The Dynamic Lexicon

The lexicon is the central locus of association between form and meaning. The prior sections in this chapter focus on the lexicon as it figures in the cognitive systems of individuals. The lexicon can also be viewed at the level of language communities, as shared intellectual property that supports mechanisms of information transmission amongst individuals. This viewpoint is foreshadowed by Hawkins (this volume), and sketched for linguistic systems in general in Hruschka et al. (2009). Here, I consider the relationship between the lexical systems of individuals and lexical systems at the community level. The dynamics of these systems over time, rooted in their relationship to each other, can inform our understanding of the lexicon, and of the entries and relationships that comprise it. Tackling problems in lexical dynamics, in the light of experimental findings and synchronic statistics, provides laboratory phonology both with fresh lines of empirical evidence and with fresh arenas for theoretical prediction. The lexicon is generally assumed to list any associations between form and meaning that are idiosyncratic and must be learned. Thus, it includes not only morphologically simple words, but also irregular or opaque complex

[1]  Adilson E. Motter,et al.  Niche as a Determinant of Word Fate in Online Groups , 2010, PloS one.

[2]  Boleslaw K. Szymanski,et al.  The Naming Game in Social Networks : Community Formation and Consensus Engineering , 2009 .

[3]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  Building social cognitive models of language change , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  E. Newport,et al.  Getting it right by getting it wrong: When learners change languages , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[5]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  Modeling language change: An evaluation of Trudgill's theory of the emergence of New Zealand English , 2009, Language Variation and Change.

[6]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Meme-tracking and the dynamics of the news cycle , 2009, KDD.

[7]  James A. Walker,et al.  The Present of the English Future: Grammatical Variation and Collocations in Discourse , 2009 .

[8]  Vsevolod Kapatsinski,et al.  Testing Theories of Linguistic Constituency with Configural Learning: The Case of the English Syllable , 2009 .

[9]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  The evolution of frequency distributions: Relating regularization to inductive biases through iterated learning , 2009, Cognition.

[10]  Paul Iverson,et al.  Neural signatures of phonetic learning in adulthood: A magnetoencephalography study , 2009, NeuroImage.

[11]  Vittorio Loreto,et al.  Collective dynamics of social annotation , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Adilson E. Motter,et al.  Beyond Word Frequency: Bursts, Lulls, and Scaling in the Temporal Distributions of Words , 2009, PloS one.

[13]  Jason M. Brenier,et al.  Predictability Effects on Durations of Content and Function Words in Conversational English , 2009 .

[14]  James S. Crampton,et al.  On the bidirectional relationship between geographic range and taxonomic duration , 2008, Paleobiology.

[15]  Yongeun Lee,et al.  The emergence of sub-syllabic representations , 2008 .

[16]  Didier Sornette,et al.  Robust dynamic classes revealed by measuring the response function of a social system , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Monica Tamariz,et al.  Exploring systematicity between phonological and context-cooccurrence representations of the mental lexicon , 2008 .

[18]  T. Jaeger,et al.  Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society , 2008 .

[19]  D. Watts,et al.  Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation , 2007 .

[20]  Judith E. Munat,et al.  Lexical Creativity, Texts and Contexts , 2007 .

[21]  Erez Lieberman,et al.  Quantifying the evolutionary dynamics of language , 2007, Nature.

[22]  M. Pagel,et al.  Frequency of word-use predicts rates of lexical evolution throughout Indo-European history , 2007, Nature.

[23]  Robert Daland,et al.  Much ado about nothing: A social network model of Russian paradigmatic gaps , 2007, ACL.

[24]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Language Evolution by Iterated Learning With Bayesian Agents , 2007, Cogn. Sci..

[25]  Lee H. Wurm,et al.  Lexical dynamics for low-frequency complex words: A regression study across tasks and modalities , 2007 .

[26]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language , 2006 .

[27]  Roger Levy,et al.  Speakers optimize information density through syntactic reduction , 2006, NIPS.

[28]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  The next toolkit , 2006, J. Phonetics.

[29]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[30]  R. Baayen,et al.  Shifting paradigms: gradient structure in morphology , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[31]  C. Frankish,et al.  Long-term knowledge effects on serial recall of nonwords are not exclusively lexical. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  David Jablonski,et al.  Mass extinctions and macroevolution , 2005, Paleobiology.

[33]  Jean Christophe Verstraeh.  Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure , 2005 .

[34]  J. Pierrehumbert.  The statistical basis of an unnatural alternation , 2005 .

[35]  J. Fontanari,et al.  Solvable null model for the distribution of word frequencies. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[36]  Holly L Storkel,et al.  The emerging lexicon of children with phonological delays: phonotactic constraints and probability in acquisition. , 2004, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[37]  Grover Hudson,et al.  PHONOLOGY AND LANGUAGE USE , 2004 .

[38]  B. Bergen.  The Psychological Reality of Phonaesthemes , 2004 .

[39]  Martin A Nowak,et al.  Chaos and language , 2004, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[40]  Alice Turk,et al.  The Smooth Signal Redundancy Hypothesis: A Functional Explanation for Relationships between Redundancy, Prosodic Prominence, and Duration in Spontaneous Speech , 2004, Language and speech.

[41]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Similarity Avoidance and the OCP , 2004 .

[42]  B. Lust,et al.  THE HANDBOOK OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION , 2005, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[43]  Michael Mitzenmacher,et al.  A Brief History of Generative Models for Power Law and Lognormal Distributions , 2004, Internet Math..

[44]  B. Hayes,et al.  Rules vs. analogy in English past tenses: a computational/experimental study , 2003, Cognition.

[45]  J. Hay.  Causes and Consequences of Word Structure , 2003 .

[46]  W Garrett Mitchener,et al.  Bifurcation analysis of the fully symmetric language dynamical equation. , 2003, Journal of mathematical biology.

[47]  J. Hay.  From Speech Perception to Morphology: Affix Ordering Revisited , 2002 .

[48]  T. L. Face,et al.  Papers in Laboratory Phonology V: Acquisition and the Lexicon (review) , 2002 .

[49]  H. Storkel.  Restructuring of similarity neighbourhoods in the developing mental lexicon , 2002, Journal of Child Language.

[50]  Duncan J Watts,et al.  A simple model of global cascades on random networks , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[51]  Hinrich Schütze,et al.  Book Reviews: Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing , 1999, CL.

[52]  John Goldsmith,et al.  Probabilistic Models of Grammar: Phonology as Information Minimization , 2002 .

[53]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Word Frequency Distributions , 2001 .

[54]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Time Course of Frequency Effects in Spoken-Word Recognition: Evidence from Eye Movements , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.

[55]  W. Stahel,et al.  Log-normal Distributions across the Sciences: Keys and Clues , 2001 .

[56]  M A Nowak,et al.  The evolutionary dynamics of the lexical matrix , 2001, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[57]  S. Frisch,et al.  The Psychological Reality of OCP-Place in Arabic , 2001 .

[58]  Bart de Boer,et al.  Self-organization in vowel systems , 2000, J. Phonetics.

[59]  M A Nowak,et al.  The basic reproductive ratio of a word, the maximum size of a lexicon. , 2000, Journal of theoretical biology.

[60]  David B Pisoni,et al.  Perception of Wordlikeness: Effects of Segment Probability and Length on the Processing of Nonwords. , 2000, Journal of memory and language.

[61]  Peter A. van der Helm,et al.  Simplicity versus likelihood in visual perception: from surprisals to precisals. , 2000 .

[62]  Sali A. Tagliamonte,et al.  The grammaticization of going to in (African American) English , 1999, Language Variation and Change.

[63]  D. Nettle.  Using Social Impact Theory to simulate language change , 1999 .

[64]  P. Gordon,et al.  Rule-Based versus Associative Processes in Derivational Morphology , 1999, Brain and Language.

[65]  S. Bikhchandani,et al.  Learning from the behavior of others : conformity, fads, and informational cascades , 1998 .

[66]  P. Luce,et al.  When Words Compete: Levels of Processing in Perception of Spoken Words , 1998 .

[67]  A. Cutler,et al.  Vowel harmony and speech segmentation in Finnish , 1997 .

[68]  Luc Steels,et al.  The synthetic modeling of language origins , 1997 .

[69]  Marilyn M. Vihman,et al.  Phonological Development , 2014 .

[70]  Kenneth Ward Church,et al.  Poisson mixtures , 1995, Natural Language Engineering.

[71]  Luc Steels,et al.  A Self-Organizing Spatial Vocabulary , 1995, Artificial Life.

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

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

[74]  D. Schacter,et al.  Perceptual specificity of auditory priming: implicit memory for voice intonation and fundamental frequency. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[75]  Jont B. Allen.  How do humans process and recognize speech , 1993 .

[76]  Michael B. Broe.  Specification theory : the treatment of redundancy in generative phonology , 1993 .

[77]  S. Goldinger,et al.  Episodic encoding of voice attributes and recognition memory for spoken words. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[78]  A. Cutler,et al.  Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: Evidence from juncture misperception , 1992 .

[79]  J. Goldsmith.  Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology , 1990 .

[80]  Björn Lindblom,et al.  Explaining Phonetic Variation: A Sketch of the H&H Theory , 1990 .

[81]  Keren Rice,et al.  Segment structure and coronal underspecification , 1989, Phonology.

[82]  A. Boothroyd,et al.  Mathematical treatment of context effects in phoneme and word recognition. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[83]  Eve V. Clark,et al.  The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition. , 1987 .

[84]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The TRACE model of speech perception , 1986, Cognitive Psychology.

[85]  Paul Kiparsky,et al.  Some consequences of Lexical Phonology , 1985, Phonology Yearbook.

[86]  A. Samuel.  Phonemic restoration: insights from a new methodology. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[87]  Drew H. Abney,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance Influence of Musical Groove on Postural Sway , 2015 .

[88]  F Grosjean,et al.  Spoken word recognition processes and the gating paradigm , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[89]  W. Ganong.  Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[90]  L L Elliott,et al.  Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[91]  David Sankoff.  On the Rate of Replacement of Word-Meaning Relationships , 1970 .

[92]  C. F. Hockett.  Linguistic Elements and Their Relations , 1961 .

[93]  J. Berko.  The Child's Learning of English Morphology , 1958 .

[94]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .