Evidence for a domain-general mechanism underlying the suffixation preference in language

Language and Cognitive Processes

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 876-909

  Hupp, Julie M ^a   Sloutsky, Vladimir M ^b   Culicover, Peter W ^b  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COGNITION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE ABILITY; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL STIMULATION; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 70450247050     PISSN: 01690965     EISSN: 14640732     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01690960902719267     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Bruening, P. R., & Brooks, P. J. (2007, March). Children's tolerance of word-form variation. Poster session presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Boston, MA.
2. Bybee, J. L., Pagliuca, W., & Perkins, R. D. (1990). On the asymmetries in the affixation of grammatical material. In W Croft, K. Denning, & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Studies in typology and diachrony Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
3. Christiansen, M. H., & Chater, N. (2001). Connectionist psycholinguistics: Capturing the empirical data. Trends in Cognitive Science, 5, 82-88.
4. Clark, E. V. (1991). Acquisitional principles in lexical development. In S. A. Gelman & J. P. Byrnes (Eds.), Perspectives on language and thought: Interrelations in development. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
5. Clark, E. V. (1998). Morphology in language acquisition. In A. Spencer & A. M. Zwicky (Eds.), The handbook of morphology. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
6. Conway, C. M., & Christiansen, M. H. (2005). Modality-constrained statistical learning of tactile, visual, and auditory sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 24-39.
7. Cutler, A., Hawkins, J. A., & Gilligan, G. (1985). The suffixing preference: A processing explanation. Linguistics, 23, 723-758.
8. Cysouw, M. (2001, July). The (a)symmetry of inflectional person marking. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference of the Association for Linguistic Typology, Santa Barbara, CA, USA.
9. Dienes, A., Altmann, G. T. M., & Gao, S. (1999). Mapping across domains without feedback: A neural network model of transfer of implicit knowledge. Cognitive Science, 23, 53-82.
10. Dryer, M. S. (2005). Prefixing versus suffixing in inflectional morphology. In M. Haspelmath, M. S. Dryer, D. Gil, & B. Comrie (Eds.), The world atlas of language structures. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
11. Erdeljac, V, & Mildner, V. (1999). Temporal structure of spoken-word recognition in Croatian in light of the cohort theory. Brain and Language, 68, 95-103.
12. Gasser, M. (1994). Acquiring receptive morphology: A connectionist model. Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 32, 279-286.
13. Gomez, R. L., & Gerken, L. A. (2001). Infant artificial language learning and acquisition. In M. Tomasello & E. Bates (Eds.), Language development: The essential readings. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
14. Greenberg, J. H. (1957). Order of affixing: Essays in linguistics. New York: Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research.
15. Hall, C. J. (1988). Integrating diachronic and processing principles in explaining the suffixing preference. In J. A. Hawkins (Ed.), Explaining language universals. New York: Basil Blackwell.
16. Hall, G (1991). Perceptual and associative learning. New York: Clarendon Press.
17. Hana, J., & Culicover, P. W. (2008). Linguistic complexity outside of universal grammar. In B. D. Joseph & J. Papke (Eds.), OSU Working Papers in Linguistics, 58. Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
18. Hawkins, J. A. (1994). A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. Hawkins, J. A. (2004). Complexity and efficiency in grammars. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
20. Hawkins, J. A., & Cutler, A. (1988). Psycholinguistic factors in morphological asymmetry. In J. A. Hawkins (Ed.), Explaining language universals. New York: Basil Blackwell.
21. Hawkins, J. A., & Gilligan, G (1988). Prefixing and suffixing universals in relation to basic word order. Lingua, 74, 219-259.
22. Hay, J. S. F., & Diehl, R. L. (2007). Perception of rhythmic grouping: Testing the iambic/trochaic law. Perception and Psychophysics, 69, 113-122.
23. Jarvis, L. H., Merriman, W. E., Barnett, M., Hanba, J., & Van Haitsma, K. S. (2004). Input that contradicts young children's strategy for mapping novel words affects their phonological and semantic interpretation of other novel words. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 47, 392-406.
24. Johnson, E. K., & Jusczyk, P. W. (2001). Word segmentation by 8-month-olds: When speech cues count more than statistics. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 548-567.
25. Jusczyk, P. W. (1993). From general to language-specific capacities: The WRAPSA model of how speech perception develops. Journal of Phonetics, 21, 3-28.
26. Kersten, A. W., Goldstone, R. L., & Schaffert, A. (1998). Two competing attentional mechanisms in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1437-1458.
27. Kruschke, J. K. (1992). ALCOVE: An exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. Psychological Review, 99, 22-44.
28. Lewis, R. L., Vasishth, S., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2006). Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 447-454.
29. Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298.
30. Macromedia Studio MX (2002). Macromedia Flash MX [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Macromedia Studio MX.
31. Marcus, G. F., Fernandes, K. J., & Johnson, S. P. (2007). Infant rule learning facilitated by speech. Psychological Science, 18, 387-391.
32. Marslen-Wilson, W (1987). Functional parallelism in spoken word recognition. Cognition, 25, 71-102.
33. Neath, I. (1993). Distinctiveness and serial position effects in recognition. Memory and Cognition, 21, 689-698.
34. Neurobehavioral Systems (2003). Presentation (Version.76) [Computer software]. Albany, CA: Neurobehavioral Systems.
35. Newport, E. L., & Aslin, R. N. (2004). Learning at a distance I: Statistical learning of non-adjacent dependencies. Cognitive Psychology, 48, 127-162.
36. Repp, B. H. (1992). Probing the cognitive representation of musical time: Structural constraints on the perception of timing perturbations. Cognition, 44, 241-281.
37. Rodd, J. M. (2004). When do leotards get their spots? Semantic activation of lexical neighbors in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11, 434-439.
38. Saffran, J. R. (2003). Statistical language learning: Mechanisms and constraints. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 110-114.
39. Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R. N., & Newport, E. L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274, 1926-1928.
40. Saygin, A. P., Dick, F., Wilson, S. W., Dronkers, N. F., & Bates, E. (2003). Neural resources for processing language and environmental sounds: Evidence from aphasia. Brain, 126, 928-945.
41. Smith, L. B., Jones, S. S., Landau, B., Gershkoff-Stowe, L., & Samuelson, L. (2002). Object name learning provides on-the-job training for attention. Psychological Science, 13, 13-19.
42. St. Clair, M. C., Monaghan, P., & Ramscar, M. (2008). Relationships between language structure and language learning: The suffixation preference and grammatical categorization. Manuscript submitted for publication.
43. Syntrillium Software Corporation (2000). Cool Edit (2000 version) [Computer software]. Phoenix, AZ: Syntrillium Software Corporation.
44. Tyler, L. K., & Wessels, J. (1983). Quantifying contextual contributions to word-recognition processes. Perception and Psychophysics, 34, 409-420.
45. allace, W. P., Stewart, M. T., Sherman, H. L., & Mellor, M. D. (1995). False positives in recognition memory produced by cohort activation. Cognition, 55, 85-113.