Abstract not found

Two striking contrasts currently exist in the sentence processing literature. First, whereas adult readers rely heavily on lexical information in the generation of syntactic alternatives, adult listeners in world-situated eye-gaze studies appear to allow referential evidence to override strong countervailing lexical biases (Tanenhaus, Spivey-Knowlton, Eberhard, & Sedivy, 1995). Second, in contrast to adults, children in similar listening studies fail to use this referential information and appear to rely exclusively on verb biases or perhaps syntactically based parsing principles (Trueswell, Sekerina, Hill, & Logrip, 1999). We explore these contrasts by fully crossing verb bias and referential manipulations in a study using the eye-gaze listening technique with adults (Experiment 1) and Wve-year-olds (Experiment 2). Results indicate that adults combine lexical and referential information to determine syntactic choice. Children rely A portion of this work was presented in proceedings to the 23rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. The ideas in this paper owe much to our conversations with Lila Gleitman and to the comments of the many audiences who heard preliminary reports of this research. We thank Kirsten Thorpe for her assistance with testing, coding, and participant recruitment and Sylvia Yuan for her assistance in data analysis. We also gratefully acknowledge Tracy Dardick who carried out the norming studies and Jared Novick and David January who assisted in comparisons between head-mounted eye-tracking and our procedure. This work was supported by NIH Grant 1-R01-HD37507 to the second author and a National Science Foundation Science and Technology grant to the Institute for Research in Cognitive Science at the University of Pennsylvania (NSF-STC Coo...

It is widely assumed that human learning and the structure of human languages are intimately related. This relationship is frequently suggested to be rooted in a language-specific biological endowment, which encodes universal, but arbitrary, principles of language structure (a universal grammar or UG). How might such a UG have evolved? We argue that UG could not have arisen either by biological adaptation or non-adaptationist genetic processes. The resulting puzzle concerning the origin of UG we call the logical problem of language evolution. Because the processes of language change are much more rapid than processes of genetic change, language constitutes a “moving target ” both over time and across different human populations, and hence cannot provide a stable environment to which UG genes could have adapted. We conclude that a biologically determined UG is not evolutionarily viable. Instead, the original motivation for UG—the mesh between learners and languages—arises because language has been shaped to fit the human brain, rather than vice versa. Following Darwin, we view language itself as a complex and interdependent “organism, ” which evolves under selectional pressures from human learning and processing mechanisms. That is, languages are themselves undergoing severe selectional pressure from each generation of language users and learners. This suggests that apparently arbitrary aspects of linguistic structure may result from general learning and processing biases, independent of language. We illustrate how this framework can integrate evidence from different literatures and methodologies to explain core linguistic phenomena, including binding constraints, word order universals, and diachronic language change. 1.

We develop an approach to automatically identify the most probable multi-word constructions used in children’s utterances, given syntactically annotated utterances from the Brown corpus of CHILDES. The found constructions cover many interesting linguistic phenomena from the language acquisition literature, and show a progression from very concrete towards abstract constructions. We show quantitatively that for all children of the Brown corpus grammatical abstraction, defined as the relative number of variable slots in the productive units of their grammar, increases globally with age.

The logical problem of language is grounded on arguments from poverty of positive evidence and arguments from poverty of negative evidence. Careful analysis of child language corpora shows that, if one assumes that children learn through item-based constructions, there is an abundance of positive evidence. Arguments regarding the poverty of negative evidence can also be addressed by the mechanism of conservative item-based learning. When conservativism is abandoned, children can rely on competition, cue construction,

This position paper proposes that the study of embodied cognitive agents, such as humanoid robots, can advance our understanding of the cognitive development of complex sensorimotor, linguistic and social learning skills. This in turn will benefit the design of cognitive robots capable of learning to handle and manipulate objects and tools autonomously, to cooperate and communicate with other robots and humans, and to adapt their abilities to changing internal, environmental, and social conditions. Four key areas of research challenges are discussed, specifically for the issues related to the understanding of: (i) how agents learn and represent compositional actions; (ii) how agents learn and represent compositional lexicons; (iii) the dynamics of social interaction and learning; and (iv) how compositional action and language representations are integrated to bootstrap the cognitive system. The review of specific issues and progress in these areas is then translated into a practical roadmap based on a series of milestones. These milestones provide a possible set of cognitive robotics goals and test-scenarios, thus acting as a research roadmap for future work on cognitive developmental robotics.

The construction grammar framework provides a rich formalism for the characterization of development in language acquisition, in part because it allows for a graceful transition from idiom-like holophrases, to fully abstract argument constructions. From the perspective of learning complexity, this means that rather than mastering the grammar used by an adult to generate or understand an utterance, the child can exploit more direct correspondences between fixed utterances and their meanings in the form of holophrases, and then progressively apply procedures for generalization in order to develop an abstract argument construction repertoire. The current chapter presents a neuro-computational model that addresses aspects of the construction grammar formalism, and uses this model to explain a possible trajectory from idiom-like holophrases to progressively more abstract argument constructions. The goal of the current research is thus to test a theory of form to meaning mapping that takes substantial input from the proposals of usage based construction grammar (Goldberg 1995, 1998; Croft 2001; Clark 2003, Tomasello 1999, 2003) analogical mapping from sentence to meaning (Fisher 1996), and cue coalitions that specify or identify the mappings (Bates et al. 1982). In particular, the model will provide a functional framework for analysis of the

l), and, eventually, the neurobiological, reality of the theoretical constructs. Many examples of this process can be found in the study of human vision, where, as in language, direct observation of the underlying mechanisms is difficult; for instance, the concept of multiple parallel spatial frequency channels, introduced in the late 1960s, was completely vindicated by purely behavioral means over the following decade; see, e.g., [2]. In linguistics, the nature of the requisite evidence is well described by Townsend and Bever: "What do we test today if we want to explore the behavioral implications of syntax? . . . the psychological basis for the two primary and ever-present operations, merge and move." [3], p.82. Unfortunately, to our knowledge, no experimental evidence has been offered to date that suggests that Merge and Move are real (in the same 1 sense as the spatial frequency channels in human vision are). Generative linguists typically respond to calls for evidence for the r

Abstract not found

Before children can ride a bicycle or tie their shoes, they have learned a great deal about how words are combined to form complex sentences. This achievement is especially impressive because children acquire most of this syntactic knowledge with little or no direct instruction. Nevertheless, mastering natural language syntax may be among the most difficult learning tasks