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]  Roderick Gould,et al.  Multiple correspondence , 1957, Mech. Transl. Comput. Linguistics.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[29]  Arto Anttila,et al.  Variation in Finnish phonology and morphology , 1997 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[37]  B. Hayes,et al.  Phonological Acquisition in Optimality Theory: the Early Stages 1 Submitted for a Forthcoming Volume on Phonological Acquisition and Typology, Edited Phonological Acquisition in Optimality Theory: the Early Stages , 1999 .

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

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

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

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

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

[43]  Mitsuhiko Ota,et al.  Optimality Theory: an overview , 2000 .

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

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

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

[47]  Jeroen van de Weijer,et al.  Optimality theory : phonology, syntax, and acquisition , 2000 .

[48]  A. Gnanadesikan.  Constraints in Phonological Acquisition: Markedness and faithfulness constraints in child phonology , 2004 .

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

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

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