Se of appropriate names, H.M.’s clichuse suggests a compensation process that relies on intact retrieval mechanisms: By retrieving familiar (but free-associative) phrases and propositions, H.M. could realize local coherence, regardless of the globally incoherent CC violations that accompanied his attempts to make novel phrases, propositions and sentences utilizing his impaired encoding mechanisms. 7.three.4. Repetition-Based Compensation Techniques Previous and present final results indicate that relative to controls, H.M. overused 4 varieties of repetition that differed in surface kind but reflected attempts to overcome his troubles in forming novel phrase- and proposition-level internal representations. 7.3.four.1. Elaborative Repetitions By hypothesis, H.M. PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21339327 was able to offset his inability to form novel phrase- and proposition-level plans on the TLC (Study 2C) and in conversational discourse [22] by creating a familiar word or phrase after which repeating it with elaboration. This hypothesis and its supporting information call for refinement from the huge repetition principle discussed in 1.1 and [60,158]. Below this huge repetition principle, amnesics exhibit a general tendency to repeat and need enormous repetition to form novel internal representations. Nonetheless, three Study 2 benefits undermine these assumptions: (a) H.M. developed no extra stutters and unmodified word string repetitions than controls around the TLC, ruling out a general tendency to repeat; (b) he essential only a single or two elaborative repetitions as an alternative to massive repetition to type phrase- and sentence-level plans around the TLC; and (c) his elaborative repetitions did not basically repeat; they elaborated. Perhaps definitely massive repetition is only needed when comparatively permanent conjunctions are required, as in mastering an unfamiliar talent (see [23]), or arbitrary conjunctions in between unrelated categories of units are expected, as in classical conditioning. Having said that, very couple of repetitions may well suffice in sentence planning mainly because (a) sentence plans are comparatively impermanent, built to last no longer than the sentence becoming developed, and (b) H.M.’s intact syntactic retrieval mechanisms determined what sorts of units to conjoin.Brain Sci. 2013, three 7.three.four.2. Stimulus Rephrasing RepetitionsH.M. developed two forms of stimulus rephrasing repetitions in [22] when detecting and describing the two meanings of ambiguous sentences which include The stout major’s wife stayed house (where either the key is stout or his wife is stout). First, when the experimenter explained a second meaning that H.M. had failed to detect in an ambiguous sentence, H.M. (in contrast to the controls) frequently repeated with rephrasing the last handful of words of her explanation. For example, when describing a second which means from the ambiguous sentence People who play chess at the same time as Bill came, the experimenter concluded together with the words “as excellent as Bill is, came”, which H.M. repeated with rephrasing: “as Bill is, they came”. Like elaborative repetitions, such “echoing” with elaboration seems to reflect an attempt to type phrase- and proposition-level internal representations 
for interpretations that H.M. had failed to learn on his personal. Second, when describing the two meanings in ambiguous sentences, H.M. repeated the ambiguous words themselves reliably a lot more often than the controls, frequently repeating them numerous times within a single response. By way of example, when attempting to trans-Piceatannol site describe the meanings of Mary and I authorized of his cooking, H.M. repeated the ambiguous words.