Using inconsistency detection to overcome structural ambiguity

Linguistic Inquiry

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 219-253

  Tesar, Bruce ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Language acquisition; Learnability; Metrical phonology; Optimality theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 23844501425     PISSN: 00243892     EISSN: 00243892     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/002438904323019057     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. Bertolo, Stefano, Kevin Broihier, Edward Gibson, and Kenneth Wexler. 1997a. Characterizing learnability conditions for cue-based learners in parametric language systems. In Proceedings of the Fifth Meeting on the Mathematics of Language, ed. by Tilman Becker and Hans-Ulrich Krieger, http://www.dfki.de/events/mol/.
2. Bertolo, Stefano, Kevin Broihier, Edward Gibson, and Kenneth Wexler. 1997b. Cue-based learners in parametric language systems: Application of general results to a recently proposed learning algorithm based on unambiguous "superparsing." In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. by Michael G. Shafto and Pat Langley, 49-54. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3. Boersma, Paul. 1998. Functional phonology. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
4. Boersma, Paul, and Bruce Hayes. 2001. Empirical tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm. Linguistic Inquiry 32:45-86.
5. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
6. Clark, Robin. 1992. The selection of syntactic knowledge. Language Acquisition 2:83-149.
7. Clark, Robin, and Ian Roberts. 1993. A computational model of language learnability and language change. Linguistic Inquiry 24:299-345.
8. Daelemans, Walter, Steven Gillis, and Gert Durieux. 1994. The acquisition of stress: A data-oriented approach. Computational Linguistics 20:421-451.
9. Dresher, B. Elan. 1999. Charting the learning path: Cues to parameter setting. Linguistic Inquiry 30:27-67.
10. Dresher, B. Elan, and Jonathan Kaye. 1990. A computational learning model for metrical phonology. Cognition 34:137-195.
11. Echeverria, Max S., and Heles Contreras. 1965. Araucanian phonemics. International Journal of American Linguistics 31:132-135.
12. Eisner, Jason. 2000. Easy and hard constraint ranking in Optimality Theory: Algorithms and complexity. In Finite-state phonology: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop of the ACL Special Interest Group in Computational Phonology, ed. by Jason Eisner, Lauri Karttunen, and Alain Theriault, 22-33. Association for Computational Linguistics.
13. Fodor, Janet Dean. 1998a. Parsing to learn. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 27:339-374.
14. Fodor, Janet Dean. 1998b. Unambiguous triggers. Linguistic Inquiry 29:1-36.
15. Gibson, Edward, and Kenneth Wexler. 1994. Triggers. Linguistic Inquiry 25:407-454.
16. Gold, E. Mark. 1967. Language identification in the limit. Information and Control 10:447-474.
17. Gupta, Prahlad, and David Touretzky. 1994. Connectionist models and linguistic theory: Investigations of stress systems in language. Cognitive Science 18:1-50.
18. Halle, Morris, and Jean-Roger Vergnaud. 1987. An essay on stress. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
19. Hammond, Michael. 1990. Metrical theory and learnability. Ms., University of Arizona, Tucson.
20. Hayes, Bruce. 1980. A metrical theory of stress rules. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
21. Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical stress theory: Principles and case studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22. Hayes, Bruce. To appear. Phonological acquisition in Optimality Theory: The early stages. In Fixing priorities: Constraints in phonological acquisition, ed. by René Kager, Joe Pater, and Wim Zonneveld. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Joanisse, Marc, and Suzanne Curtin. 1999. Dutch stress acquisition: OT and connectionist approaches. Ms., University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
24. Kager, René. 1994. Ternary rhythm in alignment theory. Ms., Utrecht University.
25. Liberman, Mark, and Alan Prince. 1977. On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry 8:249-336.
26. McCarthy, John, and Alan Prince. 1993. Generalized alignment. In Yearbook of morphology, ed. by Geert Booij and Jaap van Marie, 79-154. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
27. Niyogi, Partha, and Robert C. Berwick. 1996. A language learning model for finite parameter spaces. In Computational approaches to language acquisition, ed. by Michael R. Brent, 161-193. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
28. Osborn, Henry. 1966. Warao I: Phonology and morphophonemics. International Journal of American Linguistics 32:108-123.
29. Pinker, Steven. 1987. The bootstrapping problem in language acquisition. In Mechanisms of language acquisition, ed. by Brian MacWhinney, 399-441. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30. Prince, Alan. 1983. Relating to the grid. Linguistic Inquiry 14:19-100.
31. Prince, Alan. 1990. Quantitative consequences of rhythmic organization. In CLS 26. Vol. 2, Papers from the Parasession on the Syllable in Phonetics and Phonology, ed. by Karen Deaton, Manuela Noske, and Michael Ziolkowski, 355-398. Chicago: University of Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society.
32. Prince, Alan. 2000. Comparative tableaux. Ms., Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. Rutgers Optimality Archive ROA-376. http://roa.rutgers.edu.
33. Prince, Alan, and Paul Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Ms., Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J., and the University of Colorado, Boulder. Rutgers Optimality Archive ROA-537. http://roa.rutgers.edu.
34. Prince, Alan, and Bruce Tesar. To appear. Learning phonotactic distributions. In Fixing priorities: Constraints in phonological acquisition, ed. by René Kager, Joe Pater, and Wim Zonneveld. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Pulleyblank, Douglas, and William J. Turkel. 1998. The logical problem of language acquisition in Optimality Theory. In Is the best good enough? Optimality and competition in syntax, ed. by Pilar Barbosa, Danny Fox, Paul Hagstrom, Martha McGinnis, and David Pesetsky, 399-420. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
36. Rubach, Jerzy, and Geert E. Booij. 1985. A grid theory of stress in Polish. Lingua 66:281-319.
37. Sakas, William, and Janet Dean Fodor. 2001. The Structural Triggers Learner. In Language acquisition and leamability, ed. by Stefano Bertolo, 172-233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Samek-Lodovici, Vieri, and Alan Prince. 1999. Optima. Technical report RuCCS-TR-57, Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. Rutgers Optimality Archive ROA-363. http:// roa.rutgers.edu.
39. Smolensky, Paul. 1996. The initial state and "richness of the base" in Optimality Theory. Technical report JHU-CogSci-96-4, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. Rutgers Optimality Archive ROA154. http://roa.rutgers.edu.
40. Tesar, Bruce. 1995. Computational Optimality Theory. Doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder.
41. Tesar, Bruce. 1997. Multi-Recursive Constraint Demotion. Ms., Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. Rutgers Optimality Archive ROA-197. http://roa.rutgers.edu.
42. Tesar, Bruce. 1998a. Error-driven learning in Optimality Theory via the efficient computation of optimal forms. In Is the best good enough? Optimality and competition in syntax, ed. by Pilar Barbosa, Danny Fox, Paul Hagstrom, Martha McGinnis, and David Pesetsky, 421-435. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
43. Tesar, Bruce. 1998b. An iterative strategy for language learning. Lingua 104:131-145.
44. Tesar, Bruce. 2000a. On the roles of optimality and strict domination in language learning. In Optimality Theory: Phonology, syntax, and acquisition, ed. by Joost Dekkers, Frank van der Leeuw, and Jeroen van de Weijer, 592-620. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45. Tesar, Bruce. 2000b. Using inconsistency detection to overcome structural ambiguity in language learning. Technical report RuCCS-TR-58, Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. Rutgers Optimality Archive ROA-426. http://roa.rutgers.edu.
46. Tesar, Bruce. 2002. Enforcing grammatical restrictiveness can help resolve structural ambiguity. In Proceedings of the Twenty-first West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. by Line Mikkelsen and Christopher Potts, 443-456. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press. Rutgers Optimality Archive ROA-618. http://roa.rutgers.edu.
47. Tesar, Bruce, and Paul Smolensky. 1994. The learnability of Optimality Theory. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. by Raul Aranovich, William Byrne, Susanne Preuss, and Martha Senturia, 122-137. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications.
48. Tesar, Bruce, and Paul Smolensky. 1998. Learnability in Optimality Theory. Linguistic Inquiry 29:229-268.
49. Tesar, Bruce, and Paul Smolensky. 2000. Learnability in Optimality Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
50. Wexler, Kenneth, and Peter Culicover. 1980. Formal principles of language acquisition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.