Corpus evidence of the viability of statistical preemption

Cognitive Linguistics

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 131-153

  Goldberg, Adele E ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Construction learning; Dative; Ditransitive; Statistical preemption

Indexed keywords

EID: 80051638728     PISSN: 09365907     EISSN: 16133641     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/COGL.2011.006     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Adams, Douglas. 1979. Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy. Harmony Books.
2. Adams, Douglas. 1993. Mostly harmless. Hitchhiker's Trilogy, No. 5. New York: Ballantine Books.
3. Ambridge, Ben, Julian M. Pine, Caroline F. Rowland, Rebecca L. Jones & Victoria Clark. 2009. A Semantics-Based Approach to the "No Negative Evidence" Problem. Cognitive Science 33(7). 1301-16.
4. Arnold, Jennifer E., Thomas Wasow, Anthony Losongco & Ryan Ginstrom. 2000. Heaviness vs Newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language 76(1). 28-55.
5. Bates, Elizabeth & Brian MacWhinney. 1987. Competition, variation, and language learning. In Brian MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition. 157-193. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Bolinger, Dwight. 1977. Meaning and form. London: Longman.
7. Bowerman, Melissa. 1996. Argument Structure and Learnability: Is a Solution in Sight? In Jan Johnson, Matthew L. Juge & Jeri L. Moxley (eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-second annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General session and parasession on the role of learnability in grammatical theory, 454-468. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
8. Boyd, Jeremy K. & Adele E. Goldberg. to appear. Learning what not to say: Categorization and preemption in a-adjective production. Language.
9. Braine, Martin D. S. & Patricia Brooks. 1995. Verb argument structure and the problem of avoiding an overgeneral grammar. In Michael Tomasello & William Edward Merriman (eds.), Beyond names for things: Young children's acquisition of verbs. 353-376. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Bresnan, Joan. 2007. Is syntactic knowledge probabilistic? Experiments with the English dative alternation. In Sam Featherston and Wolfgang Sternefeld (eds.), Roots: Linguistics in search of its evidential base (Studies in Generative Grammar 96), 75-96. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
11. Bresnan, Joan & Marilyn Ford. 2010. Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English. Language 86(1). 186-213.
12. Bresnan, Joan & Jennifer Hay. 2008. Gradient grammar: An effect of animacy on the syntax of give in New Zealand and American English. Lingua 118(2). 245-259.
13. Bresnan, Joan, Anna Cueni, Tatiana Nikitina & R. Harald Baayan. 2005. Predicting the dative alternative. Paper presented at the KNAW Academy Colloquium: cognitive foundations of interpretation, Amsterdam.
14. Brooks, Patricia J. & Michael Tomasello. 1999. How children constrain their argument structure constructions. Language 75(4). 720-738.
15. Brooks, Patricia & Otto Zizak. 2002. Does preemption help children learn verb transitivity? Journal of Child Language 29(4). 759-781.
16. Chouinard, Michelle M. & Eve V. Clark. 2003. Adult reformulations of child errors as negative evidence. Journal of Child Language 30(3). 637-669. (Pubitemid 37110159)
17. Clark, Eve V. 1987. The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition. In Brian Mac- Whinney (ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition. 1-33. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18. Collins, Peter. 1995. The indirect object construction in English: An informational approach. Linguistics 33(1). 35-49.
19. Erteschik-Shir, N. 1979. Discourse constraints on dative movement. In Suzanne Laberge & Gillian Sankoff (eds.), Syntax and semantics. 441-467. New York: Academic Press.
20. Fellbaum, Christiane. 2005. Examining the constraints on the benefactive alternation by using the World Wide Web as a Corpus. In Marga Reis & Stephan Kesper (eds.) Linguistic evidence: Empirical, theoretical and computational perspectives. Mouton de Gruyter, 209-240.
21. Goldberg, Adele E. 1993. Another look at some learnability paradoxes. Paper presented to the Proceedings of the 25th Annual Stanford Child Language Research Forum. Stanford, 1993.
22. Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
23. Goldberg, Adele E. 2002. Surface generalizations: An alternative to alternations. Cognitive Linguistics 13(4). 327-356.
24. Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Green, Georgia M. 1974. Semantics and syntactic regularity. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.
26. Gropen, Jess, Pinker Steven, Michelle Hollander & Richard Goldberg. 1991. Syntax and semantics in the acquisition of locative verbs. Journal of Child Language 18(1). 115-151.
27. Hovav, Malka Rappaport & Beth Levin. 2005. Are dative verbs polysemous? Paper presented to the Linguistics Colloquium, Princeton University, February 17, 2005.
28. Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
29. McCawley, James. 1978. Conversational implicature and the lexicon. In Peter Cole (ed.) Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics. 245-259. New York: Academic Press.
30. Oehrle, Richard. 1975. The Grammatical Status of the English Dative Alternation. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.
31. Pinker, Steven. 1984. Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. Pinker, Steven. 1989. Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Pollard, Carl Jesse & Ivan Sag. 1987. Information-based syntax and semantics. Stanford: CSLI.
34. Saxton, Matthew. 1997. The Contrast Theory of negative input. Journal of Child Language 24(1). 139-161.
35. Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 2008. Negative entrenchment: A usage-based approach to negative evidence. Cognitive Linguistics 19(3). 513-531.
36. Suttle, Laura and Adele E. Goldberg. to appear. The partial productivity of constructions as induction. Linguistics.
37. Thompson, Sandra. 1995. The iconicity of "dative shift" in English: Considerations from information flow in discourse. In Marge E. Landsberg (ed.), Syntactic iconicity and linguistic freezes: the human dimension (Studies in Anthropological Linguistics 9). 155-175. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
38. Wasow, Thomas. 2002. Postverbal Behavior. Stanford: CSLI.