How Many Mechanisms Are Needed to Analyze Speech? A Connectionist Simulation of Structural Rule Learning in Artificial Language Acquisition
Graduate studies at Western
Cognitive Science 35 (7):1243-1281 (2011)
|Abstract||Some empirical evidence in the artificial language acquisition literature has been taken to suggest that statistical learning mechanisms are insufficient for extracting structural information from an artificial language. According to the more than one mechanism (MOM) hypothesis, at least two mechanisms are required in order to acquire language from speech: (a) a statistical mechanism for speech segmentation; and (b) an additional rule-following mechanism in order to induce grammatical regularities. In this article, we present a set of neural network studies demonstrating that a single statistical mechanism can mimic the apparent discovery of structural regularities, beyond the segmentation of speech. We argue that our results undermine one argument for the MOM hypothesis|
|Keywords||Language acquisition Speech processing Artificial grammar learning More than one mechanism hypothesis Connectionism Statistical learning|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Christina Behme & H. S. (2008). Language Learning in Infancy: Does the Empirical Evidence Support a Domain Specific Language Acquisition Device? Philosophical Psychology 21 (5):641 – 671.
Heather Bortfeld (2004). Which Came First: Infants Learning Language or Motherese? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (4):505-506.
Bert Timmermans, Rules Versus Statistics in Biconditional Grammar Learning: A Simulation Based on Shanks Et Al. (1997).
Peter Robinson (2005). Rules and Similarity Processes in Artificial Grammar and Natural Second Language Learning: What is the “Default”? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):32-33.
Katherine Yoshida, Mijke Rhemtulla & Athena Vouloumanos (2012). Exclusion Constraints Facilitate Statistical Word Learning. Cognitive Science 36 (5):933-947.
Tao Gong (2011). Simulating the Coevolution of Compositionality and Word Order Regularity. Interaction Studies 12 (1):63-106.
Patricia M. Greenfield (2001). Author's Response. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (1):153-154.
Hjalmar K. Turesson & Asif A. Ghazanfar (2012). Statistical Learning of Social Signals and its Implications for the Social Brain Hypothesis. Interaction Studies 12 (3):397-417.
Axel Cleeremans & L. JimC)nez (1998). Implicit Sequence Learning: The Truth is in the Details. In Michael A. Stadler & Peter A. Frensch (eds.), Handbook of Implicit Learning. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Alain Morin (2005). Possible Links Between Self-Awareness and Inner Speech: Theoretical Background, Underlying Mechanisms, and Empirical Evidence. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12 (4-5):115-134.
Philip J. Nickel (2013). Artificial Speech and Its Authors. Minds and Machines 23 (4):489-502.
Casey O'Callaghan (forthcoming). Speech Perception. In Mohan Matthen (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Perception. Oxford.
Alexander Clark & Shalom Lappin (2013). Complexity in Language Acquisition. Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (1):89-110.
Added to index2011-08-10
Total downloads18 ( #74,582 of 739,348 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #26,322 of 739,348 )
How can I increase my downloads?