Contextual phonological errors and omission of obligatory liaison as a window into a reduced span of phonological encoding

References

• Acheson, D. J., & Hagoort, P. (2014). Twisting tongues to test for conflict-monitoring in speech production. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 206. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00206
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acheson, D. J., & MacDonald, M. C. (2009). Twisting tongues and memories: Explorations of the relationship between language production and verbal working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 329–350. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2008.12.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alario, F.-X., & Ferrand, L. (1999). A set of 400 pictures standardized for French: Norms forname agreement, image agreement, familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, and age of acquisition. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31, 531–552. doi:10.3758/BF03200732
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baars, B. J. (1992). A dozen competing-plans techniques for inducing predictable slips in speech and action. In B. J. Baars (Ed.), Experimental slips and human error: Exploring the architecture of volition (pp. 129–150). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baars, B. J., & Motley, M. T. (1974). Spoonerisms: Experimental elicitation of human speech errors. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 4, 118.
   Google Scholar
• Baars, B. J., & Motley, M. T. (1976). Spoonerisms as sequencer conflicts: Evidence from artificially elicited errors. The American Journal of Psychology, 89, 467–484. doi:10.2307/1421619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumstein, S. (1973). Some phonological implications of aphasic speech. In H. Goodglass & S. Blumstein (Eds.), Psycholinguistics and aphasia (pp. 183–215). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buchwald, A., & Miozzo, M. (2011). Finding levels of abstraction in speech production: Evidence from sound-production impairment. Psychological Science, 22, 1113–1119. doi:10.1177/0956797611417723
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butterworth, B. (1992). Disorders of phonological encoding. Cognition, 42, 261–286. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(92)90045-J
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bybee, J. (2001). Frequency effects on French liaison. In J. Bybee & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 337–359). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Bybee, J. L., & Hopper, P. (2001). Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Chevrot, J.-P., Dugua, C., & Fayol, M. (2005). Liaison et formation des mots français: Un scénario développemental. Langages, 39, 38–52. doi:10.3406/lgge.2005.2661
   Google Scholar
• Cholin, J., Dell, G. S., & Levelt., W. J. (2011). Planning and articulation in incremental word production: Syllable-frequency effects in English. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 109–122. PMID 21244111. doi:10.1037/a0021322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Code, C. (1998). Models, theories and heuristics in apraxia of speech. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 12, 47–65. doi:10.3109/02699209808985212
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa, A., & Caramazza, A. (2002). The production of noun phrases in English and Spanish: Implications for the scope of phonological encoding in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 178–198. doi:10.1006/jmla.2001.2804
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Côté, M.-H. (2005). Le statut lexical des consonnes de liaison. Langages, 158, 66–78. doi:10.3917/lang.158.0066
   Google Scholar
• Damian, M. F., & Dumay, N. (2007). Effects of phoneme repetition in spoken utterance generation. In J. Trouvain & W. J. Barry (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th international congress of phonetic sciences (pp. 589–592), Saarbrücken.
   Google Scholar
• Darley, F. L., Aronson, A. E., & Brown, J. R. (1975). Motor speech disorders. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders.
   Google Scholar
• Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283–321. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Saffran, E. M., & Gagnon, D. A. (1997). Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers. Psychological Review, 104, 801–838. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.104.4.801
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dumay, N., Damian, M. F., Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H., & Perez, M. A. (2009). Is the scope of phonological encoding constrained by the syntactic role of the utterance constituents?. In N. A. Taatgen & H. Van Rijn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 667–672). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
   Google Scholar
• Durand, J., & Lyche, C. (2008). French liaison in the light of corpus data. Journal of French Language Studies, 18, 33–66. doi:10.1017/S0959269507003158
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Encrevé, P. (1988). La liaison avec et sans enchaînement. Phonologie tridimensionnelle et usages du français. Paris, France: Le Seuil.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Engelhardt, P. (2006). Syntax and production.In M. A. Gernsbacher & M. Traxler (Eds.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics. (pp. 61–91). doi:10.1016/B978-012369374-7/50004-3
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Swets, B. (2002). How incremental is language production? Evidence from the production of utterances requiring the computation of arithmetic sums. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 57–84. doi:10.1006/jmla.2001.2797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers: A Journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc, 35, 116–124. doi:10.3758/BF03195503
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Foygel, D., & Dell, G. S. (2000). Models of impaired lexical access in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 182–216. doi:10.1006/jmla.2000.2716
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fromkin, V. A. (1971). The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language, 47, 27–52. doi:10.2307/412187
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillespie, M., & Pearlmutter, N. J. (2011). Hierarchy and scope of planning in subject–verb agreement production. Cognition, 118, 377–397. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldrick, M., & Blumstein, S. E. (2006). Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 649–683. doi:10.1080/01690960500181332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickok, G. (2013). The architecture of speech production and the role of the phoneme in speech processing. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29, 44–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaeger, T. F., Furth, K., & Hilliard, C. (2012). Incremental phonological encoding during unscripted sentence production. Front. Psychology, 3, 481. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00481
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohn, S. E., & Smith, K. L. (1990). Between–word speech errors in conduction aphasia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 7, 133–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohn, S. E. (1989). The nature of the phonemic string deficit in conduction aphasia. Aphasiology, 3, 209–239. doi:10.1080/02687038908248992
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohn, S. E., & Smith, K. L. (1995). Serial effects of phonemic planning during word production. Aphasiology, 9, 209–222. doi:10.1080/02687039508248196
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konopka, A. E. (2012). Planning ahead: How recent experience with structures and words changes the scope of linguistic planning. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 143–162. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.08.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laganaro, M. (2012). Patterns of Impairments in AOS and Mechanisms of interaction between phonological and phonetic encoding. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55, 1535–1543. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0316)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking : From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral Brain Sciences, 22, 1–38. doi:10.1017/S0140525X99001776
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, A. S. (1996). Lexical access in phrase and sentence production: Results from picture– word interference experiments. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 477–496. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michel Lange, V., & Laganaro, M. (2014). Inter-subject variability modulates phonological advance planning in the production of adjective-noun phrases. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 43. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00043
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (2007). Prosodic phonology. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. Originally published in 1986 (Dordrecht: Foris).
   Google Scholar
• Nespoulous, J. L., Lecours, A. R., Lafond, D., Lemay, A., Puel, M., Joannette, Y., … Rascol, A. (1992). Protocole Montréal-Toulouse d’examen linguistique de l’aphasie (MT86). Isbergues, France: L’Ortho-Edition.
   Google Scholar
• Pate, D. S., Saffran, E. M., & Martin, N. (1987). Specifying the nature of the production impairment in a conduction aphasic: A case study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2, 43–84. doi:10.1080/01690968708406351
   Google Scholar
• Rossi, M., & Peter-Defare, É. (1998). Les lapsus, ou, Comment notre fourche a langué. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.
   Google Scholar
• Santiago, J., MacKay, D. G., Palma, A., & Rho, C. (2000). Sequential activation processes in producing words and syllables: Evidence from picture naming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 1–44. doi:10.1080/016909600386101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schane, S. A. (1967). L’élision et la liaison en français. Retrieved from http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/lgge_0458-726x_1967_num_2_8_2891
   Google Scholar
• Schnur, T. T. (2011). Phonological planning during sentence production: Beyond the verb. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 1–15. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00319
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schnur, T. T., Costa, A., & Caramazza, A. (2006). Planning at the phonological level during sentence production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 189–213. doi:10.1007/s10936-005-9011-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schriefers, H., & Teruel, E. (1999). The production of noun phrases: A cross-linguistic comparison of French and German. In M. Hahn & S. C. Stoness (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 637–642). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, M. F., Saffran, E. M., Bloch, D. E., & Dell, G. S. (1994). Disordered speech production in aphasic and normal speakers. Brain and Language, 47, 52–88. doi:10.1006/brln.1994.1042
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, M. F., Wilshire, C. E., Gagnon, D. A., & Polansky, M. (2004). The origins of nonword phonological errors in aphasics’ picture naming. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21, 159–186. doi:10.1080/02643290342000519
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M., & Wheeldon, L. (2004). Horizontal information flow in spoken sentence production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 675–686.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stark, E., & Pomino, N. (2009). Adnominal adjectives in romance. Where morphology seemingly meets semantics. In M. T. Espinal, M. Leonetti, & L. McNally (Eds.), Proceedings of the IV nereus international workshop: Definiteness and DP structure in romance languages (pp. 113–135). Konstanz: Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Konstanz.
   Google Scholar
• Talo, E. S. (1980). Slips of the tongue in normal and pathological speech. In V. A. Fromkin (Ed.), Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand (pp. 81–86). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vitevitch, M. S. (2002). The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 735–747.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, V., Jescheniak, J. D., & Schriefers, H. (2010). On the flexibility of grammatical advance planning during sentence production: Effects of cognitive load on multiple lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 323–340. doi:10.1037/a0018619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilshire, C. E. (1999). The ‘tongue twister’ paradigm as a technique for studying phonological encoding. Language and Speech, 42, 57–82. doi:10.1177/00238309990420010301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilshire, C. E. (2002). Where do aphasic phonological errors come from? Evidence from phoneme movement errors in picture naming. Aphasiology, 16, 169–197. doi:10.1080/02687040143000528
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziegler, W. (2008). Apraxia of speech. In B. Miller & G. Goldenberg (Eds.), Handbook of clinical neurology. 3rd series (Vol. 88, pp. 269–285). London: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Ziegler, W. (2009). Modelling the architecture of phonetic plans: Evidence from apraxia of speech. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24, 631–661. doi:10.1080/01690960802327989
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar