Recognition memory for novel syntactic structures.

It is commonly held that recognition memory for the surface syntax of language is not robust, especially when compared with memory for gist (e.g., Potter & Lombardi, 1998; Sachs, 1967). Nevertheless, it has been reported that memory for surface syntax occurs and can be surprisingly robust (e.g., Gurevich, Johnson, & Goldberg, 2011). However, most studies have focused on recognition memory for syntactic structures present in participants' native languages, but little is known about memory for novel (e.g., nonnative) syntactic structures. Adults were exposed under incidental learning conditions to a semiartificial language consisting of English words placed into non-English syntactic structures derived from Persian. They were then given an unexpected recognition memory test. Participants demonstrated clear recognition memory for novel syntactic structures. Overall, the results suggest that memory for surface syntax can be acquired under incidental learning conditions, consistent with previous findings in the implicit learning literature using nonlinguistic stimuli. The results also suggest that basic memory processes like those investigated in the recognition memory literature may be involved in the incidental learning of novel syntactic structures, consistent with some current neurocognitive approaches to language (e.g., Ullman, 2004).Keywords: recognition memory, syntax, incidental learning, implicit learningEarly work on memory for language is remembered for revealing that verbatim memory for surface syntax (i.e., word order) is not particularly robust, especially when compared with memory for gist. For example, Sachs (1967) presented participants with sentences like "He sent a letter about it to Galileo, the great Italian scientist" embedded in a story. Participants' memory for verbatim recognition was tested after zero to 160 intervening syllables. Sachs reported that memory for exact syntax deteriorated rapidly, with participants often erroneously accepting sentences such as "He sent Galileo, the great Italian scientist, a letter about it." However, participants were able to reject sentences whose meaning had changed, for example, "Galileo, the great Italian scientist, sent him a letter about it." In short, memory for the gist meaning of the original sentence was more pronounced than memory for specific syntactic form. This basic finding has been more or less corroborated in numerous other studies (e.g., Bransford & Franks, 1971; Jarvella, 1973) and has been interpreted strongly as evidence that "there is no explicit memory for the surface syntactic structure of a perceived sentence" (Potter & Lombardi, 1998, p. 267).Although memory for syntax is not as robust as gist memory, it is not absent altogether. For example, when people are forewarned of an impending memory test, they are much better at recalling surface syntax (Johnson-Laird & Stevenson, 1974). Similarly, if sentence stimuli are marked (e.g., because they are funny), then people are generally better at recognising exact surface syntax (e.g., Kintsch & Bates, 1977). Memory for syntax in nonmarked contexts has been demonstrated, too, at both short intervals (Anderson, 1974) and longer intervals (Gurevich et al., 2011). Indeed, Gurevich et al. (2011) reported a series of experiments demonstrating that participants could recall and recognise sentences from 300-word texts after a single exposure, without being warned of a test phase, for up to a 6-day delay.However, little is known about memory for novel (e.g., nonnative) syntactic structures, because memory for syntax is typically assessed when the target syntactic structures are already known from the native language. To address this gap, the present study investigated whether adult learners exposed to novel syntax under incidental learning conditions were able to acquire recognition memory for surface syntax. The experimental paradigm was derived from implicit learning research using artificial grammars and serial reaction time (RT) tasks, in which it is well-established that adults can induce structural information from passive exposure to stimuli without deliberate attempts to leam or memorise (for overviews, see Perruchet, 2008, and Shanks, 2005). …