Prince, A. and Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report 2.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....of finite state phonology: classical rewrite systems and two level models. In particular, the ranking of optimality constraints corresponds to the ordering of rewrite rules. 1 Introduction It has been recognized for some time that Optimality Theory (OT) introduced by Prince and Smolensky [24], is from a computational point of view closely related to classical phonological r. ewrite systems (Chomsky and Halle [1] and to two level descriptions (Koskenniemi [21] Ellison [6] observes that the O.N function of OT can be regarded as a regular relation and that OT constraints seem to be ....

....on a finite.state lexicon creating a transducer that maps each member of a possibly infinite set of lexical forms into its most optimal surface realization, and vice versa. For the sake of con cSeness, we limit the discussion to optimality theory as originally presented in Prince and molensky [24]. The techniques described below can also be applied to the correspondence version of the theory (McCarthy and Prince [22] that expands the model to encompass output output constraints between reduplicaut and base forms. To set the stage for discussing the application and merging of optimality ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generatire Grammar. Technical Report TR-2, Rutgers University Cognitive Science Center, New Brunswick, NJ. To appear, MIT Press.

....whole. Grammatical knowledge is modelled in a declarative way expressed by violable constraints in WCDGs so that a finegrained distinction between gramatical and non grammatical utterances is available. Optimality described by means of constraints is also a central issue in related linguistic work [19, 12, 4]. Nevertheless, advanced natural language processing imposes its own requirements and limits to the applicability of specific parsing techniques, namely realtime performance, anytime properties [1] resource adaptability [15] and bounded incremental parsing. From the perspective of these ....

Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky, `Optimality theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar', Technical Report Report Nr. 2, Rutgers University Center of Cognitive Science, Piscataway, New York, (1993).

.... system for querying Internet movie databases, currently developed at the Vienna University of Technology [Eiter et al. 2002] Also, it serves for modeling linguistic phenomena occurring in phonology and syntax [Besnard et al. 2001] which are treated in linguistics within Optimality Theory [Prince and Smolensky, 1993; Kager, 1999] Acknowledgements. The first author was partially supported by a Canadian NSERC Research Grant. The second author was partially supported by the German Science Foundation (DFG) 38 under grant FOR 375 1 1, TP C. The third author was partially supported by the Austrian Science Fund ....

Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Technical report, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1993. 60

....to test set variations, the test set was randomly split into two subsets. Both subsets showed exactly the same tendencies and varied only within a three percent margin. A veri cation of these results on a larger test set seems desirable. 5 Related work 5. 1 Optimality Theory Optimality Theory (Prince Smolensky 93) is a linguistic theory that declares exactly those struc 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 No. of generations f measure time fitness Figure 4: F measure, time and tness of the best individuals taken from each ....

Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Technical Report RuCCS #2, Rutgers University, Center for Cognitive Science, Piscataway, NJ, 1993.

.....o. RightContext . When the component relations are composed together in this manner, UPPER gets mapped to LOWER just in case it ends up between LEFT and RIGHT in the output string. This fourth version seems well suited for the modeling of the currently popular optimality theory in phonology (Prince and Smolensky 1993). 2.2. Examples Let us illustrate the consequences of these definitions with a few examples. Consider the upward oriented replacement relation: 52] a b x c (d) e f ; 11 The infinite set of strings in this relation includes pairs like [53] c d a b e , c a b f , c d x e c d x e c x ....

Prince, Alan and Smolensky, Paul (1993). Optimality Theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. To appear, MIT Press. TR-2, Rutgers University Cognitive Science Center.

....in the realizations by Steven of respectively acht eight and korst crust . 3) Cluster reduction Steven age: target word: input: realisation: 1;11 acht #xt [#t] 2;2 korst knrst [kns] The dominating constraint in both cases is COMPLEX, a prohibition on consonant clusters in the output. Prince and Smolensky (1993) propose HMARG to indicate that in marginal syllable positions less sonorant segments are prefererred to more sonorant ones. The child has come in a phase of its development in which the correspondence constraint MAX I O, a constraint which demands a 1:1 relation between segments in the input and ....

....of boundaries In both music and language, several processes can be considered to be boundary markers. Secondary stress shift and final lengthening are such processes. In OT so called generalized alignment constraints are proposed for the analysis of boundary marking processes (McCarthy and Prince 1993). All alignment constraints refer to constituent boundaries, and they have the following form: 13) Alignment Align (Cat 1, Edge 1, Cat 2, Edge 2) Cat 1 Cat 2 where Edge 1 of Cat 1 and Edge 2 of Cat 2 coincide Alignment constraints prefer output candidates in which for example a ....

Prince, A. & P. Smolensky (1993). Optimality Theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. Ms., Rutgers Optimality Archive.

....Fortunately, it is in fact possible to determine the (in)consistency of a set of descriptions far more efficiently, given the proper linguistic theory; this will be proven below. The details of IDL as presented here are based upon a particular approach to linguistic theory, Optimality Theory (Prince Smolensky, 1993). An overview of Optimality Theory and related learning principles is presented in section 2. With that background established, the learning algorithm is presented in detail in section 3. The results of a computational experiment, designed to evaluate the computational efficiency of the algorithm, ....

....established, the learning algorithm is presented in detail in section 3. The results of a computational experiment, designed to evaluate the computational efficiency of the algorithm, are presented in section 4. 2. Learning in Optimality Theory 2.1. Optimality Theory In Optimality Theory (Prince Smolensky, 1993), universal grammar consists of a universal candidate mapping, GEN, and a set of universal constraints, CON. GEN maps each linguistic input to an assigned set of candidate structural descriptions. The candidates for an input are understood to compete with each other. The competition is based on ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar (Ms. ): Rutgers University and the University of Colorado.

....graut in (17) reflects contrasting patterns of paradigmatic competition rather than different lexical specifications for agreement features. As in Andrews 1990, this competition involves just a sanctioning entry, a set of opponents, and a single preterminal structure. Unlike Optimality accounts (Prince and Smolensky 1993), the use of competition does not involve the enumeration or evaluation of alternative structures, even at the preterminal level. In particular, the satisfiability or admissibility of paradigmatic alternatives does not have to be determined. The present account is local in another significant ....

Prince, Alan, and Paul Smolensky. 1993. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Technical report, Rutgers University and University of Colorado.

.... late late early ERG nom ERG nom OBL nom ERG OBL Basque late late late ERG ACC ERG ACC OBL ACC ERG OBL Antekerrepenhe 4 Formalizing Earliness and Economy In this section, I will formulate the Earliness principle more precisely than I have done so far using the language of ranked constraints of (Prince Smolensky 1994). I will then point out that the analyses in this paper require a specific type of economy condition on the derivation; namely it must be a set of ranked constraints. These constraints are evaluated at every step of the derivation. I will then go on to describe what a counterexample to this ....

....features of the root node that can possibly be checked have been checked. The three conditions on the derivation conflict in a number of cases, e.g. if a movement checks an early and a late feature. I assume that there is a universal hierarchy among the three conditions. Using the language of (Prince Smolensky 1994), this hierarchy is Earliness AE Procrastinate, Shortest Move, as I will argue below. 7 The relative ordering of Procrastinate and Shortest Move, as I will also show below, does not matter. Though I use the idea of ranked constraints from Prince Smolensky s (1994) work on phonology, there is ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Prince, Alan, & Paul Smolensky. 1994. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University and University of Colorado at Boulder. Forthcoming at MIT Press.

....appear in The Proceedings of the 21st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, November 1996. 1 An Iterative Strategy for Learning Metrical Stress in Optimality Theory Bruce Tesar Rutgers University 1. Introduction Optimality Theory (Prince Smolensky, 1993) accounts for linguistic competence in terms of optimization over a ranked, universal set of violable constraints. For any given underlying form, there is a general space of candidate structural descriptions of that input. The candidate which best satisfies the constraints is the grammatical ....

....Section 5 presents the results of some computer simulations used to test and investigate the learning strategy. 2. Metrical Stress in Optimality Theory The following optimality theoretic system is loosely based upon analyses proposed by John McCarthy and Alan Prince (Prince, 1990; McCarthy Prince, 1993). While it is not a complete account of all attested metrical phenomena, it does capture many of the central cross linguistic stress patterns, making it a worthy test bed for the investigation of learning. Metrical stress was selected because it permits the issue of input output faithfulness to be ....

Prince, A., and P. Smolensky. (1993) Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar, Technical Report TR-2, Rutgers University Cognitive Science Center, and CU-CS-696-93, Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado at Boulder.

....is assumed to be identical to the adult surface form and the locus of child adult differences is placed in the mapping between the underlying representation and the child surface representation. The current study pursues this approach, in particular its adaptation within Optimality Theory (OT; Prince Smolensky, 1993). The central idea of this model is that properties of child grammar in various stages are consequences of non targetlike rankings of a universal set of violable constraints (Demuth, 1995, 1996; Gnanadesikan, 1995; Pater, 1997; Tesar Smolensky, 1998) The analysis presented below supports this ....

....sonorants holds at any stage of development. Word internal prosody The organization of word internal prosodic structure is regulated by several representational principles. First, a lexical word must be contained in a prosodic word (McCarthy Prince, 1986; Nespor Vogel, 1986) Following Prince and Smolensky (1993), this will be referred to as Lx PrWd. Second, like all other constituents in the prosodic hierarchy in (1) except the mora, the foot is subject to a universal principle that ensures headedness of all the non terminal constituents. 6 (5) Proper Headedness (It Mester, 1992: 12; cf. Selkirk, ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar (RuCCS Technical Report Series TR-2). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University.

....(correctly, we believe) that children have access to the full set of universal features in constructing URs and that they store URs fully and accurately specified, according to what they hear in the target language. 4 Therefore, under S s own analysis the notion of richness of the base (e.g. Prince Smolensky 1993, 191) becomes irrelevant (at least in the case of non alternating forms) to the acquisition process. Richness of the base is a claim about the nature of OT grammars which states that there can be great latitude in the form of URs. For example, someone with a grammar of English could have all ....

....We will present a simple and efficient algorithm for solving this problem, assuming a given set of hypothesized underlying forms. Concerning the problem of acquiring underlying forms, see the discussion of optimality in the lexicon in P S 1993:9) emphasis added mrh cr] Turning to Prince Smolensky 1993:9 we find (16) Prince and Smolensky 1993, 192 Lexicon Optimization. Suppose that several different inputs I 1 ,I 2 , I n , when parsed by a grammar G [i.e. ranked constraint hierarchy mrh cr] lead to corresponding outputs O 1 ,O 2 , O n , all of which are realized as the same phonetic ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Prince, A. and P. Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Technical Report Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J.

....by their own prosodic requirements. For this reason, I will propose that it is necessary to provide a grammatical model of early prosodic structure which encompasses the mechanisms of truncation and surface variability. This goal can be achieved by adopting the perspective of Optimality Theory (Prince Smolensky, 1993). The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 gives a description of the prosodic structures of early words produced by two Japanese speaking children, and explains why the data cannot be handled by a model of production limitation. Section 3 then presents an analysis of the data based on ....

Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Manuscript. Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ and University of Colorado, Boulder, CO.

....a set of representational possibilities. Applying the soft rules to any representation yields the Harmony value for that representation. A representation with maximal Harmony from some class defined by common substructure the inputs is said to be the winning candidate. In Optimality Theory [Prince and Smolensky, 1993] the soft rules are ranked and the C X values are arranged so that no number of violations of lower ranked soft rules could ever outweigh a violation by a higher ranked one. Harmonic grammar is expressive enough to specify the context free languages [Smolensky, 1993] Here Harmony maximization is ....

Prince, A. and Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. MIT Press. Forthcoming.

....variation in language specific total rankings of the universal constraints in Con. Analysis of the optimal forms arising from all possible total rankings of Con gives the typology of possible human languages. UG may impose restrictions on the possible rankings of Con. p. 27) As already shown in Prince Smolensky (1993), analysis of all rankings of the constraints considered in the basic CV syllable theory reveals a typology that explains Jakobson s (1962) typological generalizations. In the case of OT syntax, Grimshaw Samek Lodovici (1995) were the first who performed an analysis involving all rankings of the ....

....the complexity of language learning. In my opinion, the learning theory of Paul Boersma s (e.g. Boersma 1998) is on the right track for doing this job. With regard to the condition (B) Smolensky himself sees it as a regimentation and pushing to extremes of the basic notion of Harmonic Grammar (Prince Smolensky 1993, p. 200. And Gibson Broihier (1998) argue that this restriction does not appropriately characterize the manner in which parsing preferences interact. What about condition (A) Many representatives of OT seem to consider it as a conditio sine qua none. Boersma s work on functional phonology ....

Prince, Alan and Paul Smolensky: 1993, Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar, Technical Report RuCCSTR-2, Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science (To appear, MIT Press).

....and efficient algorithm for solving this problem, assuming a given set of hypothesized underlying forms. Concerning the problem of acquiring underlying forms, see the discussion of optimality in the lexicon in P S 1993:9) emphasis added mrh cr] Turning to P S 1993:9 we find (2) Prince and Smolensky (1993, 192) Lexicon Optimization. Suppose that several different inputs I 1 , I 2 , I n when parsed by a grammar G [i.e. ranked constraint hierarchy mrh cr] lead to corresponding outputs O 1 , O 2 , On , all of which are realized as the same phonetic form Phi The authors would ....

....more recent paper Tesar and Smolensky (to appear) acknowledge the flaw in their approach, but consign a solution to the status of one of the next steps in [their] research program (sec. 9) They also propose that the child must make an initial guess as to the correct UR for each surface form. Prince and Smolensky s (1993) process of Lexicon Optimization has a second drawback in addition to the Teufelkreis issue: as pointed out by Inkelas (1994) it only works for non alternating morphemes, those that have a single surface realization. Hale and Reiss (1995, to appear) have pointed out the impossibility of ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Prince, A. and P. Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Technical Report Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J.

No context found.

Prince, A. and Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report 2.

No context found.

Prince, A. and Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report 2.

No context found.

Prince, A. and Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report 2.

No context found.

A. Prince and P. Smolensky. 1993. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Technical Report TR-2, Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers Univ.

No context found.

Alan S. Prince and Paul Smolensky. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Technical Report 2, Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, and Boulder, CO: Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado, 1993.

No context found.

Alan Prince and Peter Smolensky, Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar, Rutgers University Centre for Cognitive Science, 1993.

No context found.

PRINCE, A., AND SMOLENSKY, P. Optimality Theory: Constraint Inter- action in Generarive Grammar. MIT Press, to be published. Also available as Techinical Report 2 from the Center for Cognitive Science (RuCCS), Rutgers University, Busch Campus, New Brunswick, NJ 08903.

No context found.

-170. Prentice-Hall. Prince, Alan, & Paul Smolensky. 1993. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Technical report, Rutgers University.

No context found.

PRINCE,A.&SMOLENSKY, P. (1993). Optimality theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. In: ech- nical Report RuCCS R-2, pp. 234, Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT 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