This commentary discusses whether abstract metrical frames are stored. For stress-assigning languages (e.g., Dutch and English), which have a dominant stress pattern, metrical frames are stored only for words that deviate from the default stress pattern. The majority of the words in these languages are produced without retrieving any independent syllabic or metrical frame.
Any complete theory of speaking must take the dialogical function of language use into account. Pickering & Garrod (P&G) make some progress on this point. However, we question whether their interactive alignment model is the optimal approach. In this commentary, we specifically criticize (1) their notion of alignment being implemented through priming, and (2) their claim that self-monitoring can occur at all levels of linguistic representation.
Page generated Thu Aug 5 15:56:36 2021 on philpapers-web-65948fd446-qrpbq
cache stats: hit=14641, miss=9468, save= autohandler : 505 ms called component : 491 ms search.pl : 309 ms render loop : 298 ms next : 154 ms menu : 138 ms addfields : 128 ms publicCats : 124 ms autosense : 26 ms save cache object : 25 ms match_cats : 21 ms prepCit : 8 ms retrieve cache object : 8 ms initIterator : 7 ms match_other : 2 ms intermediate : 2 ms match_authors : 1 ms applytpl : 1 ms init renderer : 0 ms quotes : 0 ms setup : 0 ms writelog : 0 ms auth : 0 ms