(ii) what meaning/extension has recently been accessed, irrespective of the structure that generated it (semantics)
(iii) what the likely communicative intention is, given the discourse (pragmatics)
(3) Footnote 16 right at the end about how long the priming lasted — 3 days to a month sounds like a very long time. My (fairly uninformed and probably out-of-date) recollection about syntactic priming suggested that structure priming effects are usually pretty short-lived. So something lasting this long is a major implicit learning kind of thing. Maybe this happened because the logical structure is connected to specific extensions that mattered in the context of the experiments? So the idea would be that this connection between multiple representations (one of which is more conscious and matters for communication, i.e., the semantic extension) is what caused the evidence accrued during the experiment to have more of an impact on these kids.