Semantics boosts syntax in artificial grammar learning tasks with recursion

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 776-782

  Fedor, Anna ^a   Varga, Máté ^b   Szathmáry, Eörs ^a  

^a EÖTVÖS LORÁND UNIVERSITY   (Hungary)

^b Peel Hunt LLP   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Artificial grammar learning; Center embedded recursion; Familiarity; Linguistics; Natural language; Semantics

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS; MALE; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZATION; RECOGNITION; SEMANTICS;

ADULT; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; COMPREHENSION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; RANDOM ALLOCATION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; VERBAL LEARNING; VOCABULARY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84865681418     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0026986     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Bahlmann, J., Schubotz, R. I., & Friederici, A. D. (2008). Hierarchical artificial grammar processing engages Broca's area. NeuroImage, 42, 525-534. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.04.249
2. Conway, C. M., Ellefson, M. R., & Christiansen, M. H. (2003, August). When less is less and when less is more: Starting small with staged input. Paper presented at the conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Boston, MA.
3. Corballis, M. C. (2007a). On phrase structure and brain responses: A comment on Bahlmann, Gunter, and Friederici (2006). Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1581-1583. doi:10.1162/jocn.2007.19.10.1581
4. Corballis, M. C. (2007b). Recursion, language, and starlings. Cognitive Science, 31, 697-704. doi:10.1080/15326900701399947
5. de Vries, M. H., Monaghan, P., Knecht, S., & Zwitserlood, P. (2008). Syntactic structure and artificial grammar learning: The learnability of embedded hierarchical structures. Cognition, 107, 763-774. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.09.002
6. Everett, D. L. (2005). Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã: Another look at the design features of human language. Current Anthropology, 46, 621-646. doi:10.1086/431525
7. Fedor, A., & Szathmáry, E. (2011). Center-embedded recursion in artificial grammar learning tasks: The role of working memory. Unpublished data.
8. Fitch, W. T., & Hauser, M. D. (2004, January 16). Computational constraints on syntactic processing in a nonhuman primate. Science, 303, 377-380. doi:10.1126/science.1089401
9. Friederici, A. D., Bahlmann, J., Heim, S., Schubotz, R. I., & Anwander, A. (2006). The brain differentiates human and non-human grammars: Functional localization and structural connectivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 103, 2458-2463. doi:10.1073/ pnas.0509389103
10. Gentner, T. Q., Fenn, K. M., Margoliash, D., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2006, April 27). Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature, 440, 1204-1207. doi:10.1038/nature04675
11. Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002, November 22). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569-1579. doi:10.1126/science.298.5598.1569
12. Lai, J., & Poletiek, F. H. (2011). The impact of adjacent-dependencies and staged-input on the learnability of center-embedded hierarchical structures. Cognition, 118, 265-273. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.11.011
13. Perruchet, P., & Rey, A. (2005). Does the mastery of center-embedded linguistic structures distinguish humans from nonhuman primates? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 307-313.