Empirical Tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm

The Gradual Learning Algorithm (Boersma 1997) is a constraint-ranking algorithm for learning optimality-theoretic grammars. The purpose of this article is to assess the capabilities of the Gradual Learning Algorithm, particularly in comparison with the Constraint Demotion algorithm of Tesar and Smolensky (1993, 1996, 1998, 2000), which initiated the learnability research program for Optimality Theory. We argue that the Gradual Learning Algorithm has a number of special advantages: it can learn free variation, deal effectively with noisy learning data, and account for gradient well-formedness judgments. The case studies we examine involve Ilokano reduplication and metathesis, Finnish genitive plurals, and the distribution of English light and dark /l/.

[1]  Robert Kirchner,et al.  An Effort Based Approach to Consonant Lenition , 2001 .

[2]  Mitsuhiko Ota.  A review of two books introducing Optimality Theor y , 2000 .

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

[4]  John J. McCarthy,et al.  Sympathy and phonological opacity , 1999, Phonology.

[5]  Iggy Roca,et al.  Derivations and constraints in phonology , 1999 .

[6]  Charles Reiss,et al.  Formal and Empirical Arguments concerning Phonological Acquisition , 1998, Linguistic Inquiry.

[7]  Bruce P. Hayes,et al.  Quatrain form in English folk verse , 1998 .

[8]  F. Hinskens,et al.  Variation, change and phonological theory , 1997 .

[9]  Katya Zubritskaya,et al.  Mechanism of sound change in Optimality Theory , 1997, Language Variation and Change.

[10]  Bill Reynolds,et al.  Optimality Theory and variable word-final deletion in Faetar , 1997, Language Variation and Change.

[11]  Bruce Tesar,et al.  Computational optimality theory , 1996 .

[12]  Laura Benua.  Identity Effects in Morphological Truncation , 1995 .

[13]  Bruce Hayes,et al.  Reduplication and syllabification in Ilokano , 1989 .

[14]  D. Dinnsen.  A re-examination of phonological neutralization , 1985, Journal of Linguistics.

[15]  Elisabeth Selkirk,et al.  Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure , 1984 .

[16]  John J. McCarthy,et al.  Optimality Theory: An overview , 2003 .

[17]  B. Hayes,et al.  Phonological Acquisition in Optimality Theory: the Early Stages Phonological Acquisition in Optimality Theory: the Early Stages , 2001 .

[18]  Boersma,et al.  [Review of: A. Anttila (1997) Variation in Finnish phonology and morphology] , 2001 .

[19]  P. Boersma,et al.  Empirical Tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm , 2001 .

[20]  Kevin Broihier,et al.  Optimality Theoretic Rankings with Tied Constraints: Slavic Relatives, Resumptive Pronouns and Learnability , 2000 .

[21]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Learning a grammar in Functional Phonology , 2000 .

[22]  A. Anttila.  Deriving variation from grammar: A study of Finnish genitives , 2000 .

[23]  William J. Turkel.  Learning Phonology: Genetic Algorithms and Yoruba Tongue Root Harmony , 2000 .

[24]  Bruce Hayes,et al.  Gradient Well-Formedness in Optimality Theory , 2000 .

[25]  J. V. D. Weijer,et al.  Optimality theory : phonology, syntax, and acquisition , 2000 .

[26]  A. Gnanadesikan.  Markedness and Faithfulness Constraints in Child Phonology , 2000 .

[27]  D. Steriade.  Phonetics in Phonology: The Case of Laryngeal Neutralization , 1999 .

[28]  René Kager,et al.  Surface opacity of metrical structure in optimality theory , 1999 .

[29]  Michael Kenstowicz,et al.  Uniform Exponence: Exemplification and extension , 1999 .

[30]  P. Smolensky,et al.  Learning Phonotactic Distributions , 1999 .

[31]  B. Hayes,et al.  Phonological Acquisition in Optimality Theory: The Early Stages 1 , 1999 .

[32]  David Pesetsky,et al.  Some optimality principles of sentence pronunciation , 1998 .

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

[34]  Pilar Barbosa,et al.  Is the best good enough? : optimality and competition in syntax , 1998 .

[35]  P. Boersma.  How we learn variation, optionality and probalility , 1997 .

[36]  J. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Similarity and phonotactics in Arabic , 1997 .

[37]  G. N. Clements,et al.  Berber Syllabification: Derivations or Constraints? , 1997 .

[38]  John J. McCarthy,et al.  Remarks on phonological opacity in Optimality Theory , 1996 .

[39]  P. Smolensky.  The Initial State and 'Richness of the Base' in Optimality Theory , 1996 .

[40]  Bruce Tesar,et al.  Learnability in Optimality Theory (long version) , 1996 .

[41]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Paradigm Uniformity and the Phonetics-Phonology Boundary , 1996 .

[42]  S. Kapur,et al.  On the use of triggers in parameter setting , 1996 .

[43]  B. Laks,et al.  Current Trends in Phonology : Models and Methods , 1996 .

[44]  Alan S. Prince,et al.  Faithfulness and reduplicative identity , 1995 .

[45]  Alan S. Prince,et al.  The emergence of the unmarked: Optimality in prosodic morphology , 1994 .

[46]  William Thomas Reynolds,et al.  Variation and phonological theory , 1994 .

[47]  W. Labov.  Principles of Linguistic Change: Internal Factors , 1994 .

[48]  W. Labov.  Principles Of Linguistic Change , 1994 .

[49]  P. Smolensky,et al.  The Learnability of Optimality Theory: An Algorithm and Some Basic Complexity Results , 1995 .

[50]  Alan S. Prince,et al.  Generalized alignment , 1993 .

[51]  Francis Nolan,et al.  Gesture, Segment, Prosody: The descriptive role of segments: evidence from assimilation , 1992 .

[52]  John Kingston,et al.  Papers in Laboratory Phonology: Index of names , 1990 .

[53]  Bruce P. Hayes.  Compensatory Lengthening in Moraic Phonology , 1989 .