The past and future of the past tense

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Volumn 6, Issue 11, 2002, Pages 456-463

  Pinker, Steven ^a   Ullman, Michael T ^b  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRAIN; FORMAL LANGUAGES; LINGUISTICS;

LEXICAL MEMORY;

NEUROPHYSIOLOGY;

BOOK; BRAIN; COGNITION; DISSOCIATION; EMPIRICISM; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MEMORY; NEUROPSYCHOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REVIEW; SPEECH; THEORY;

EID: 0036849488     PISSN: 13646613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01990-3     Document Type: Review

References (82)

1. Rumelhart D.E., McClelland J.L. On learning the past tenses of English verbs. McClelland J.L., et al. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructures of Cognition. 2:1986;216-271 MIT Press.
2. Pinker S., Prince A. On language and connectionism: analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition. 28:1988;73-193.
3. Pinker S. Words and Rules: The Ingredients of Language. 1999;HarperCollins.
4. Marcus G.F. The Algebraic Mind: Integrating Connectionism and Cognitive Science. 2001;MIT Press.
5. Ullman M.T. A neurocognitive perspective on language: the declarative/procedural model. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2:2001;717-726.
6. Lima S.D., et al. The Reality of Linguistic Rules. 1994;John Benjamins.
7. Nooteboom S., et al. Storage and Computation in the Language Faculty. 2002;Kluwer.
8. McClelland J.L., Patterson K. Rules or connections in past-tense inflections: what does the evidence rule out? Trends Cog. Sci. 6:2002;462-472.
9. Berko J. The child's learning of English morphology. Word. 14:1958;150-177.
10. Chamberlain A.F. Preterite forms, etc., in the language of English-speaking children. Mod. Lang. Notes. 21:1906;42-44.
11. Marcus G.F., et al. Overregularization in language acquisition. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Dev. 57:1992;1-165.
12. Chomsky N. A review of B.F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior. Language. 35:1959;26-58.
13. Pinker S. Language Learnability and Language Development. 1984;Harvard University Press.
14. Clahsen H. Lexical entries and rules of language: a multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behav. Brain Sci. 22:1999;991-1060.
15. Chomsky N., Halle M. The Sound Pattern of English. 1968;MIT Press.
16. Halle M., Mohanan K.P. Segmental phonology of modern English. Linguistic Inquiry. 16:1985;57-116.
17. Halle M., Marantz A. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. Hale K., Keyser S.J., The View from Building 20. 1993;MIT Press.
18. Plunkett K., Marchman V. From rote learning to system building: acquiring verb morphology in children and connectionist nets. Cognition. 48:1993;21-69.
19. Elman J., et al. Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development. 1996;MIT Press.
20. Prasada S., Pinker S. Generalization of regular and irregular morphological patterns. Lang. Cogn. Proc. 8:1993;1-56.
21. Xu F., Pinker S. Weird past tense forms. J. Child Lang. 22:1995;531-556.
22. Jackendoff R.S. Morphological and semantic regularities in the lexicon. Language. 51:1975;639-671.
23. Aronoff M. Word Formation in Generative Grammar. 1976;MIT Press.
24. Lieber R. On the organization of the lexicon. Linguistics and Philosophy. 1980;MIT.
25. Bresnan J. A realistic transformational grammar. Halle J.B., Miller G., Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality. 1978;MIT Press.
26. Ullman M.T., et al. A neural dissociation within language: evidence that the mental dictionary is part of declarative memory, and that grammatical rules are processed by the procedural system. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 9:1997;266-276.
27. Mishkin M., et al. Memories and habits: Two neural systems. Lynch G., et al. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory. 1984;65-77 Guilford Press.
28. Squire L.R., Knowlton B.J. The medial temporal lobe, the hippocampus, and the memory systems of the brain. Gazzaniga M.S., The New Cognitive Neurosciences. 2000;765-780 MIT Press.
29. Jackendoff R. Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. 2002;Oxford University Press.
30. Ullman M.T. The computation of inflectional morphology. Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences. 1993;263 Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
31. Ullman M.T. The declarative/procedural model of lexicon and grammar. J. Psycholinguist. Res. 30:2001;37-69.
32. Ullman, M.T. Evidence that lexical memory is part of the temporal lobe declarative memory, and that grammatical rules are processed by the frontal/basal-ganglia procedural system. Brain Lang. (in press)
33. Badecker W., Caramazza A. Morphological composition in the lexical output system. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 8:1991;335-367.
34. Burani C., et al. Morphological structure and lexical access. Vis. Lang. 18:1984;348-358.
35. Baayen R.H., et al. Singulars and plurals in Dutch: evidence for a parallel dual-route model. J. Mem. Lang. 37:1997;94-117.
36. Balota D.A., Ferraro R. A dissociation of frequency and regularity effects in pronunciation performance across young adults, older adults, and individuals with senile dementia of the Alzheimer types. J. Mem. Lang. 32:1993;573-592.
37. Balota D.A., Spieler D.H. The utility of item-level analyses in model evalutation: a reply to Seidenberg and Plaut. Psychol. Sci. 9:1997;238-240.
38. Besner D., et al. On the connection between connectionism and data: are a few words necessary? Psychol. Rev. 97:1990;432-446.
39. Coltheart M., et al. Models of reading aloud: dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Psychol. Rev. 100:1993;589-608.
40. Ullman, M.T. et al. Sex differences in the neurocognition of language. Brain Lang. (in press)
41. Ullman M.T., Gopnik M. Inflectional morphology in a family with inherited specific language impairment. Appl. Psycholinguist. 20:1999;51-117.
42. van der Lely H.K.J., Ullman M.T. Past tense morphology in specifically language impaired and normally developing children. Lang. Cogn. Proc. 16:2001;177-217.
43. Ullman M.T. The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: the declarative/procedural model. Bilingual. Lang. Cogn. 4:2001;105-122.
44. Alegre M., Gordon P. Frequency effects and the representational status of regular inflections. J. Mem. Lang. 40:1999;41-61.
45. Sproat R. Morphology and Computation. 1992;MIT Press.
46. Hare M., et al. Default generalization in connectionist networks. Lang. Cogn. Proc. 10:1995;601-630.
47. Hare, M. and Elman, J. (1992) A connectionist account of English inflectional morphology: evidence from language change. In 14th Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc., pp. 265-270, Erlbaum
48. Nakisa, R.C. and Hahn, U. (1996) Where defaults don't help: The case of the German plural system. In: Proc. 18th Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc. (Cottrell, G.W., ed.), pp. 177-182, Erlbaum
49. Nakisa, R.C. and Hahn, U. (1996) Where defaults don't help: the case of the German plural system. In: Proc. 18th Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc. (Cottrell, G.W., ed.), pp. 177-182, Erlbaum
50. Marcus G.F., et al. German inflection: the exception that proves the rule. Cogn. Psychol. 29:1995;189-256.
51. Marcus G.F. The acquisition of inflection in children and multilayered connectionist networks. Cognition. 56:1995;271-279.
52. Marcus G.F. Children's overregularization of English plurals: a quantitative analysis. J. Child Lang. 22:1995;447-459.
53. Forrester, N. and Plunkett, K. (1994) Learning the Arabic plural: the case for minority default mappings in connectionist networks. In 16th Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc., Erlbaum
54. Plunkett K., Nakisa R. A connectionist model of the Arab plural system. Lang. Cogn. Proc. 12:1997;807-836.
55. Berent, I. et al. The nature of regularity and irregularity: evidence from Hebrew nominal inflection. J. Psycholinguist. Res. (in press)
56. Berent I., et al. Default nominal inflection in Hebrew: evidence for mental variables. Cognition. 72:1999;1-44.
57. Kiparsky P. Lexical phonology and morphology. Yang I.S., Linguistics in the Morning Calm. 1982;3-91 Hansin, Seoul.
58. Williams E. On the notions of 'lexically related' and 'head of a word'. Linguist. Inq. 12:1981;245-274.
59. Selkirk E.O. The Syntax of Words. 1982;MIT Press.
60. Kim J.J., et al. Why no mere mortal has ever flown out to center field. Cogn. Sci. 15:1991;173-218.
61. Kim J.J., et al. Sensitivity of children's inflection to morphological structure. J. Child Lang. 21:1994;173-209.
62. MacWhinney B., Leinbach J. Implementations are not conceptualizations: revising the verb learning model. Cognition. 40:1991;121-157.
63. Harris, C.L. (1992) Understanding English past-tense formation: the shared meaning hypothesis. In Proc. 14th Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc., Erlbaum
64. Daugherty, K.G. et al. (1993) Why no mere mortal has ever flown out to center field but people often say they do. In 15th Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc., Erlbaum
65. Shirai Y. Is regularization determined by semantics, or grammar, or both? Comments on Kim, Marcus, Pinker, Hollander & Coppola. J. Child Lang. 24:1997;495-501.
66. Goodglass H. Understanding Aphasia. 1993;Academic Press.
67. Ullman, M.T. et al. Neural correlates of lexicon and grammar: evidence from the production, reading, and judgment of inflection in aphasia. Brain Lang. (in press)
68. Tyler L.K., et al. Dissociations in processing past tense morphology: neuropathology and behavioral studies. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 14:2002;79-94.
69. Alexander M.P. Aphasia: clinical and anatomic aspects. Feinberg T.E., Farah M.J., Behavioral Neurology and Neuropsychology. 1997;133-150 McGraw-Hill.
70. Damasio A.R. Aphasia. N. Engl. J. Med. 326:1992;531-539.
71. Hagiwara H., et al. Neurolinguistic evidence for rule-based nominal suffixation. Language. 75:1999;739-763.
72. Feinberg T.E., Farah M.J., Behavioral Neurology and Neuropsychology. 1997;McGraw-Hill.
73. Jankovic J., Tolosa E.E. Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorders. 1993;Williams & Wilkins.
74. Marslen-Wilson W.D., Tyler L.K. Dissociating types of mental computation. Nature. 387:1997;592-594.
75. Marslen-Wilson W.D., Tyler L.K. Rules, representations, and the English past tense. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2:1998;428-435.
76. Weyerts H., et al. Brain potentials indicate differences between regular and irregular German plurals. Neuroreport. 8:1997;957-962.
77. Penke M., et al. How the brain processes complex words: an event-related potential study of German verb inflections. Cogn. Brain Res. 6:1997;37-52.
78. Gross M., et al. Human brain potentials to violations in morphologically complex Italian words. Neurosci. Lett. 241:1998;83-86.
79. Rodriguez-Fornells A., et al. Event-related brain responses to morphological violations in Catalan. Cogn. Brain Res. 11:2001;47-58.
80. Bullinaria J.A., Chater N. Connectionist modeling: implications for cognitive neuropsychology. Lang. Cogn. Proc. 10:1995;227-264.
81. Joanisse M.F., Seidenberg M.S. Impairments in verb morphology after brain injury: a connectionist model. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96:1999;7592-7597.
82. Miozzo, M. On the processing of regular and irregular forms of verbs and nouns: evidence from neuropsychology. Cognition (in press)