Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cognitive Science Series. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... The focus here is on the learnability results; this paper is part of a larger research project intended to show the feasibility of a particular implementation within the type logical framework of the psycholinguistic hypothesis that human languages can be learned via semantic bootstrapping [14]. 2 Type logical grammar Definition 2.1 A type logical grammar can be defined as a triple G = V G , I G , RG ) such that: i) VG , the vocabulary of G, is a non empty finite set; ii) I G , the lexicon of G, is a function which to each v VG assigns a finite set of types; iii) RG , the ....

....= # I G (sings) # s I G (loves) # s) # I G (John) # I G (a) # # I G(man) # I G (sees) # s) # It should be noted that this implementation of semantic bootstrapping uses much less information than has frequently been considered in such efforts. The basic requirements of Pinker s [14] proposal for a bootstrapping procedure include the Canonical Structure Realization, through which the syntactic realization of known semantic categories is provided as a part of innate Universal Grammar. This requires the would be semantic bootstrapper to already know the system of semantic ....

Pinker, S., "Language Learnability and Language Development," Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984.

....now, and the child can observe the context and guess what the speaker might have meant. In fact, many models of language acquisition assume that the input the child receives consists not only of the sentence, but also of a representation of the meaning of the sentence ( Wexler and Culicover 1980] [Pinker 1984], Berwick 1985] Briscoe 1999] among others) How much of the context surrounding the hearing of a sentence is used by children is an open question. Besides, as Landau and Gleitman [1985] observe, blind children have a severely limited access to non linguistic aspects of the world, but they ....

Pinker, S. Language Learnability and Language Development. Harvard University Press, 1984.

....it could easily be forgotten. The value set for the forgetting threshold determines the minimum frequency of required repetition. 6) Minimum Understanding Threshold: One might want to assume that the first utterances of human languages were guaranteed some minimum level of understanding [1] [20]. An optimist might even claim that the language constructed from the very first utterances benefitted from perfect understanding of those utterances. Our own view is extremely negative on this point. However, the system nonetheless allows this assumption to be paramaterized. The effects are ....

Steven Pinker, Language Learnability and Language Development, Harvard University Press, 1996.

....represents a first step towards semantically grounded syntax acquisition. This method of linking early lexical learning to syntax acquisition is closely related to the semantic bootstrapping hypothesis which posits that language learners use seman tic categories to seed syntactic categories [35], 36] Accord ing to this theory, perceptually accessible categories such as objects and actions seed the syntactic classes of nouns and verbs. Once these seed categories have been established, input utterances are used to deduce phrase structure in combination with constraints from other innate ....

S. Pinker, Language learnability and language development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984.

....language structures in which various words appear. If there is a correlation between meanings and a range of syntactic structures, the meaning (or some components of the meaning) of an unknown word can be predicted when it appears in a familiar structure. Semantic bootstrapping (Grimshaw, 1981; Pinker, 1984) is in some ways a mirror image of the syntactic bootstrapping proposal, where syntax is acquired with help from semantics. This is the hypothesis that children exploit mappings or linking rules from cognition to syntax to acquire grammatical categories. These linking rules are innately specified ....

....seems to have developed an ability to use the syntactic context to predict a component of the meaning of a novel word. Semantic Bootstrapping Semantic bootstrapping can be viewed as a proposal complementary to the semantic bootstrapping hypothesis. Originally developed by Grimshaw (1981) and Pinker (1984), in this procedure children first learn meanings of words by observing their real world contingencies. Then innate linking or mapping rules are invoked which specify the structures that the word might be used in. Later on, the term semantic bootstrapping has also been used for the idea that the ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

....two unresolved issues in this debate, because they will be addressed here. The first issue is feedback. A well known fact in language acquisition is that children do not rely on feedback on their own production of language (at least with respect to syntax) simply because they do not receive any (Pinker, 1984). Although this problem is addressed by some modelers (e.g. Plunkett Juola, 1999) its resolution is not entirely satisfactory: the assumption is that learning takes place while children perceive past tenses, and not while they actually produce past tenses. This idea is at odds with the picture ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development.

....represents a first step towards semantically grounded syntax acquisition. This method of linking early lexical learning to syntax acquisition is closely related to the semantic bootstrapping hypothesis which posits that language learners use semantic categories to seed syntactic categories [12, 7]. According to this theory, perceptually accessible categories such Situation Aware Spoken Language Processing: Roy as objects and actions seed the syntactic classes of nouns and verbs. Once these seed categories have been established, input utterances are used to deduce phrase structure in ....

S. Pinker. Language learnability and language development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984.

....a child encounters linguistic data in the context of situations that the child can, to some degree, perceive and conceptualize. The situational contexts in which linguistic utterances are encountered are widely thought to provide powerful semantic constraints on the learning process (see Pinker, 1984). Indeed, there is significant evidence that humans cannot learn even moderately simple context free languages in the absence of accompanying semantic information (cf. Moeser and Bregman, 1973) For these reasons, researchers in language acquisition have often assumed that the learning agent ....

....language acquisition have often assumed that the learning agent (whether human or artificial) frequently manages to guess the speaker s intended meaning, thereby ensuring that some semantic information is available. Examples of systems which embody this assumption can be found in Anderson (1977) Pinker (1984), and St. John and McClelland (1990) Now, although perceived semantic information certainly assists the learning process, acquisition of the active passive voice distinction poses an interesting challenge. For, the distinction itself is not to be found in the external situations which a child ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development.

.... group verbs by semantic structure (Levin and Rappaport Hovav, 1995) In contrast to semantic content the idiosyncratic aspect of verb meaning semantic structure determines syntactic patterning within and across languages (Dorr and Oard, 1998; Dorr and Katsova, 1998; Grimshaw, 1993; Pinker, 1984; Pinker, 1989) Most importantly for our system, the thematic grid or set of grids assigned to a verb class maps directly into interlingual LCS structures (Dorr et al. 1995) Both parsing and semantic analysis key off the thematic structure of the verb, covering as much of the source language ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

....view, there only needs to be one basic epigenetic mechanism for the acquisition of language which is semantic in nature. This mechanism is founded in the capacity of the brain to categorize in an expanding time window. This suggestion relates to the hypothesis of semantic bootstrapping proposed by [Pinker 1984]. The basic distinction between syntax and semantics, which has been the foundation of modern linguistics, can be dropped. Syntax is acquired by interacting in a linguistic environment: it arises out of semantics. In [Verschure, 1994] a further generalization of the principles expressed in DAC ....

Pinker S.: Language Learnability and Language Development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.

.... group verbs by semantic structure (Levin and Rappaport Hovav, 1995) In contrast to semantic content the idiosyncratic aspect of verb meaning semantic structure determines syntactic patterning within and across languages (Dorr and Oard, 1998; Dorr and Katsova, 1998; Grimshaw, 1993; Pinker, 1984; Pinker, 1989) Most importantly for our system, the thematic grid or set of grids assigned to a verb class maps directly into interlingual LCS structures (Dorr et al. 1995) In our system, both parsing and semantic analysis key off the thematic structure of the verb, covering as much of the ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

....basic fact that children acquire their language (Chomsky, 1965; Wexler Culicover, 1980) while psychologists and psycholinguists are concerned, in detail, with how an acquisition mechanism substantiates and predicts empirically testable phenomena of child language acquisition. MacWhinney, 1987; Pinker, 1984). My goals are much more limited than either the best algorithm or the most precise psychological model; in fact I scrupulously avoid any strong claims of algorithmic efficiency, or of neural or psychological plausibility for this initial work. I take as a central research question for ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

.... group verbs by semantic structure [ Levin and Hovav, 1995 ] In contrast to semantic content, a term used to label idiosyncratic aspects of verb meaning, semantic structure is important in determining syntactic patterning within and across languages [ Dorr and Oard, 1998, Grimshaw, 1993, Pinker, 1984, Pinker, 1989 ] 3 Verb Selection The assignment of thematic grids is one step in the creation of a lexicon from a large (600k entries) machine readable Chinese English dictionary. The dictionary was compiled by hand, by the ChineseEnglish Translation Assistance (CETA) group from some 250 ....

Steven Pinker. Language Learnability and Language Development. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984.

....acquisition without knowing the meanings of any words. Adults can often determine the meaning of a single new word from the context of an utterance composed of familiar words. Children are not so lucky. The utterances that they hear must sound to them like Foo bar baz quux. Children must bootstrap (Pinker, 1984; Gleitman, 1990) their lexical knowledge from an empty mental lexicon. Third, children hear utterances in a context where many things could have been said. They must figure out which of these things actually was said. For example, when hearing the utterance Daddy lifted the ball, the child must ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

.... of a noun phrase and the conceptualized unity of the properties it encodes (such as shape, size, color) The general idea that a combination of semantic grounding and distributional induction leads to syntactic structure is also consistent with theories of language acquisition and development [20]. Clearly the localist, flat feature encoding used here, although initially convenient and efficient for our purposes, does not have enough structure to explore any of those possibly crucial relationships between syntax and semantics. Even in our simple domain this lack became evident: there is ....

Steven Pinker. Language Learnability and Language Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1984.

.... Bootstrapping and Ergativity Laura Siegel Department of Linguistics University of Pennsylvania siegel ling.upenn.edu LINGUISTIC SOCIETY OF AMERICA 2000 MEETING, CHICAGO January 8, 2000 1 Overview of Issues ffl In this paper, I investigate whether semantic bootstrapping (e.g. Pinker 1984) can account for the acquisition of case marking inflection in ergative and split ergative languages. This question has been debated in the literature with respect to ergative languages, with Pinker (1984, etc. arguing that it can and Pye (1990) arguing that it cannot. ffl I argue that ....

....Overview of Issues ffl In this paper, I investigate whether semantic bootstrapping (e.g. Pinker 1984) can account for the acquisition of case marking inflection in ergative and split ergative languages. This question has been debated in the literature with respect to ergative languages, with Pinker (1984, etc. arguing that it can and Pye (1990) arguing that it cannot. ffl I argue that semantic bootstrapping can account for the acquisition of case inflection in ergative languages. ffl However, I argue that semantic bootstrapping cannot be extended to the acquisition of case marking in split ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Pinker, S. (1984) Language Learnability and Language Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

....listener acquire the particular form of sound system, morphology, grammar, etc. appropriate to the language of his her social community The first of these is the classical problem of categorical perception (Harnad 1987) and the second is that of language acquisition (Wexler and Culicover 1980; Pinker 1984). Both have been intensively studied, and have given rise to intense debate and controversy, as befits their key status in the field. They are generally held to be rather different problems and are traditionally considered separately. Plainly, however, each makes little or no sense by itself. It ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

....this line of interest that we seek to understand the acquisition of word meanings in this study. As a starting point for our approach, we would like to consider two major hypotheses on how children start the process of lexical acquisition: the semantic bootstrapping hypothesis (Grimshaw, 1981; Pinker, 1984, 1987) and the syntactic bootstrapping hypothesis (Landau Gleitman, 1985; Gleitman, 1990) The semantic bootstrapping hypothesis assumes that This project was supported by a Faculty Research Grant from the School of Arts and Sciences, University of Richmond. We would like to thank Ashley ....

Pinker, S. 1984. Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

....agreement indicating some intrinsic feature of a word (suchasnumber or tense) case is an audible form of agreement indicating an extrinsic feature of a word: its function in the sentence. In effect, this is another application of the notion of bootstrapping , proposed by [ Macnamara 1982 ] and [ Pinker 1984 ] Thechild starts out with a simplistic but natural notion of case that it is another agreement feature of a word and uses this to lift himself by the bootstraps into the more complex adult notion of case. The hypothesis that case is first acquired as a type of agreement not only accounts ....

Stephen Pinker. Language Learnability and Language Development. Harvard UniversityPress,Cambridge, Mass., 1984.

....features (such as [ N V] in generative syntax [4] In our model, syntactic features are extracted from distribution of words and phrases, and syntactic rules operate on the set of features. Some researchers suggest that semantic information provides the primary cue for the acquisition of syntax [15]. We will not try to argue for or against such a view in this paper. 2. Model To comprehend a sentence, one would have to analyze the input according to syntactic rules, at the same time retrieving semantic memory, resulting in either confirmation or update of the current semantic memory ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Harvard University press, Cambridge, MA.

....the perspective of a language learner. From this perspective it is hard to see how language can be learnable, since language is said to be arbitrary and initially over generalised (cf. Baker, 1979; Bohannon Stanowich, 1988; Demeteras, Post, Snow, 1986; Elman, 1993; Mazurkewich White, 1984; Pinker, 1984; Pinker, 1989; inter al. Over generalisation in language acquisition is often paired with non corrective behaviour when faced with negative evidence. To resolve this paradox it is necessary to shift perspective towards the perspective of the language. In an evolutionary scenario from the ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

....categories. Specifically, in the presence of phrase structure knowledge the learners can work back and forth between their representations of the world and their implicit knowledge of how these are linked to information selectional and syntactic that is displayed across the input sentence (Pinker, 1984; Landau and Gleitman, 1985) In the present experiment, we were able to model adjective learning in our young subjects by allowing them to leverage their hard won knowledge of the noun phrase in the service of this task. Acknowledgements We would like to thank all the parents and children who ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development.

.... Conceptual Structures (LCSs) Using the model of aspect in Olsen (1994; 1997) monotonic aspectual composition we have identified 71 aspectually basic subclasses that are associated with one or more of 68 aspectually non basic classes via some lexical ( type shifting ) rule (Bresnan, 1982; Pinker, 1984; Levin and Rappaport Hovav, 1995) This allows us to refine the IL and address certain computational and theoretical issues at the same time. 1) From a linguistic viewpoint, the expected benefits include a refinement of the aspectual model in (Olsen, 1994; Olsen, 1997) which provides necessary ....

Pinker, Steven. 1984. Language Learnability and Language Development. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

....1996) broadening a field in which morphological and syntactic rules had been the dominant focus. With the new methods and interests have come new theoretical approaches, including the class of theories known as bootstrapping hypotheses (Gleitman, 1990; Gleitman Wanner, 1982; Grimshaw, 1981; Pinker, 1984, 1987) Linguistic theory has also seen great changes, including a shift from rule based theories, in which the number of possible language types was taken to be unbounded, to constraint based theories, in which the number of possible language types is taken to be finite and cross linguistic ....

....by their use of strategy s. Strategies are often cast in terms of information sources. For instance, the semantic bootstrapping hypothesis asserts that children exploit their knowledge of the meanings of words as one source of information for inferring the syntactic categories of those words (Pinker, 1984, 1989) For example, they use the knowledge that certain words refer to concrete objects to infer that those words belong to the syntactic category noun (Grimshaw, 1981) Hypotheses of the form (1) attempt to answer a how question about task t namely, how do children perform t. Such hypotheses ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

....element X in a dependent position will automatically assume that its maximal projection X max can also appear there. Thus, a productive pattern like S NP VP could be acquired solely on the basis of data in the form N V . For some speculations along these lines, see Grimshaw (1981) and Pinker (1984). 2.5. Centrality. The usual definition of a grammar demands that a single designated symbol be admissible as the start symbol in a derivation. Maximality covers constituents introduced in right hand sides of rules, and thus says nothing about the start symbol. Centrality requires that the start ....

Pinker, Steven. 1984. Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

....in this paper is how an infant could learn the form n t classes of his or her language. In particular, we focus on how the infant could lear he major form class categories Noun and Verb. A number of solutions to this problem have been proposed in the literature (see t f Maratsos Chalkley, 1980, Pinker, 1984, 1987, for discussion) One proposal is tha orm classes are part of the innate knowledge of the learner (Chomsky, 1965; McNeill, m 1966) However, while learners might well know the abstract universal properties of ajor form classes (Chomsky, 1986; Jackendoff, 1977) they cannot innately know a s ....

....form classes (Chomsky, 1986; Jackendoff, 1977) they cannot innately know a s which particular words of their input language fall into each of these classes, and so ubstantial learning problem remains to be explained. Other proposals hypothesize that i form classes may be acquired from semantic (Pinker, 1984) or prosodic (Kelly, 1992) nformation which correlates with form class. However, the pertinent semantic or pro a sodic information may not always be available to the learner, and, even when avail ble, correlates imperfectly with form class. These proposals therefore also run into f t ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, P Mass.: Harvard.

.... early grammars, and their maturation is regulated by a biological schedule (Radford 1990; Guilfoyle Noonan 1988; Platzack 1990) The Strong Continuity Hypothesis (SCH) the full range of functional categories is universally present from the onset of acquisition (Hyams 1986; 1994; Pierce 1992; Pinker 1984). The Weak Continuity Hypothesis (WCH) although functional categories are in principle available throughout acquisition, their instantiation is not independently motivated, but is a function of the properties of the lexical items the children have acquired (Clahsen 1991; Clahsen, Eisenbeiss ....

Pinker, S. 1984. Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

....produced by children (e.g. Schlesinger 1982, 1988) It is argued here that the problem with these is that, while they appear suitable with respect to the sample of language in question, they are problematic for a theory of acquisition. The case against semantic grammars has been made by Pinker (1984). He argues that they are not suitable for inclusion in a continuous theory of acquisition, since the adult, syntactic grammar cannot be acquired by building upon child grammars characterized in terms of semantic categories. Semantic grammars of early child language are, thus, ruled out by the ....

....alternative to syntactic grammars to have been suggested for early child language. However, the problem with these, as outlined in the previous chapter, is that they fail to meet the constraint of learnability, since they do not provide a suitable basis for the acquisition of the target grammar (Pinker 1984). Ninio (1988) presents an analysis of child language, on the basis of which he argues that the most appropriate characterization of child grammars is lexical. Lexical categories are similar to syntactic categories, except that a number of lexical categories are subsumed by a single syntactic ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Pinker, S. (1984), Language Learnability and Language Development, London: Harvard University Press.

.... Fisher, Gleitman, and Gleitman, 1991; Levin and Rappaport Hovav, to appear; Pinker, 1989) 7 (v) Children assume that each meanings and strings, grammatical morphemes in this case, map one to one, an assumption also known as the Uniqueness postulate (Wexler and Culicover, 1980; Clark, 1987; Pinker, 1984), Less is More hypothesis (Newport, 1984; Newport, 1988; Newport, 1990; Carey and Gelman, 1991) Goldowsky and Newport, 1992) cf. Elman, 1993) Specifically, since tense and aspect are confounded, we assume that the one meaning is aspect, demonstrably closer to the verb than tense (see ....

Pinker, Steven. 1984. Language Learnability and Language Development. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

....acquisition, we argue that an account is required of how phrase structure may be acquired. Our goal is to model the acquisition of a phrase structure grammar, without assuming innate knowledge of phrase structure such as X Bar Theory. Other models have either relied on this assumption (e.g. Pinker 1984; Berwick 1985) or other ad hoc assumptions (e.g. Anderson 1977) or demonstrated the acquisition of only finite state grammars (e.g. Hill 1983; Satake 1990) The target grammar of natural language acquisition must incorporate phrase structure rules as well as terminal categories (Chomsky 1957, ....

....of child language development. Computational Models of Child Language Acquisition Assumptions and Objectives A diverse range of computational models have been developed which address the issue of children s acquisition of syntax (e.g. Anderson 1977; Langley 1982; Anderson 1983; Hill 1983; Pinker 1984; Berwick 1985; Selfridge 1986; MacWhinney Anderson 1986, MacWhinney 1987; Satake 1990) These share a number of simplifying assumptions which are outlined below. Acquiring a grammar is viewed as formulating a set of rules characterizing the mapping which exists between phonological and ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. London: Harvard University Press.

....that CS has representations for physical objects corresponding to nouns, for concrete actions corresponding to verbs, for predication and the subject predicate relation, and for operator variable binding structures. I hypothesize that the connection with CS is sufficient to bootstrap the syntax (Pinker 1984; Lebeaux 1988; Gleitman 1990) once the sentential core is up and running, there can be significant divergences between CS and syntax. 4 3.2. Constraints On this approach constraints must come from one of two sources: either they correspond to regions of Syntactic Space that are relatively ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

....omit them. Gerken (1987) cites this observation in her criticism of the telegraphic perception hypothesis , the idea that children fail to produce functional morphemes because they fail to perceive them. The idea of a production bottleneck as responsible for functional morpheme omission (e.g. Pinker 1984) has avoided some of the criticisms of the telegraphic perception hypothesis, but, crucially, it also fails to explain why functional morphemes should be produced before the onset of their omission. Overgeneralization is, similarly, a phenomenon which may follow a period of correct use of regular ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. London: Harvard University Press.

.... with any syntactic attributes that it possesses, e.g. number, tense, mood, definiteness) The assumption of paired phonological and semantic representations as input to the acquisition mechanism is common among language acquisition researchers (Anderson, 1974) Wexler, 1980) Grimshaw, 1981) (Pinker, 1984), Berwick, 1985) It has considerable empirical support as well. For example, it has been shown (Slobin, 1975) that children are exposed to very few sentences which they cannot decipher through contextual clues. The morphological analysis mechanism logically stands at the center of the entire ....

Pinker, Stephen. Language Learnability and Language Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1984.

....[one centroid split] raise fi delete extra twins c Figure 3.2: Clustering algorithm 3.4 Clustering Examples The properties that the child can detect in the input such as the serial positions and adjacency and co occurrence relations among words are in general linguistically irrelevant. (Pinker, 1984, pg. 50) In this section, we describe experiments with clustering words using the procedure described in the previous section. As explained there, our clustering procedure yields for each value of fi a set C fi of clusters minimizing the free energy F , with the model estimate for the conditional ....

Pinker, Steven. 1984. Language Learnability and Language Development. Number 7 in Cognitive science series. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

....subcategorization frames and meanings plays an important role in lexical acquisition. Pinker and colleagues have proposed that children typically learn the meaning of a word first, then exploit the regular correspondence between meaning and subcategorization to infer its subcategorization frames (Pinker, 1984; Pinker, 1989) Conversely, Gleitman and colleagues have proposed that children often learn the subcategorization frame first, then exploit the correspondence to restrict their hypotheses about its possible meanings (Landau and Gleitman, 1985; Gleitman, 1990) These two proposals are known as the ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

....context free phrase structure grammar is a collection of rules such as those described here, which describes the structure and allowable forms of some aspect of a language. Some theorists have postulated that people do in fact have mental structures corresponding directly to phrase structure rules (Pinker, 1984), but regardless of whether or not this is so, children 8 must learn structures which have an equivalent function, so it is unimportant for the purposes here just what form language knowledge takes in the brain. Rules take the forms shown in (11) The symbol, A, on the left hand side of each ....

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

No context found.

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cognitive Science Series. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

No context found.

Pinker, S. (1984) Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

No context found.

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development, Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.

No context found.

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Prince, E. F. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 223--256). New York: Academic Press.

No context found.

Pinker, S. 1984. Language Learnability and Language Development, Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.

No context found.

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA. Radford, A. (1990). Syntactic theory and the acquisition of English syntax. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

No context found.

S. Pinker. Language Learnability and Language Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984.

No context found.

S. Pinker. Language Learnability and Language Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA, 1984.

No context found.

Pinker, S., \Language Learnability and Language Development," Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984.

No context found.

Pinker, S., Language learnability and language development. 1984, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

No context found.

Pinker S. 1984. Language Learnability and Language Development, MIT Press.

No context found.

Cognition 7: 217-283. Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

No context found.

Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

No context found.

Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

First 50 documents  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC