grammar and syntax. If syntax is not defi ned as a set of rules, but as the process
that handles integration, the implementation of Merge acquires a clear, converg-
ing direction towards WM accounts that are based on capturing how information
integrates at the neuronal level. An example of a cognitive model that gets closer
to Merge is Oberauer’s (2009), summarized in Figure 7.4, which I introduce
here so that we have a summary of everything we have learned about WM in
this chapter. The model distinguishes between the focus of attention and the
fringe of attention, following the idea that the cognitive cycle is characterized
by a moment of unifi cation (the global broadcast) in which only one item (or one
item and its context) infl uences processing, identifi ed in the fi gure as B, which
slowly descends with dotted lines towards the focus. Simultaneously, activated
representations in long-term memory descend to a region of direct access known
as the fringe of attention, indicating that they are more easily retrievable but do
not occupy the focus of attention within that cognitive cycle. Note that long-
term memory is characterized as a network of increasing degrees of activation,
indicated by the opposition between white and grey dots, and by the inclusion
of letters in the fringe of attention to indicate an even greater degree of activa-
tion. If we wanted to translate Merge into this account, Merge would have to
occupy the focus of attention, linking two items (or an item and its context) at
each cognitive cycle. Merge, in short, would have to be identifi ed with the
processing operation, not with the whole of WM, nor with grammar.
Figure 7.4. Oberauer’s model of Declarative Working Memory (adapted from Obe-
rauer 2009). A, B, C correspond to the “fringe of attention”, grey circles
are activated long-term memory items, the “focus of attention” has
selected A as the target for processing.
116 Gonzalo Castillo