The power of statistical learning: No need for algebraic rules

Traditionally, it has been assumed that rules are necessary to explain language acquisition. Recently, Marcus, Vijayan, Rao, & Vishton (1999) have provided behavioral evidence which they claim can only be explained by invoking algebraic rules. In the first part of this paper, we show that contrary to these claims an existing simple recurrent network model of word segmentation can fit the relevant data without invoking any rules. Importantly, the model closely replicates the experimental conditions, and no changes are made to the model to accommodate the data. The second part provides a corpus analysis inspired by this model, demonstrating that lexical stress changes the basic representational landscape over which statistical learning takes place. This change makes the task of word segmentation easier for statistical learning models, and further obviates the need for lexical stress rules to explain the bias towards trochaic stress patterns in English. Together the connectionist simulations and the corpus analysis show that statistical learning devices are sufficiently powerful to eliminate the need for rules in an important part of language acquisition.

[1]  S Pinker,et al.  Out of the Minds of Babes , 1999, Science.

[2]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Learning to Segment Speech Using Multiple Cues: A Connectionist Model , 1998 .

[3]  P. Fikkert On the acquisition of prosodic structure , 1994 .

[4]  Marlys A. Macken,et al.  The child's lexical representation: the ‘puzzle-puddle-pickle’ evidence , 1980, Journal of Linguistics.

[5]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants' preference for the predominant stress patterns of English words. , 1993, Child development.

[6]  R N Aslin,et al.  Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1996, Science.

[7]  LouAnn Gerken,et al.  Signal to syntax : bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition , 1996 .

[8]  Peter M. Vishton,et al.  Rule learning by seven-month-old infants. , 1999, Science.

[9]  Mark S. Seidenberg Visual Word Recognition: An Overview , 1995 .

[10]  T. A. Cartwright,et al.  Distributional regularity and phonotactic constraints are useful for segmentation , 1996, Cognition.

[11]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Perception of a phonetic contrast in multisyllabic utterances by 2-month-old infants , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  Nick Chater,et al.  Toward a connectionist model of recursion in human linguistic performance , 1999, Cogn. Sci..

[13]  G. Marcus Rethinking Eliminative Connectionism , 1998, Cognitive Psychology.

[14]  Tena I. Katsaounis,et al.  Analyzing Multivariate Data , 2004, Technometrics.

[15]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational Geometry , 1969 .

[16]  H. Klein,et al.  Learning to stress: a case study , 1984, Journal of Child Language.

[17]  P. D. Eimas,et al.  Speech, language, and communication , 1997 .

[18]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Sound Pattern of English , 1968 .