David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Machine learning and statistical methods have yielded impressive results in a wide variety of natural language processing tasks. These advances have generally been regarded as engineering achievements. In fact it is possible to argue that the success of machine learning methods is signiﬁcant for our understanding of the cognitive basis of language acquisition and processing. Recent work in unsupervised grammar induction is particularly relevant to this issue. It suggests that knowledge of language can be achieved through general learning procedures, and that a richly articulated language faculty is not required to explain its acquisition
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Tecle Ghebremuse, Bilingual Second Language Learning Strategies in Eritrea with Reference to Reading, Writing and Vocabulary.
Anat Ninio (2006). Language and the Learning Curve: A New Theory of Syntactic Development. OUP Oxford.
Heather Bortfeld (2004). Which Came First: Infants Learning Language or Motherese? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (4):505-506.
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.
Nick Chater & Morten H. Christiansen (2010). Language Acquisition Meets Language Evolution. Cognitive Science 34 (7):1131-1157.
Christopher D. Viger (2005). Learning to Think: A Response to the Language of Thought Argument for Innateness. Mind and Language 20 (3):313-25.
Added to index2010-07-26
Total downloads4 ( #195,709 of 1,008,786 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,700 of 1,008,786 )
How can I increase my downloads?