Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar learning

Two experiments examined the claim for distinct implicit and explicit learning modes in the artificial grammar-learning task (Reber, 1967, 1989). Subjects initially attempted to memorize strings of letters generated by a finite-state grammar and then classified new grammatical and nongrammatical strings. Experiment 1 showed that subjects' assessment of isolated parts of strings was sufficient to account for their classification performance but that the rules elicited in free report were not sufficient. Experiment 2 showed that performing a concurrent random number generation task under different priorities interfered with free report and classification performance equally. Furthermore, giving different groups of subjects incidental or intentional learning instructions did not affect classification or free report.

Effects of divided attention and speeded responding on implicit and explicit retrieval of artificial grammar knowledge

The artificial grammar (AG) learning literature (see, e.g., Mathews et al., 1989; Reber, 1967) has relied heavily on a single measure of implicitly acquired knowledge. Recent work comparing this measure (string classification) with a more indirect measure in which participants make liking ratings of novel stimuli (e.g., Manza & Bornstein, 1995; Newell & Bright, 2001) has shown that string classification (which we argue can be thought of as an explicit, rather than an implicit, measure of memory) gives rise to more explicit knowledge of the grammatical structure in learning strings and is more resilient to changes in surface features and processing between encoding and retrieval. We report data from two experiments that extend these findings. In Experiment 1, we showed that a divided attention manipulation (at retrieval) interfered with explicit retrieval of AG knowledge but did not interfere with implicit retrieval. In Experiment 2, we showed that forcing participants to respond within a very tight deadline resulted in the same asymmetric interference pattern between the tasks. In both experiments, we also showed that the type of information being retrieved influenced whether interference was observed. The results are discussed in terms of the relatively automatic nature of implicit retrieval and also with respect to the differences between analytic and nonanalytic processing (Whittlesea Price, 2001).

Are normative properties descriptive properties?

Some philosophers think that normative properties are identical to descriptive properties. In this paper, I argue that this entails that it is possible to say which descriptive properties normative properties are identical to. I argue that Frank Jackson’s argument to show that this is possible fails, and that the objections to this argument show that it is impossible to say which descriptive properties normative properties are identical to. I conclude that normative properties are not identical to descriptive properties. I then show that if we combine this conclusion with the conclusion of a different argument that Jackson has given to show that there are no irreducibly normative properties, it follows that there are no normative properties at all.

Motherhood, evolutionary psychology and mirror neurons or: ‘Grammar is politics by other means’

Through a close analysis of socio-biologist Sarah Blaffer Hrdy’s work on motherhood and ‘mirror neurons’ it is argued that Hrdy’s claims exemplify how research that ostensibly bases itself on neuroscience, including in literary studies ‘literary Darwinism’, relies after all not on scientific, but on political assumptions, namely on underlying, unquestioned claims about the autonomous, transparent, liberal agent of consumer capitalism. These underpinning assumptions, it is further argued, involve the suppression or overlooking of an alternative, prior tradition of feminist theory, including feminist science criticism.

Noticing, exploring and practicing: functional grammar in the ESL classroom

This book introduces six general procedures for teaching grammar to learners of English as a second language. The procedures are designed to encourage learners to notice, explore and practice grammar in context. Each description and discussion of a procedure is followed by two sample lesson plans together with sample texts and worksheets. Teachers can either use these 'as is' or adapt them for their own students. The lessons are suitable for a wide range of students from beginning learners to advanced learners. A final chapter provides examples of lessons in which several procedures are combined. In addition, before each sample lesson plan, the grammar focus of the lesson is briefly explained for the teacher. These procedures all illustrate how grammar can be taught through texts, and they are based on an understanding of the latest research on pedagogical grammar and the role of language awareness and discovery in second language learning and provide teachers with principles they can apply in developing their own teaching materials and activities. The grammar explanations preceding each teaching plan provide a fresh look at English grammar drawing on work in systemic functional linguistics.