Word categorization from distributional information: Frames confer more than the sum of their (Bigram) parts

Grammatical categories, such as noun and verb, are the building blocks of syntactic structure and the components that govern the grammatical patterns of language. However, in many languages words are not explicitly marked with their category information, hence a critical part of acquiring a language is categorizing the words. Computational analyses of child-directed speech have shown that distributional information-information about how words pattern with one another in sentences-could be a useful source of initial category information. Yet questions remain as to whether learners use this kind of information, and if so, what kinds of distributional patterns facilitate categorization. In this paper we investigated how adults exposed to an artificial language use distributional information to categorize words. We compared training situations in which target words occurred in frames (i.e., surrounded by two words that frequently co-occur) against situations in which target words occurred in simpler bigram contexts (where an immediately adjacent word provides the context for categorization). We found that learners categorized words together when they occurred in similar frame contexts, but not when they occurred in similar bigram contexts. These findings are particularly relevant because they accord with computational investigations showing that frame contexts provide accurate category information cross-linguistically. We discuss these findings in the context of prior research on distribution-based categorization and the broader implications for the role of distributional categorization in language acquisition.

[1]  E. Markman,et al.  When it is better to receive than to give: Syntactic and conceptual constraints on vocabulary growth , 1994 .

[2]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  The differential role of phonological and distributional cues in grammatical categorisation , 2005, Cognition.

[3]  Virginia Valian,et al.  Anchor points in language learning: The role of marker frequency ☆ , 1988 .

[4]  R. Gómez,et al.  Artificial grammar learning by 1-year-olds leads to specific and abstract knowledge , 1999, Cognition.

[5]  Nick Chater,et al.  Distributional Information: A Powerful Cue for Acquiring Syntactic Categories , 1998, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  Marina Nespor,et al.  Perceptual and memory constraints on language acquisition , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[7]  M. Braine,et al.  Learning the positions of words relative to a marker element. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[8]  Carla L. Hudson Kam,et al.  Regularizing Unpredictable Variation: The Roles of Adult and Child Learners in Language Formation and Change , 2005 .

[9]  Kirk H. Smith,et al.  Learning Co-occurrence restrictions: Rule induction or rote learning? , 1969 .

[10]  Michael Tomasello,et al.  "Frequent Frames" in German Child-Directed Speech: A Limited Cue to Grammatical Categories , 2011, Cogn. Sci..

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

[12]  T. Jaeger,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[13]  Barbara Höhle,et al.  Cross-Linguistic Distributional Analyses with Frequent Frames: the Cases of German and Turkish , 2011 .

[14]  Lila R. Gleitman,et al.  A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words, but That's the Problem: The Role of Syntax in Vocabulary Acquisition , 1992 .

[15]  Sébastien Pacton,et al.  Is an attention-based associative account of adjacent and nonadjacent dependency learning valid? , 2015, Acta psychologica.

[16]  L. Gerken,et al.  Infants can use distributional cues to form syntactic categories , 2005, Journal of Child Language.

[17]  Janet L. McDonald,et al.  Properties of Phonological Markers That Affect the Acquisition of Gender-Like Subclasses☆☆☆★ , 1998 .

[18]  Toben H. Mintz,et al.  The distributional structure of grammatical categories in speech to young children , 2002 .

[19]  J. Weissenborn,et al.  Functional Elements in Infants' Speech Processing: The Role of Determiners in the Syntactic Categorization of Lexical Elements , 2004 .

[20]  Toben H. Mintz,et al.  Categorizing words using 'frequent frames': what cross-linguistic analyses reveal about distributional acquisition strategies. , 2009, Developmental science.

[21]  Toben H. Mintz Finding The Verbs: Distributional Cues to Categories Available to Young Learners , 2004 .

[22]  R. Gómez,et al.  The Developmental Trajectory of Nonadjacent Dependency Learning. , 2005, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[23]  M. Maratsos,et al.  The internal language of children's syntax : The ontogenesis and representation of syntactic categories , 1980 .

[24]  Patricia J. Brooks,et al.  Exploring language acquisition in children with a miniature artificial language: Effects of item and pattern frequency, arbitrary subclasses, and correction☆ , 1990 .

[25]  E. Newport,et al.  Computation of Conditional Probability Statistics by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1998 .

[26]  Janet F Werker,et al.  Learning non-adjacent regularities at age 0 ; 7. , 2013, Journal of child language.

[27]  L. Gleitman The Structural Sources of Verb Meanings , 2020, Sentence First, Arguments Afterward.

[28]  Sandra R Waxman,et al.  What's in the input? Frequent frames in child-directed speech offer distributional cues to grammatical categories in Spanish and English* , 2009, Journal of Child Language.

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

[30]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Learning grammatical categories from distributional cues: Flexible frames for language acquisition , 2010, Cognition.

[31]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  The phonological-distributional coherence hypothesis: Cross-linguistic evidence in language acquisition , 2007, Cognitive Psychology.

[32]  Matthew Flatt,et al.  PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers , 1993 .

[33]  K H Smith,et al.  Grammatical intrusions in the recall of structured letter pairs: mediated transfer or position learning? , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[34]  Paul D. Allopenna,et al.  Phonological and acoustic bases for earliest grammatical category assignment: a cross-linguistic perspective , 1998, Journal of Child Language.

[35]  Toben H. Mintz Category induction from distributional cues in an artificial language , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[36]  Sébastien Pacton,et al.  An attention-based associative account of adjacent and nonadjacent dependency learning. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[37]  Alon Lavie,et al.  High-accuracy Annotation and Parsing of CHILDES Transcripts , 2007 .

[38]  Toben H. Mintz Frequent frames as a cue for grammatical categories in child directed speech , 2003, Cognition.

[39]  R. Gómez Variability and Detection of Invariant Structure , 2002, Psychological science.

[40]  Rushen Shi,et al.  Syntactic Categorization in French-Learning Infants. , 2010, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[41]  Marian Erkelens,et al.  UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) Learning to categorize verbs and nouns : studies on Dutch , 2009 .

[42]  M. Tomasello The item-based nature of children’s early syntactic development , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[43]  T. A. Cartwright,et al.  Syntactic categorization in early language acquisition: formalizing the role of distributional analysis , 1997, Cognition.

[44]  R. Gómez,et al.  A first step in form-based category abstraction by 12-month-old infants. , 2004, Developmental science.

[45]  Anna L. Theakston,et al.  The role of performance limitations in the acquisition of verb-argument structure: an alternative account. , 2001, Journal of child language.

[46]  Michael Ramscar,et al.  Granularity and the acquisition of grammatical gender: How order-of-acquisition affects what gets learned , 2012, Cognition.

[47]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer , 2002 .

[48]  Grzegorz Kondrak,et al.  On the Syllabification of Phonemes , 2009, NAACL.

[49]  Richard N. Aslin,et al.  From shared contexts to syntactic categories: The role of distributional information in learning linguistic form-classes , 2013, Cognitive Psychology.