Rules and similarity processes in artificial grammar and natural second language learning: What is the “default”?
Graduate studies at Western
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):32-33 (2005)
|Abstract||Are rules processes or similarity processes the default for acquisition of grammatical knowledge during natural second language acquisition? Whereas Pothos argues similarity processes are the default in the many areas he reviews, including artificial grammar learning and first language development, I suggest, citing evidence, that in second language acquisition of grammatical morphology “rules processes” may be the default.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Gary Marcus (2005). Opposites Detract: Why Rules and Similarity Should Not Be Viewed as Opposite Ends of a Continuum. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):28-29.
Todd M. Bailey (2005). Rules Work on One Representation; Similarity Compares Two Representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):16-16.
M. Dolores Jiménez López (2006). A Grammar Systems Approach to Natural Language Grammar. Linguistics and Philosophy 29 (4):419 - 454.
Arthur B. Markman, Sergey Blok, Kyungil Kim, Levi Larkey, Lisa R. Narvaez, C. Hunt Stilwell & Eric Taylor (2005). Digging Beneath Rules and Similarity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):29-30.
Bert Timmermans, Rules Versus Statistics in Biconditional Grammar Learning: A Simulation Based on Shanks Et Al. (1997).
Emmanuel M. Pothos (2005). The Rules Versus Similarity Distinction. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):1-14.
Rolf Reber (2005). Rule Versus Similarity: Different in Processing Mode, Not in Representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):31-32.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #114,517 of 739,396 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,396 )
How can I increase my downloads?