A multiple process solution to the logical problem of language acquisition

Many researchers believe that there is a logical problem at the centre of language acquisition theory. According to this analysis, the input to the learner is too inconsistent and incomplete to determine the acquisition of grammar. Moreover, when corrective feedback is provided, children tend to ignore it. As a result, language learning must rely on additional constraints from universal grammar. To solve this logical problem, theorists have proposed a series of constraints and parameterizations on the form of universal grammar. Plausible alternatives to these constraints include: conservatism, item-based learning, indirect negative evidence, competition, cue construction, and monitoring. Careful analysis of child language corpora has cast doubt on claims regarding the absence of positive exemplars. Using demonstrably available positive data, simple learning procedures can be formulated for each of the syntactic structures that have traditionally motivated invocation of the logical problem. Within the perspective of emergentist theory (MacWhinney, 2001), the operation of a set of mutually supportive processes is viewed as providing multiple buffering for developmental outcomes. However, the fact that some syntactic structures are more difficult to learn than others can be used to highlight areas of intense grammatical competition and processing load.

[1]  R. G. Kent,et al.  Language: Its Nature, Development, and Origin , 1923 .

[2]  E. Mark Gold,et al.  Language Identification in the Limit , 1967, Inf. Control..

[3]  P. A. Reich.  The Finiteness of Natural Language , 1969 .

[4]  James Jay Horning,et al.  A study of grammatical inference , 1969 .

[5]  Henry Hamburger,et al.  On the Insufficiency of Surface Data for the Learning of Transformational Languages , 1973 .

[6]  John P. Kimball,et al.  The Formal Theory of Grammar , 1973 .

[7]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  Pragmatic Patterns in Child Syntax , 1975 .

[8]  H. Gleitman,et al.  Mother, Id rather do it myself: Some effects and non-effects of maternal speech style , 1977 .

[9]  B. MacWhinney.  The Acquisition Of Morphophonology , 1978 .

[10]  Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.  Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation , 1979 .

[11]  Stan A. Kuczaj,et al.  Some empirical studies in the acquisition of transformational relations , 1979 .

[12]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Rules and Representations , 1982 .

[13]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Lectures on Government and Binding , 1981 .

[14]  Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini,et al.  Language and Learning: The Debate Between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky , 1980 .

[15]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  Basic Syntactic Processes , 1982 .

[16]  Norbert Hornstein,et al.  Explanation in Linguistics: The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition , 1982 .

[17]  Stephen Crain,et al.  Simplicity and Generality of Rules in Language Acquisition. , 1984 .

[18]  Steven Pinker,et al.  Language learnability and language development , 1985 .

[19]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  Toward a Psycholinguistically Plausible Parser , 1986 .

[20]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Conspiracy effects in word pronunciation. , 1987 .

[21]  B. MacWhinney.  Applying the Competition Model to bilingualism , 1987, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[22]  Robert C. Berwick.  Parsability and learnability. , 1987 .

[23]  S. Crain,et al.  Structure dependence in grammar formation , 1987 .

[24]  M. Bowerman.  The 'no negative evidence' problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar? , 1988 .

[25]  Ann M. Peters,et al.  What Are You Cookin' on a Hot?: Movement Constraints in the Speech of A Three-Year-Old Blind Child , 1988 .

[26]  R. Taraban,et al.  Language learning: Cues or rules? , 1989 .

[27]  D. Lightfoot.  The child's trigger experience: Degree-0 learnability , 1989, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[28]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Language Processing and Language Acquisition , 1990 .

[29]  Jill de Villiers,et al.  The Acquisition of Long-Distance Rules , 1990 .

[30]  B. MacWhinney.  The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk , 1992 .

[31]  B. MacWhinney,et al.  Implementations are not conceptualizations: Revising the verb learning model , 1991, Cognition.

[32]  J. Chafetz,et al.  ‘There car’: ungrammatical parentese , 1992, Journal of Child Language.

[33]  Kate Wolfe Quintero.  Learnability and the Acquistion of Extraction in Relative Clauses and Wh-Questions , 1992, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[34]  G. Marcus.  Negative evidence in language acquisition , 1993, Cognition.

[35]  V. Marchman,et al.  From rote learning to system building: acquiring verb morphology in children and connectionist nets , 1993, Cognition.

[36]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Subsymbolic natural language processing - an integrated model of scripts, lexicon, and memory , 1993, Neural network modeling and connectionism.

[37]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution , 1994 .

[38]  Takeshi Shinohara,et al.  Rich Classes Inferable from Positive Data: Length-Bounded Elementary Formal Systems , 1994, Inf. Comput..

[39]  Alan H. Kawamoto.  One System or Two to Handle Regulars and Exceptions , 1994 .

[40]  A. Böhmer,et al.  Macrolides and community-acquired pneumonia: is quorum sensing the key? , 2010, Critical care.

[41]  M. Saxton.  The Contrast Theory of negative input , 1997, Journal of Child Language.

[42]  William J. Turkel,et al.  The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition in Optimality Theory , 1998 .

[43]  Makoto Kanazawa.  Learnable Classes of Categorial Grammars , 1998 .

[44]  P. Smolensky,et al.  Learnability in Optimality Theory , 2000, Linguistic Inquiry.

[45]  K. Wexler.  Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage , 1998 .

[46]  Roland R. Hausser.  Foundations of Computational Linguistics: Man-Machine Communication in Natural Language , 1999 .

[47]  Risto Miikkulainen and Marshall R. Mayberry,et al.  Disambiguation And Grammar As Emergent Soft Constraints , 1999 .

[48]  Emergence from what? Comments on Sabbagh & Gelman , 2000, Journal of Child Language.

[49]  M. Tomasello.  Do young children have adult syntactic competence? , 2000, Cognition.

[50]  M. Sabbagh,et al.  Emergence is what? , 2000, Journal of Child Language.

[51]  Barbara C. Scholz,et al.  Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments , 2002 .

[52]  Jeffrey L. Elman,et al.  Sense and structure: Meaning as a determinant of verb subcategorization preferences , 2003 .

[53]  J. Elman,et al.  Learnability and the Statistical Structure of Language: Poverty of Stimulus Arguments Revisited , 2004 .

[54]  Alon Lavie,et al.  Automatic Parsing of Parent-Child Interactions , 2004 .

[55]  B. MacWhinney,et al.  The Handbook of East Asian Psycholinguistics: The competition model , 2006 .