Learning phonotactic distributions

Constraints in Phonological Acquisition

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 245-291

  Prince, Alan ^a   Tesar, Bruce ^a  

^a The State University of New Jersey New Brunswick   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053878523     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511486418.008     Document Type: Chapter

References (51)

1. Angluin, D. (1980). Inductive inference of formal languages from positive data. Information and Control 45. 117–135.
2. Baker, C. L. (1979). Syntactic theory and the projection problem. LI 10: 4. 533–581.
3. Beckman, J. (1998). Positional Faithfulness. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [ROA 234, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
4. Bernhardt, B. and J. Stemberger (1997). Handbook of Phonological Development: from the Perspective of Constraint-Based Nonlinear Phonology. San Diego: Academic Press.
5. Berwick, R. (1982). Locality Principles and the Acquisition of Syntactic Knowledge. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
6. Broihier, K. (1995). Optimality theoretic rankings with tied constraints: Slavic relatives, resumptive pronouns and learnability. MS., MIT. [ROA 46, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
7. Chafe, W. (1977). Accent and related phenomena in the Five Nations Iroquoian languages. In C. N. Li and L. M. Hyman (eds.) Studies in Stress and Accent. Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 4. 169–181.
8. Clark, R. (1992). The selection of syntactic knowledge. Language Acquisition 2: 2. 83–149.
9. Demuth, K. (1995). Markedness and the development of prosodic structure. NELS 25. 13–25. [ROA 50, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
10. Dresher, B. E. (1999). Charting the learning path: cues to parameter setting. LI 30: 1. 27–67.
11. Dresher, B. E. and J. Kaye (1990). A computational learning model for metrical phonology. Cognition 34. 137–195.
12. Gnanadesikan, A. (this volume). Markedness and faithfulness constraints in child phonology.
13. Dresher, B. E. and J. Kaye (1997). Phonology with Ternary Scales. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [ROA 195, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
14. Goldsmith, J. (1993). Phonology as an intelligent system. In D. J. Napoli and J. Kegl (eds.) Bridges between Psychology and Linguistics: a Swarthmore Festschrift for Lila Gleitman. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 247–267.
15. Hale, M. and C. Reiss (1997). Grammar optimization: the simultaneous acquisition of constraint ranking and a lexicon. MS., Concordia University. [ROA 231, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
16. Halle, M. (1959). Questions of linguistics. Supplemento a Il Nuovo Cimento 13, ser. 10. 494–517.
17. Hayes, B. (this volume). Phonological acquisition in Optimality Theory: the early stages.
18. Itô, J. and A. Mester (1997). Sympathy theory and German truncations. In V. Miglio and B. Morén (eds.) University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 5: Selected Phonology Papers from Hopkins Optimality Theory Workshop 1997/University of Maryland Mayfest 1997. 117–139. [ROA 211, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
19. Itô, J. and A. Mester (1999a). The structure of the phonological lexicon. In Tsujimura, Natsuko (ed.) The Handbook of Japanese Linguistics. Malden, Mass., and Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. 62–100.
20. Itô, J. and A. Mester (1999b). On the sources of opacity in OT: coda processes in German. To appear in C. Féry and R. van de Vijver (eds.) The Optimal Syllable. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [ROA 347, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
21. Jacubowitz, C. (1984). On markedness and binding principles. NELS 14.
22. Keer, E. (1999). Geminates, theOCP, and the Nature of Con. Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers University, New Brunswick. ROA-350.
23. Kiparsky, P. (1980). Vowel harmony. MS., MIT.
24. Kiparsky, P. (1982). Lexical phonology and morphology. In I. S. Yang (ed.) Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin. 3–91.
25. Kisseberth, C. (1970). On the functional unity of phonological rules. LI 1. 291–306.
26. Koutsoudas, A., G. Sanders, and C. Noll (1974). The application of phonological rules. Lg 50. 1–28. (Drafted September 1971: fn. 2)
27. Levelt, C. (1995). Unfaithful kids: place of articulation patterns in early child language. Paper presented at the Department of Cognitive Science, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.
28. Lombardi, L. (1999). Positional faithfulness and voicing assimilation in Optimality Theory. NLLT 17. 267–302.
29. McCarthy, J. (1998). Morpheme structure constraints and paradigm occultation. MS., University of Massachusetts. To appear in C. Gruber, D. Higgins, K. Olson, and T. Wysocki (eds.) CLS 32, vol. II: The Panels. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
30. Michelson, K. (1988). A Comparative Study of Lake-Iroquoian accent. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
31. Oostendorp, M. van (1995). Vowel Quality and Phonological Projection. Ph.D. dissertation, Tilburg University. [ROA 84, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
32. Prince, A. (1997). Paninian relations. Lecture given at LSA Summer Institute, Cornell University.
33. Prince, A. (2000). Comparative tableaux. MS., Rutgers University, New Brunswick. [ROA 376, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
34. Prince, A. (2001a). Entailed ranking arguments. RuLing Papers2. 117–140. Rutgers University, New Brunswick.
35. Prince, A. (2001b). Entailed ranking arguments (extended version). MS., Rutgers University, New Brunswick. [ROA-500].
36. Prince, A. and P. Smolensky (1993). Optimality Theory. Technical Report RuCCS-TR-2, Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science. To appear, Blackwell [ROA-537].
37. Samek-Lodovici, V. and A. Prince (1999). Optima. MS., University of London and Rutgers University, New Brunswick. [ROA-363]
38. Sherer, T. (1994). Prosodic Phonotactics. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. [ROA 54, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
39. Sommerstein, A. H. (1974). On phonotactically motivated rules. JL 19. 71–94.
40. Smith, J. (1999). Special-general relations among faithfulness constraints and learning. Paper presented at the Rutgers-UMass Joint Class Meeting.
41. Smolensky, P. (1996a). On the comprehension/production dilemma in child language. LI 27. 720–731. [ROA 118, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
42. Smolensky, P. (1996b). The initial state and ‘Richness of the Base’. Technical Report JHU-CogSci- 96-4. [ROA 154, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
43. Tesar, B. (1995). Computational Optimality Theory. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder. [ROA 90, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
44. Tesar, B. (1997). Multi-Recursive Constraint Demotion. MS., Rutgers University. [ROA 197, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
45. Tesar, B. (1998). Using the mutual inconsistency of structural descriptions to overcome ambiguity in language learning. NELS 28. 469–483.
46. Tesar, B. (2000). Using inconsistency detection to overcome structural ambiguity in language learning. MS., Rutgers University, New Brunswick. [ROA 426, http://roa.rutgers.edu]
47. Tesar, B. and P. Smolensky (1998). The learnability of Optimality Theory. LI 29: 2. 229–268.
48. Tesar, B. and P. Smolensky (2000). Learnability in Optimality Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
49. Vapnik, V. N. and A. Y. Chervonenkis (1971). On the uniform convergence of relative frequencies of events to their probabilities. Theory of Probability and its Applications 16. 264–280.
50. Wexler, K. and R. Manzini (1987). Parameters and learnability in binding theory. In T. Roeper and E. Williams (eds.) Parameter Setting. Dordrecht: Reidel. 41–76.
51. Zoll, C. (1998). Positional asymmetries and licensing. MS., MIT. [ROA 282, http://roa.rutgers.edu]