ABSTRACT
In this chapter and the next, we extend our consideration of the functional significance of the symbolic processes to grammatical variables and units larger than the single word. We have discussed such factors from time to time in various contexts but not in a systematic and unified way, as will be the case here. Our concern generally is with the classical problem of the relationship between language and thought. More specifically, attention will focus on the role of the symbolic processes in the understanding, retention, and production of language. Because this entails an emphasis on extended segments of verbal behavior, we are obviously faced with phenomena of greater complexity than heretofore, but we also encounter a problem that appears to differ qualitatively from those previously considered. Linguists and psychologists interested in language behavior are agreed that the crucial psycholinguistic problem is the creativity or productivity of language (e.g., Chomsky, 1966; Hebb & Thompson, 1954). We can combine and readily recombine familiar units to make up new utterances, which can be understood equally easily by others. The nub of the theoretical issue is found in grammar and the sentence. G. A. Miller (1962) stated it plainly: “I do not see how we are going to describe language as a skill unless we find some satisfactory way to deal with grammar and with the combinatorial processes that grammar entails” (p. 748). Osgood posed the problem as a challenge: “Can our psychological theories incorporate and render comprehensible the way human beings understand and create sentences?” (1963, p. 735).
