The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Incremental Procedural Grammar for Sentence Formulation
Open accessAbstract
This paper presents a theory of the syntactic aspects of human sentence production. An important characteristic of unprepared speech is that overt pronunciation of a sentence can be initiated before the speaker has completely worked out the meaning content he or she is going to express in that sentence. Apparently, the speaker is able to build up a syntactically coherent utterance out of a series of syntactic fragments each rendering a new part of the meaning content. This incremental, left-to-right mode of sentence production is the central capability of the proposed Incremental Procedural Grammar (IPG). Certain other properties of spontaneous speech, as derivable from speech errors, hesitations, self-repairs, and language pathology, are accounted for as well. The psychological plausibility thus gained by the grammar appears compatible with a satisfactory level of linguistic plausibility in that sentences receive structural descriptions which are in line with current theories of grammar. More importantly, an explanation for the existence of configurational conditions on transformations and other linguistics rules is proposed. The basic design feature of IPG which gives rise to these psychologically and linguistically desirable properties, is the “Procedures + Stack” concept. Sentences are built not by a central constructing agency which overlooks the whole process but by a team of syntactic procedures (modules) which work—in parallel—on small parts of the sentence, have only a limited overview, and whose sole communication channel is a stack. IPG covers object complement constructions, interrogatives, and word order in main and subordinate clauses. It handles unbounded dependencies, crossserial dependencies and coordination phenomena such as gapping and conjunction reduction. It is also capable of generating self-repairs and elliptical answers to questions. IPG has been implemented as an incremental Dutch sentence generator written in LISP.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Monitoring and self-repair in speech.
Levelt, W. (1983) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(83)90026-4 · Cited by 1,676
Cited by
Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking
Clark, H. (2002) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00017-3 · Cited by 1,235
Chang, F., Dell, G. S., & Bock, K. (2006) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.113.2.234 · Cited by 984
Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding
Clark, H. H., & Krych, M. A. (2004) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2003.08.004 · Cited by 739
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Druks, J., Barber, H., & Cappa, S. F. (2011) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.04.007 · Cited by 594
The WEAVER model of word-form encoding in speech production
Roelofs, A. (1997) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(97)00027-9 · Cited by 561
Metadata
- Authors
- Kempen, G., & Hoenkamp, E. C. M.
- Venue
- Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1987-04-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 201-258
- ISSN
- 0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2002161948
- Cited by
- 671
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 116.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Incremental Procedural Grammar for Sentence Formulation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0364-0213(87)80006-x
- The paper
- Kempen, G., & Hoenkamp, E. C. M. (1987). An Incremental Procedural Grammar for Sentence Formulation. Cognitive Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0364-0213(87)80006-x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.