By Steven Pinker, Timothy E. Moore, Irving Biederman, Stephen P. Schwartz, Anne Erreich, Judith Winzemer Mayer & Virginia Valian
Read or Download Cognition, Vol. 7, No. 3 PDF
Best nonfiction_2 books
The document attracts on inputs from discussions with the woking workforce participants from the govt in addition to with representatives of the personal zone.
- The framing of decision situations : automatic goal selection and rational goal pursuit
- Remembering the kana: the hiragana / the katakana
- Ishmael on the Border: Rabbinic Portrayals of the First Arab (S U N Y Series in Judaica)
- Handbook of Veterinary Obstetrics 2nd Edition
- Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect
Extra resources for Cognition, Vol. 7, No. 3
Anderson calls this heuristic (and the putative property of natural languages that it exploits) Semantics-Induced Equivalence of Syntax. He asserts that the heuristic exploits the tendency of natural languages always to use the same syntactic construction to express a particular semantic relation within a given higher-order constituent. Whether or not this claim is true of English will be discussed in Section VII. It is interesting to note that the Semantics-Induced Equivalence of Syntax heuristic is neither more nor less conservative, on the whole, than Distributional Analysis.
Implications for Developmental Toward a Theory of Language 269 Psycholinguistics Learning Among the models of language learning that 1 have considered, two seem worthy upon examination to serve as prototypes for a theory of human language acquisition. Anderson’s LAS program roughly meets the Cognitive, Input, and Time Conditions, while faring less well with the Learnability and Equipotentiality Conditions. Hamburger, Wexler, and Culicover’s transformational model meets the Learnability and. Equipotentiality Conditions (clearly), and the Input Condition (perhaps), while faring less well with the Cognitive and Time Conditions.
The proof is long and complex and will not be outlined here. , propose function to guarantee learnability. This, of course, is the crux of the Chomskian claim that learnability considerations favor a strongly nativist theory of language acquisition. Proving Icarnabilit) As I have mentioned in Section IV, restricting the learner’s hypothesis space only yields learnability if the intersection between the grammars in the hypothesis space and the grammars consistent with the sample becomes smaller and smaller as learning proceeds (see Figure 2).