scholarly journals Beyond Recursion: Critique of Hauser, Chomsky, and Fitch

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 58-66
Author(s):  
Роман Тарабань ◽  
Бандара Ахінта
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Minimalist Program ◽  
University Of Pennsylvania ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Formal Properties ◽  
And Control

In 2002, Hauser, Chomsky, and Fitch published an article in which they introduced a distinction between properties of language that are exclusively part of human communication (i.e., the FLN) and those properties that might be shared with other species (i.e., the FLB). The sole property proposed for the FLN was recursion. Hauser et al. provided evidence for their position based on issues of evolution. The question of the required properties of human language is central to developing theories of language processing and acquisition. In the present critique of Hauser et al. we consider two examples from non-English languages that argue against the suggestion that recursion is the sole property within the human language faculty. These are i) agreement of inflectional morphemes across sentence constructions, and ii) synthetic one-word constructions. References Adger, D. (2003). Core Syntax: A Minimalist Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1989). Functionalism and the Competition Model. In: The Crosslinguistic Study of Sentence Processing, (pp 3-76). B. MacWhinney and E. Bates (Eds.). New York: Cambridge University Press. Bickerton, D (2009). Recursion: core of complexity or artifact of analysis? In: Syntactic Complexity: Diachrony, Acquisition, Neuro-Cognition, Evolution, (pp. 531–543). T. Givón and M. Shibatani (Eds.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures (2nd edition published in 2002). Berlin: Mouton Chomsky, N. (1959). On certain formal properties of grammars. Information and Control, 2, 137–167. Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: What it is, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569-1579. Luuk, E., & Luuk, H. (2011). The redundancy of recursion and infinity for natural language. Cognitive Processing 12, 1–11. Marantz, A. (1997). No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 4(2), A. Dimitriadis, L. Siegel, et. al. (eds.), 201- 225. MacWhinney, B. & O’Grady, W. (Eds.) (2015). Handbook of Language Emergence. New York: Wiley. Nevins, A., Pesetsky, D., & Rodrigues, C. (2009). Pirahã exceptionality: A reassessment. Language, 85(2), 355–404. Ott, D. (2009). The evolution of I-language: Lexicalization as the key evolutionary novelty. Biolinguistics, 3, 255–269. Sauerland, U., & Trotzke, A. (2011). Biolinguistic perspectives on recursion: Introduction to the special issue. Biolinguistics, 5, 1–9. Trotzke, A., Bader, M. & Frazier, L. (2013). Third factors and the performance interface in language design. Biolinguistics, 7, 1–34.  

Movement-based approaches

2020 ◽  
pp. 122-155
Author(s):  
Rui P. Chaves ◽  
Michael T. Putnam
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Structural Information ◽  
Cognitive Status ◽  
Minimalist Program ◽  
Cyclic Movement ◽  
Island Constraints ◽  
Unbounded Dependency ◽  
Island Phenomena ◽  
Internal Merge

This chapter discusses how the Minimalist Program (MP) strives to model unbounded dependency constructions and island constraints, and discusses the empirical, theoretical and cognitive status of syntactic displacement (movement), as formalized in terms of Internal Merge. At the present time, modelling filler-gap dependencies via movement faces significant theoretical and empirical issues. There is no parsimonious account of successive cyclic movement in the MP because of the Triggering Problem, nor of convergent and cumulative filler-gap dependencies. Other problems concern island phenomena, which have been argued to follow from core architectural economy constraints, but which make incorrect predictions not only about islands, but also about unbounded dependency constructions more generally. Finally, the MP has also been difficult to reconcile with extant psycholinguistic evidence about language processing. All recent attempts to make the MP consistent with incremental sentence processing adopt phrase-structural information, and abandon movement altogether.

Bilingual sentence processing

2007 ◽  
pp. 370-384
Author(s):  
Arturo E. Hernández ◽  
Eva M. Fernández ◽  
Noemí Aznar-besé
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Processing Effects

Bilinguals live in two linguistic worlds. Given the different demands of each language, one might think that each system functions independently. However, bilinguals do not behave like two monolingual speaker/listeners housed in a single brain. Instead, the evidence to date suggests that the characteristics of bilingual language processing may appear to be “in between” the individual's two codes. Studies in bilingual sentence processing have focused on phenomena related to how semantic or syntactic representations are built. This article reviews data consistent with the view of interdependence between the two languages of the bilingual, using evidence from the literature on bilingual sentence processing. Studies of both semantic processing and syntactic processing show that bilinguals almost always use a unitary mechanism which accesses two separately represented grammars. The study of bilingual sentence processing can also offer insights into our understanding of human language processing in general, because bilinguals offer opportunities to examine sentence processing effects in within-participant designs, impossible to carry out with monolinguals. In addition to the above, this article explores parsing, the age of language acquisition, and language proficiency.

Reviews - Noam Chomsky. Syntactic structures. Janua linguarum, Studia memoriae Nicolai van Wijk dedicata, series minor no. 4. Mouton & Co., ‘s-Gravenhage1957, 116 pp. - Noam Chomsky. Three models for the description of language. A reprint of XXIII 71. Readings in mathematical psychology, volume II, edited by R. Duncan Luce, Robert R. Bush, and Eugene Galanter, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, London, and Sydney, 1965, pp. 105–124. - Noam Chomsky. Logical structures in language. American documentation, vol. 8 (1957), pp. 284–291. - Noam Chomsky and George A. Miller. Finite state languages. Information and control, vol. 1 (1958), pp. 91–112. Reprinted in Readings in mathematical psychology, volume II, edited by R. Duncan Luce, Robert R. Bush, and Eugene Galanter, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, London, and Sydney, 1965, pp. 156–171. - Noam Chomsky. On certain formal properties of grammars. Information and control, vol. 2 (1959), pp. 137–167. Reprinted in Readings in mathematical psychology, volume II, edited by R. Duncan Luce, Robert R. Bush, and Eugene Galanter, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, London, and Sydney, 1965, pp. 125–155. - Noam Chomsky. A note on phrase structure grammars. Information and control, vol. 2 (1959), pp. 393–395. - Noam Chomsky. On the notion “rule of grammar.”Structure of language and its mathematical aspects, Proceedings of symposia in applied mathematics, vol. 12, American Mathematical Society, Providence 1961, pp. 6–24. - Arthur Sard, Noam Chomsky, W. P. Livant, A. G. Oettinger, L. M. Court. Comments. Structure of language and its mathematical aspects, Proceedings of symposia in applied mathematics, vol. 12, American Mathematical Society, Providence 1961, pp. 255–257.

1966 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-251
Author(s):  
J. F. Staal
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Applied Mathematics ◽  
American Mathematical Society ◽  
Mathematical Psychology ◽  
Mathematical Society ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Noam Chomsky ◽  
Finite State ◽  
Formal Properties ◽  
And Control

Noam Chomsky

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard Lasnik ◽  
Terje Lohndal
Keyword(s):  
Human Mind ◽  
Minimalist Program ◽  
Standard Theory ◽  
University Of Pennsylvania ◽  
Full Professor ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Noam Chomsky ◽  
Major Transition ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
The University

Noam Avram Chomsky is one of the central figures of modern linguistics. He was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on December 7, 1928. In 1945, Chomsky enrolled in the University of Pennsylvania, where he met Zellig Harris (1909–1992), a leading Structuralist, through their shared political interests. His first encounter with Harris’s work was when he proof-read Harris’s book Methods in Structural Linguistics, published in 1951 but completed already in 1947. Chomsky grew dissatisfied with Structuralism and started to develop his own major idea that syntax and phonology are in part matters of abstract representations. This was soon combined with a psychobiological view of language as a unique part of the mind/brain. Chomsky spent 1951–1955 as a Junior Fellow of the Harvard Society of Fellows, after which he joined the faculty at MIT under the sponsorship of Morris Halle. He was promoted to full professor of Foreign Languages and Linguistics in 1961, appointed Ferrari Ward Professor of Linguistics in 1966, and Institute Professor in 1976, retiring in 2002. Chomsky is still remarkably active, publishing, teaching, and lecturing across the world. In 1967, both the University of Chicago and the University of London awarded him honorary degrees, and since then he has been the recipient of scores of honors and awards. In 1988, he was awarded the Kyoto Prize in basic science, created in 1984 in order to recognize work in areas not included among the Nobel Prizes. These honors are all a testimony to Chomsky’s influence and impact in linguistics and cognitive science more generally over the past 60 years. His contributions have of course also been heavily criticized, but nevertheless remain crucial to investigations of language. Chomsky’s work has always centered around the same basic questions and assumptions, especially that human language is an inherent property of the human mind. The technical part of his research has continuously been revised and updated. In the 1960s phrase structure grammars were developed into what is known as the Standard Theory, which transformed into the Extended Standard Theory and X-bar theory in the 1970s. A major transition occurred at the end of the 1970s, when the Principles and Parameters Theory emerged. This theory provides a new understanding of the human language faculty, focusing on the invariant principles common to all human languages and the points of variation known as parameters. Its recent variant, the Minimalist Program, pushes the approach even further in asking why grammars are structured the way they are.

scholarly journals Fine-tuning of deep language models as a computational framework of modeling listeners' perspective during language comprehension

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Refael Tikochinski ◽  
Ariel Goldstein ◽  
Yaara Yeshurun ◽  
Uri Hasson ◽  
Roi Reichart
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Language Models ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Neural Responses ◽  
Brain Areas ◽  
Computational Framework ◽  
Different Levels

Computational Deep Language Models (DLMs) have been shown to be effective in predicting neural responses during natural language processing. This study introduces a novel computational framework, based on the concept of fine-tuning (Hinton, 2007), for modeling differences in interpretation of narratives based on the listeners' perspective (i.e. their prior knowledge, thoughts, and beliefs). We draw on an fMRI experiment conducted by Yeshurun et al. (2017), in which two groups of listeners were listening to the same narrative but with two different perspectives (cheating versus paranoia). We collected a dedicated dataset of ~3000 stories, and used it to create two modified (fine-tuned) versions of a pre-trained DLM, each representing the perspective of a different group of listeners. Information extracted from each of the two fine-tuned models was better fitted with neural responses of the corresponding group of listeners. Furthermore, we show that the degree of difference between the listeners' interpretation of the story - as measured both neurally and behaviorally - can be approximated using the distances between the representations of the story extracted from these two fine-tuned models. These models-brain associations were expressed in many language-related brain areas, as well as in several higher-order areas related to the default-mode and the mentalizing networks, therefore implying that computational fine-tuning reliably captures relevant aspects of human language comprehension across different levels of cognitive processing.

Cognitive Processing of Miscommunication in Interactive Listening: An Evaluation of Listener Indecision and Cognitive Effort

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Jennifer M. Roche ◽  
Arkady Zgonnikov ◽  
Laura M. Morett
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Cognitive Effort ◽  
Mouse Tracking ◽  
Computer Mouse ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Computer Mouse Tracking ◽  
Listening Task ◽  
Processing Effort

Purpose The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the social and cognitive underpinnings of miscommunication during an interactive listening task. Method An eye and computer mouse–tracking visual-world paradigm was used to investigate how a listener's cognitive effort (local and global) and decision-making processes were affected by a speaker's use of ambiguity that led to a miscommunication. Results Experiments 1 and 2 found that an environmental cue that made a miscommunication more or less salient impacted listener language processing effort (eye-tracking). Experiment 2 also indicated that listeners may develop different processing heuristics dependent upon the speaker's use of ambiguity that led to a miscommunication, exerting a significant impact on cognition and decision making. We also found that perspective-taking effort and decision-making complexity metrics (computer mouse tracking) predict language processing effort, indicating that instances of miscommunication produced cognitive consequences of indecision, thinking, and cognitive pull. Conclusion Together, these results indicate that listeners behave both reciprocally and adaptively when miscommunications occur, but the way they respond is largely dependent upon the type of ambiguity and how often it is produced by the speaker.

In Search of a Human Language Processing System

1985 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 529-531
Author(s):  
Patrick Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Processing System ◽  
Human Language

The Opposition of Surprisal and Semantic Similarity in the Prediction of Language Processing: Evidence from Eye-tracking Data

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kun Sun
Keyword(s):  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Semantic Similarity ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Word Processing ◽  
Reading Time ◽  
Computational Models ◽  
Tracking Data ◽  
Dynamic Approach

Expectations or predictions about upcoming content play an important role during language comprehension and processing. One important aspect of recent studies of language comprehension and processing concerns the estimation of the upcoming words in a sentence or discourse. Many studies have used eye-tracking data to explore computational and cognitive models for contextual word predictions and word processing. Eye-tracking data has previously been widely explored with a view to investigating the factors that influence word prediction. However, these studies are problematic on several levels, including the stimuli, corpora, statistical tools they applied. Although various computational models have been proposed for simulating contextual word predictions, past studies usually preferred to use a single computational model. The disadvantage of this is that it often cannot give an adequate account of cognitive processing in language comprehension. To avoid these problems, this study draws upon a massive natural and coherent discourse as stimuli in collecting the data on reading time. This study trains two state-of-art computational models (surprisal and semantic (dis)similarity from word vectors by linear discriminative learning (LDL)), measuring knowledge of both the syntagmatic and paradigmatic structure of language. We develop a `dynamic approach' to compute semantic (dis)similarity. It is the first time that these two computational models have been merged. Models are evaluated using advanced statistical methods. Meanwhile, in order to test the efficiency of our approach, one recently developed cosine method of computing semantic (dis)similarity based on word vectors data adopted is used to compare with our `dynamic' approach. The two computational and fixed-effect statistical models can be used to cross-verify the findings, thus ensuring that the result is reliable. All results support that surprisal and semantic similarity are opposed in the prediction of the reading time of words although both can make good predictions. Additionally, our `dynamic' approach performs better than the popular cosine method. The findings of this study are therefore of significance with regard to acquiring a better understanding how humans process words in a real-world context and how they make predictions in language cognition and processing.

Capability Model of Manage Human Resource And Service Agreement at PT X

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inez Gavrila Wahyudi ◽  
Johan Setiawan ◽  
Wella Wella
Keyword(s):  
Information System ◽  
Human Resources ◽  
Human Resource ◽  
Visionary Leadership ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Service Agreement ◽  
And Control ◽  
Work Management

This research was made with purpose to measure the capability of human resource and work management in PT. X using COBIT 5.0. In the assessment process, researcher applied 1 domain (align, plan, and organize) with 2 processed, Manage Human Resource APO 07) and Manage Service Agreement (APO 09). Data collection was obtained from the distribution of questionnaires to IT division (there were 127 items of the question and 10 respondents). The result of this research figured out that APO 07 stopped in level 2 with score 82.50 in level 3 and APO 09 ended in level 3 with score 84.10 in level 4. In conclusion, there were still few problems that made human resources in PT X unable to reach level 5. PT.X ought to do audit regularly in deep and holistically.   Keywords— Align Plan and Organize, Capabilities Level, COBIT 5.0, Manage Human Resources, Manage Service Agreement REFERENCES [1] Sumarsono, Sonny. 2003. Ekonomi Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Jakarta: LPFE-UI. [2] Gondodiyoto, Sanyoto. 2003. Audit Sistem Informasi (Pendekatan COBIT). Bekasi : Mitra Wacana Media. [3] ISACA. 2013. COBIT 5 A Business Framework for the Governance and Management of Enterprise IT. USA : Enterprise GRC Solution Inc. [4] ISACA 2013. COBIT 5 for Information Security. USA : Enterprise GRC Solution Inc. [5] Arbie, E. 2000. Pengantar Sistem Informasi Manajemen, Edisi ke-7. Jakarta : Bina Alumni Indonesia. [6] Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Metodelogi Penelitian. Yogyakarta : Bina Aksara. [7] Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2010. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta : Rineka Cipta. [8] Davis, Chris, Mike Schiller, & Kevin Wheeler. 2011. IT Auditing Using Controls to Protect Information Assets, 2nd Edition. English : Mc Graw Hill. [9] Follet, Mary Parker. 1999. Visionary Leadership and Strategic Management. MCB University Press. Women in Management Review Volume 14. Number 7.Gondodiyoto, Sanyoto. 2003. Audit Sistem Informasi (Pendekatan COBIT). Bekasi : Mitra Wacana Media. [10] Hasibuan,M. 2003. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara. [11] Hasibuan,M. 2003. Organisasi dan Motivasi. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara. [12] Herzberg, Frederick. 2006. Perilaku Organisasi Edisi 10. Yogyakarta: Andy. [13] Jogiyanto. 2005. Sistem Teknologi Informasi. Yogyakarta : Andi Offset. [14] ISACA. 2012. COBIT 5 Enabling Processes. USA : Enterprise GRC Solution Inc. [15] ISACA. 2003. Audit and Control of Information System. USA : Enterprise GRC Solution Inc. [16] Kusumah, Wijaya dan Dwitagama Dedi. 2011. Mengenal Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta : PT Indeks. [17] Littlejohn, Stephen W. 1999. Theories of Human Communication, 6th Ed. Belmont CA : Wadsworth Publishing. [18] Muhyuzir T.D. 2001. Analisa Perancangan Sistem Pengolahan Data, Cetakan kedua. Jakarta : PT Elex Media Komputindo. [19] O’Brien, James A. 2010. Management Information System (11th Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. [20] O’Brien, James A. 2005. Pengantar Sistem Informasi: Perspektif Bisnis dan Manjerial (12th Edition). Jakarta: Salemba.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document