Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Positron Emission Tomographic Study of Regular and Irregular Verb Morphology in English

Jaeger, Jeri J., Lockwood, Alan H., Kemmerer, David L., van Valin, Robert D., Murphy, Brian W., Khalak, Hanif G.·1996·Language
DOI 10.2307/416276
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Theories about the representation and processing of regular and irregular past tense forms of verbs in English have disagreed as to whether they should be treated as a unified phenomenon (e.g. both rule-governed, or both generated by a connectionist net), or as two distinct types of linguistic entities (e.g. regulars formed by rules of the grammar, irregulars stored in lexical memory). In this article we present data from a positron emission tomographic study in which subjects were asked to produce the past tense forms of regular, irregular, and nonce stems. We find very different amounts and areas of cortical activation in the regular and irregular tasks, as well as significantly different reaction times in producing the past tenses. We interpret our findings as supporting the grammar/lexicon theories, and discuss the implications of our results for general linguistic theory.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/416276

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Jaeger, J. J., Lockwood, A. H., Kemmerer, D. L., van Valin, R. D., Murphy, B. W., & Khalak, H. G.
Venue
Language
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1996-09
Volume
72
Issue
3
Pages
451
ISSN
0097-8507 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/416276
OpenAlex
W2037320790
Cited by
257
References
5
FWCI
11.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.