Language learners privilege structured meaning over surface frequency

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 111, Issue 16, 2014, Pages 5842-5847

  Culbertson, Jennifer ^a   Adger, David ^b  

^a GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Artificial grammar learning; Learning biases; Semantic scope; Transitional probabilities; Typology

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COGNITIVE BIAS; CULTURAL FACTOR; GRAMMAR; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; KNOWLEDGE; LANGUAGE; LEARNING; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEMANTICS; STRUCTURAL KNOWLEDGE; SURFACE STATISTICAL KNOWLEDGE;

ARTIFICIAL GRAMMAR LEARNING; LEARNING BIASES; SEMANTIC SCOPE; TRANSITIONAL PROBABILITIES; TYPOLOGY;

ADULT; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; LEARNING; SEMANTICS;

EID: 84899089084     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1320525111     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Chomsky N (1957) Syntactic Structures (Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin).
2. Chomsky N (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
3. Gleitman LR, Newport EL (1995) An Invitation to Cognitive Science, eds Osherson DN, Gleitman LR (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp 1-24.
4. Crain S, Nakayama M (1987) Structure dependence in grammar formation. Language 63(3):522-543.
5. Reali F, Christiansen MH (2005) Uncovering the richness of the stimulus: structure dependence and indirect statistical evidence. Cogn Sci 29(6):1007-1028. (Pubitemid 43432314)
6. Lewis JD, Elman J (2001) Learnability and the statistical structure of language: Poverty of stimulus arguments revisited. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, eds Skarabela B, Fish S, Do AH-J (Cascadilla, Somerville, MA), pp 359-370.
7. Kam XNC, Stoyneshka I, Tornyova L, Fodor JD, Sakas WG (2008) Bigrams and the richness of the stimulus. Cogn Sci 32(4):771-787.
8. Berwick RC, Pietroski P, Yankama B, Chomsky N (2011) Poverty of the stimulus revisited. Cogn Sci 35(7):1207-1242.
9. Frank R, Mathis D, Badecker W (2013) The acquisition of anaphora by simple recurrent networks. Lang Acquis 20(3):181-227.
10. Perfors A, Tenenbaum JB, Regier T (2011) The learnability of abstract syntactic principles. Cognition 118(3):306-338.
11. Pearl L, Sprouse J (2013) Syntactic islands and learning biases: Combining experimental syntax and computational modeling to investigate the language acquisition problem. Lang Acquis 20(1):23-68.
12. Goldberg A (1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure (Univ of Chicago Press, Chicago).
13. Croft W (2001) Radical Construction Grammar (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford).
14. Lieven EV, Pine JM, Baldwin G (1997) Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development. J Child Lang 24(1):187-219. (Pubitemid 127359937)
15. Tomasello M (2009) Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition (Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge, MA).
16. Saffran JR, Newport EL, Aslin RN (1996) Word segmentation: The role of distributional cues. J Mem Lang 35(4):606-621. (Pubitemid 126160417)
17. Mintz TH, Newport EL, Bever TG (2002) The distributional structure of grammatical categories in speech to young children. Cogn Sci 26(4):393-424.
18. Goldberg AE (2003) Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends Cogn Sci 7(5):219-224.
19. Frank SL, Bod R (2011) Insensitivity of the human sentence-processing system to hierarchical structure. Psychol Sci 22(6):829-834.
20. Frank SL, Bod R, Christiansen MH (2012) How hierarchical is language use? Proc Biol Sci 279(1747):4522-4531.
21. Saffran JR (2003) Statistical language learning mechanisms and constraints. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 12(4):110-114.
22. Evans N, Levinson SC (2009) The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behav Brain Sci 32(5):429-448, discussion 448-494.
23. Dunn M, Greenhill SJ, Levinson SC, Gray RD (2011) Evolved structure of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order universals. Nature 473(7345):79-82.
24. Baker M, McCloskey J (2007) On the relationship of typology to theoretical syntax. Linguistic Typology 11(1):273-284.
25. Prince A, Smolensky P (2004) Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar (Blackwell, New York).
26. Chomsky N (1975) The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory (Plenum, New York).
27. Yang CD (2004) Universal grammar, statistics or both? Trends Cogn Sci 8(10):451-456.
28. Lidz J, Musolino J (2002) Children's command of quantification. Cognition 84(2):113-154. (Pubitemid 34520456)
29. Greenberg J (1963) Universals of Language, ed Greenberg J (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp 73-113.
30. Baker M (1985) The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguist Inq 16(3):373-415.
31. Rijkhoff J (1990) Explaining word order in the Noun Phrase. Linguistics 28(1):5-42.
32. Rice K (2000) Morpheme Order and Semantic Scope: Word Formation in the Athapaskan Verb (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK).
33. Cinque G (2005) Deriving Greenberg's Universal 20 and its exceptions. Linguist Inq 36(3):315-332.
34. Koopman HJ, Szabolcsi A (2000) Verbal Complexes (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
35. Jenks P (2011) The hidden structure of Thai noun phrases. PhD thesis (Harvard Univ, Cambridge, MA).
36. Culbertson J, Smolensky P, Legendre G (2012) Learning biases predict a word order universal. Cognition 122(3):306-329.
37. Partee BH (1987) Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, eds Groenendijk J, de Jongh D, Stokhof M (Foris, Dordrecht), pp 115-143.
38. Elbourne P (2008) Demonstratives as individual concepts. Linguist Philos 31(4):409-466.
39. Adger D (2003) Core Syntax (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford).
40. Alexiadou A, Haegeman L, Stavrou M (2007) Noun Phrase in the Generative Perspective (Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin).
41. Rijkhoff J (2004) The Noun Phrase (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford, UK).
42. Aikhenvald AY (2000) Classifiers: A Typology of Noun Categorization Devices (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford, UK).
43. Tenenbaum JB, Kemp C, Griffiths TL, Goodman ND (2011) How to grow a mind: Statistics, structure, and abstraction. Science 331(6022):1279-1285.
44. Adger D (2013) A Syntax of Substance (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
45. Kayne R (1994) The Antisymmetry of Syntax (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
46. Culbertson J (2012) Typological universals as reflections of biased learning: Evidence from artificial language learning. Language Linguistics Compass 6(5):310-329.
47. Moreton E, Pater J (2012) Structure and substance in artificial-phonology learning, part I: Structure. Language Linguistics Compass 6(11):686-701.
48. Gerken L (2004) Nine-month-olds extract structural principles required for natural language. Cognition 93(3):B89-B96.
49. Wilson C (2006) Learning phonology with substantive bias: An experimental and computational study of velar palatalization. Cogn Sci 30(5):945-982.
50. Takahashi E (2009) Beyond statistical learning in the acquisition of phrase structure. PhD dissertation (Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD).
51. Smith K, Wonnacott E (2010) Eliminating unpredictable variation through iterated learning. Cognition 116(3):444-449.
52. Davies M (2011) N-grams data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Available at www.ngrams.info. Accessed January 6, 2014.
53. Hadfield JD (2010) MCMC methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: The MCMCglmm R package. J Stat Softw 33(2):1-22.
54. Gelman A, Jakulin A, Grazia Pittau M, Su YS (2008) A weakly informative default prior distribution for logistic and other regression models. The Annals of Applied Statistics 2(4):1360-1383.
55. Hetzron R (1978) Language Universals, ed Seiler H (Narr, Tübingen, Germany), pp 165-184.
56. Kemp C, Perfors A, Tenenbaum JB (2007) Learning overhypotheses with hierarchical Bayesian models. Dev Sci 10(3):307-321.
57. Richtsmeier PT (2011) Word-types, not word-tokens, facilitate extraction of phonotactic sequences by adults. Lab Phonol 2(1):157-183.
58. Tily H, Frank M, Jaeger T (2011) The learnability of constructed languages reflects typological patterns. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, eds Carlson L, Hoelscher C, Shipley TF (Cognitive Sci Soc, Austin, TX), pp 1364-1369.
59. Gass SM, Selinker L (1992) Language Transfer in Language Learning (John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam).
60. Schwartz B, Sprouse R (1996) L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Lang Res 12(1):40-72.
61. Odlin T (2003) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, ed Doughty CJ (Blackwell, Oxford, UK), pp 436-486.