Implicit Acquisition of Grammars With Crossed and Nested Non-Adjacent Dependencies: Investigating the Push-Down Stack Model
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Cognitive Science 36 (6):1078-1101 (2012)
A recent hypothesis in empirical brain research on language is that the fundamental difference between animal and human communication systems is captured by the distinction between finite-state and more complex phrase-structure grammars, such as context-free and context-sensitive grammars. However, the relevance of this distinction for the study of language as a neurobiological system has been questioned and it has been suggested that a more relevant and partly analogous distinction is that between non-adjacent and adjacent dependencies. Online memory resources are central to the processing of non-adjacent dependencies as information has to be maintained across intervening material. One proposal is that an external memory device in the form of a limited push-down stack is used to process non-adjacent dependencies. We tested this hypothesis in an artificial grammar learning paradigm where subjects acquired non-adjacent dependencies implicitly. Generally, we found no qualitative differences between the acquisition of non-adjacent dependencies and adjacent dependencies. This suggests that although the acquisition of non-adjacent dependencies requires more exposure to the acquisition material, it utilizes the same mechanisms used for acquiring adjacent dependencies. We challenge the push-down stack model further by testing its processing predictions for nested and crossed multiple non-adjacent dependencies. The push-down stack model is partly supported by the results, and we suggest that stack-like properties are some among many natural properties characterizing the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms that implement the online memory resources used in language and structured sequence processing
|Keywords||Nested Non‐adjacent dependencies Implicit learning Artificial grammar learning Crossed|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Peter Hagoort (2005). On Broca, Brain, and Binding: A New Framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9 (9):416-423.
Morten H. Christiansen & Nick Chater (1999). Toward a Connectionist Model of Recursion in Human Linguistic Performance. Cognitive Science 23 (2):157-205.
Zoltan Dienes & Christopher Longuet‐Higgins (2004). Can Musical Transformations Be Implicitly Learned? Cognitive Science 28 (4):531-558.
Alan Turing (1936). On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society 42 (1):230-265.
Meinou H. de Vries, Padraic Monaghan, Stefan Knecht & Pienie Zwitserlood (2008). Syntactic Structure and Artificial Grammar Learning: The Learnability of Embedded Hierarchical Structures. Cognition 107 (2):763-774.
Citations of this work BETA
Hsinjen J. Hsu, J. Bruce Tomblin & Morten H. Christiansen (2014). Impaired Statistical Learning of Non-Adjacent Dependencies in Adolescents with Specific Language Impairment. Frontiers in Psychology 5.
Feifei Li, Shan Jiang, Xiuyan Guo, Zhiliang Yang & Zoltan Dienes (2013). The Nature of the Memory Buffer in Implicit Learning: Learning Chinese Tonal Symmetries. Consciousness and Cognition 22 (3):920-930.
Xiaoli Ling, Fengying Li, Fuqiang Qiao, Xiuyan Guo & Zoltan Dienes (2016). Fluency Expresses Implicit Knowledge of Tonal Symmetry. Frontiers in Psychology 7.
Similar books and articles
Evelina Fedorenko, Rebecca Woodbury & Edward Gibson (2013). Direct Evidence of Memory Retrieval as a Source of Difficulty in Non-Local Dependencies in Language. Cognitive Science 37 (2):378-394.
Alastair Butler (2007). Scope Control and Grammatical Dependencies. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 16 (3):241-264.
Alastair Butler (2011). Semantically Restricted Argument Dependencies. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 20 (1):69-114.
Luis López (2007). Locality and the Architecture of Syntactic Dependencies. Palgrave Macmillian.
Christopher D. Manning, An Effective Two-Stage Model for Exploiting Non-Local Dependencies in Named Entity Recognition.
Sara Finley (2012). Testing the Limits of Long-Distance Learning: Learning Beyond a Three-Segment Window. Cognitive Science 36 (4):740-756.
Anastasia Giannakidou (1999). Affective Dependencies. Linguistics and Philosophy 22 (4):367-421.
Cedric Boeckx (2008). Understanding Minimalist Syntax: Lessons From Locality in Long-Distance Dependencies. Blackwell Pub..
Richard E. Pastore & Edward J. Crawley (1998). Locus Equation: Assumption and Dependencies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):278-279.
Robert C. Richardson (1997). Natural and Artificial Complexity. Philosophy of Science 64 (4):267.
Satish P. Deshpande, Jacob Joseph & Rashmi Prasad (2008). Impact of Managerial Dependencies on Ethical Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 83 (3):535 - 542.
Added to index2012-03-28
Total downloads32 ( #148,372 of 1,932,501 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #456,270 of 1,932,501 )
How can I increase my downloads?