France.
32. Heller, J., Pierrehumbert, J., & Rapp, D. N. (2010, September). Predicting words beyond the syntactic horizon: Word recurrence distributions modulate on-line long-distance lexical predictability. Paper presented at Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing 2010, York, United Kingdom.
33. Jaeger, T. F. (2010). Redundancy and reduction: Speakers manage syntactic information density. Cognitive Psychology, 61, 23-62. doi:10.1016/ j.cogpsych.2010.02.002
34. Jaeger, T. F., Furth, K., & Hilliard, C. (2012). Phonological overlap affects lexical selection during sentence production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1439-1449. doi: 10.1037/a0027862
35. Jaeger, T. F., & Snider, N. (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. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.10.013
36. Jurafsky, D., Bell, A., Gregory, M., & Raymond, W. D. (2001). Probabilistic relations between words: Evidence from reduction in lexical production. In J. Bybee & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 229-254). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Benjamins.
37. Kahn, J., & Arnold, J. E. (2012). A processing-centered look at the contribution of givenness to durational reduction. Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 311-325. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.07.002
38. Lam, T. Q. (2012). The prominence of referring expressions: Message and lexical level effects. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
39. Lam, T. Q., & Watson, D. (2010). Repetition is easy: Why repeated referents have reduced prominence. Memory & Cognition, 38, 1137- 1146. doi:10.3758/MC.38.8.1137
40. Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-38. doi:10.1017/S0140525X99001776
41. Mahrt, T., Cole, J., Fleck, M., & Hasegawa-Johnson, M. (2012). F0 and the perception of prominence. In Proceedings of Interspeech 2012. Retrieved from http://www.isca-speech.org/archive/interspeech_2012/ i12_2422.html
42. Meagher, B. R., & Fowler, C. A. (2013). Embedded articulation: Shifts in location influence speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/01690965.2013 .791704
43. Metzing, C., & Brennan, S. E. (2003). When conceptual pacts are broken: Partner-specific effects on the comprehension of referring expressions. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 201-213. doi:10.1016/S0749- 596X(03)00028-7
44. Rosa, E. C., Finch, K., Bergeson, M., & Arnold, J. E. (2013). The effects of addressee attention on prosodic prominence. Language and Cognitive Processes. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/01690965.2013 .772213
45. Sevald, C. A., & Dell, G. S. (1994). The sequential cuing effect in speech production. Cognition, 53, 91-127. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90067-1
46. The Sims 3 [Computer video game]. (2009). Redwood City, CA: Electronic Arts.
47. Watson, D. G. (2010). The many roads to prominence: Understanding emphasis in conversation. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 52, 163-183. doi:10.1016/S0079-7421(10)52004-8
48. Watson, D. G., Arnold, J. E., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Tic Tac TOE: Effects of predictability and importance on acoustic prominence in language production. Cognition, 106, 1548-1557. doi:10.1016/j .cognition.2007.06.009