N. Chomsky, Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht, 1981.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....linguistic parameters, chaos. T HIS paper puts together two sets of ideas that have not until now kept close company. One set of ideas is the Chomskyan metatheory of Universal Grammar (UG) and language acquisition, as developed in numerous publications over the past forty years, from [1] through [2] to [3] The other set of ideas is the theory of complexity, and specifically the theory of random Boolean nets, as developed by [4] 5] The advantage of putting these two sets of ideas together is that it relates the Chomskyan picture to a model whose properties are somewhat well understood, ....

....differences, probably no two languages have exactly the same grammatical system. Chomsky has suggested that the number of grammatically distinct possible languages is finite. When the parameters of UG are fixed, a core grammar is determined, one among finitely many possibilities, lexicon apart. [2] :137) Learnability from incomplete data. A newborn child can learn any language perfectly. The well known Poverty of Stimulus argument states that the knowledge of language (in the form of solid intuitions of wellformedness) possessed by adults is underdetermined by the examples to which they ....

N. Chomsky, Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht, 1981.

....generation within a speech community. This transmission process involves at least some cultural transmission language learners, under normal circumstances, learn the language in use in their speech community. The most influential linguistic theories of modern times (Chomsky, 1965; Chomsky, 1980; Chomsky, 1981; Chomsky, 1987) assume an element of genetic transmission in addition to this cultural transmission under the Chomskyan hypothesis, a genetically encoded Language Acquisition Device is transmitted from generation to generation, with the cultural transmission of language being parasitic on this ....

Chomsky, N. (1981). Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

....Grammatical acquisition proceeds on the basis of a partial genotypic specification of (universal) grammar (UG) complemented by a procedure enabling the child to complete this specification appropriately on exposure to finite positive samples from other speakers. The parameter setting framework of Chomsky (1981) claims that learning involves fixing the values of a finite set of finite valued parameters to select a single fully specified grammar from within the space defined by the genotypic specification of UG. Formal models of parameter setting have been developed for small sets of grammars, but even ....

....parsed appropriately. Frank and Kapur (1996) demonstrate that the existence of locking sequences of such triggers, guaranteeing convergence to a target grammar, depends on the nature of the parameters, on the specific acquisition procedure, and on the initial configuration of the parameter set. Chomsky (1981:7f) argued that at least some parameters probably have an initially unmarked or default value which will be retained by the learner unless incompatible with input. That is, that the learner is biased towards certain settings of some parameters. Unmarked, default values have been proposed as a ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chomsky, Noam (1981) Government and Binding, Dordrecht: Foris.

.... had already itself evolved on a historical timescale (e.g. Hurford, 1987; Kirby, 1998; Steels, 1998) and continued to coevolve with the LAD (e.g. Briscoe, 1997, 1998, 2000a) The model of the LAD presented here builds on and extends previous work in the parameter setting framework (e.g. Chomsky, 1981; Clark, 1992; Gibson and Wexler, 1994; Niyogi and Berwick, 1996; Briscoe, 1997, 1998, 2000a) by developing a Bayesian account of parameter setting, and embedding this within a more general theory of language acquisition in which it is not essential that the hypothesis space of grammars is finite. ....

....a LAD in agents already equipped with the capacity for social reasoning and reasoning with uncertainty. 2 The Language Acquisition Device A model of the language acquisition device (LAD) must incorporate a theory of universal grammar (UG) with an associated finite set of finite valued parameters (Chomsky, 1981) defining the space of possible grammars, a parser for these grammars, and an algorithm for updating initial parameter settings on parse failure during acquisition (e.g. Clark, 1992) The following subsections present such a model (see Briscoe, 1997, 1998, 2000a for further details and ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chomsky, N. (1981) Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.

....Gibson and Wexler, 1994) and by defining learnability in terms of reachability of any g 2 G (given triggers from g) from any such starting point. 22 More substantively oriented work on parameters has tended to assume that some, perhaps most, parameters will have unmarked or default values (e.g. Chomsky, 1981:7f; Hyams, 1986; Wexler and Manzini, 1987) Such an assumption is a form of inductive bias, or soft constraint, over and above the hard constraints determined by UG, as it creates a preference ordering on the acquisition of g 2 UG by LP . For example, if we assume that there is a V2 parameter ....

Chomsky, N. (1981) Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.

.... a population had already itself evolved on a historical timescale (e.g. Hurford, 1987; Kirby, 1998; Steels, 1998) and continued to coevolve with the LAD (e.g. Briscoe, 1997, 1998a,b) The model of the LAD presented here builds on and extends previous work in the parameter setting framework (e.g. Chomsky, 1981; Clark, 1992; Gibson and Wexler, 1994; Niyogi and Berwick, 1996; Briscoe, 1997, 1998a,b) by developing a Bayesian account of parameter setting, and embedding this within a more general theory of language acquisition in which it is not essential that the hypothesis space of grammars is finite. The ....

....the properties of the theory of language acquisition which lies at the heart of these results. 1 The Language Acquisition Device A model of the language acquisition device (LAD) must incorporate a theory of universal grammar (UG) with an associated finite set of finite valued parameters (Chomsky, 1981) defining the finite space of possible grammars, a parser for these grammars, and an algorithm for updating initial parameter settings on parse failure during acquisition (e.g. Clark, 1992) The following subsections present such a model (see Briscoe, 1997; 1998a,b) for further details and ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chomsky, N. (1981) Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.

....in every attested human language, of constructions which violate this preference, such as morphological negation or non compositional idioms. Despite or perhaps because of these often counterfactual biases, grammatical acquisition remains highly robust. Within the parameter setting framework of Chomsky (1981), the Language Acquisition Device (LAD) is taken to consist of a partial genotypic specification of (universal) grammar (UG) complemented with a parameter setting procedure which, on exposure to a finite positive sample of triggers from a given language, fixes the values of a finite set of ....

....set of finite valued parameters to select a single fully specified grammar from within the space defined by UG. Many parameters of grammatical variation set during language acquisition appear to have default or so called unmarked values retained in the absence of robust counter evidence (e.g. Chomsky, 1981:7f; Hyams, 1986; Wexler and Manzini, 1987; Lightfoot, 1992) Thus, the LAD incorporates both a set constraints defining a possible human grammar and a set of biases (partially) ranking possible grammars by markedness. A variety of explanations have been offered for the emergence of an innate LAD ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chomsky, N. (1981) Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.

....acquisition proceeds on the basis of a partial genotypic specification of (universal) grammar (UG) complemented with a learning procedure enabling the child to complete this specification appropriately on exposure to finite positive samples from a given language. The parameter setting framework of Chomsky (1981) claims that learning involves fixing the values of a finite set of finite valued parameters to select a single fully specified grammar from within the space defined by the genotypic specification of UG. Formal models of parameter setting have been developed for small fragments, but even the ....

....trigger can be parsed appropriately. Frank and Kapur (1996) demonstrate that the existence of locking sequences of such triggers, guaranteeing convergence to a target grammar, depends on the nature of the parameters, on the specific acquisition procedure, and on the starting point for learning. Chomsky (1981:7f) argued that at least some parameters probably have an initially unmarked or default value which will be retained by the learner unless incompatible with input. That is, that the learner is biased towards certain settings of some parameters. Unmarked, default values have been proposed as a ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chomsky, N. (1981) Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.

.... a population had already itself evolved on a historical timescale (e.g. Hurford, 1987; Kirby, 1998; Steels, 1998) and continued to coevolve with the LAD (e.g. Briscoe, 1997, 1998a,b) The model of the LAD presented here builds on and extends previous work in the parameter setting framework (e.g. Chomsky, 1981; Clark, 1992; Gibson and Wexler, 1994; Niyogi and Berwick, 1996; Briscoe, 1997, 1998a,b) by developing a Bayesian account of parameter setting, and embedding this within a more general theory of language acquisition in which it is not essential that the hypothesis space of grammars is finite. The ....

....a LAD in agents already equipped with the capacity for social reasoning and reasoning with uncertainty. 1 The Language Acquisition Device A model of the language acquisition device (LAD) must incorporate a theory of universal grammar (UG) with an associated finite set of finite valued parameters (Chomsky, 1981) defining the space of possible grammars, a parser for these grammars, and an algorithm for updating initial parameter settings on parse failure during acquisition (e.g. Clark, 1992) The following subsections present such a model (see Briscoe, 1997; 1998a,b for further details and background) ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chomsky, N. (1981) Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.

No context found.

Chomsky, N. (1981). Government and Binding. Foris, Dordrecht. 90

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