Sentence comprehension: A parallel distributed processing approach

Abstract In this paper, we review basic aspects of conventional approaches to sentence comprehension and point out some of the difficulties faced by models that take these approaches. We then describe an alternative approach, based on the principles of parallel distributed processing, and show how it offers different answers to basic questions about the nature of the language processing mechanism. We describe an illustrative simulation model that captures the key characteristics of the approach, and illustrate how it can cope with the difficulties faced by conventional models. We describe alternative ways of conceptualising basic aspects of language processing within the framework of this approach, consider how it can address several arguments that might be brought to bear against it, and suggest avenues for future development.

[1]  B. MacWhinney,et al.  The Crosslinguistic Study of Sentence Processing. , 1992 .

[2]  J. Elman.  Representation and structure in connectionist models , 1991 .

[3]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Learning and Applying Contextual Constraints in Sentence Comprehension , 1990, Artif. Intell..

[4]  Jeffrey L. Elman,et al.  Finding Structure in Time , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[5]  R. Miikkulainen,et al.  A modular neural network architecture for sequential paraphrasing of script-based stories , 1989, International 1989 Joint Conference on Neural Networks.

[6]  Geoffrey E. Hinton.  Connectionist Learning Procedures , 1989, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Interaction with context during human sentence processing , 1988, Cognition.

[8]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Constituent Attachment and Thematic Role Assignment in Sentence Processing: Influences of Content-Based Expectations , 1988 .

[9]  James L. McClelland.  Parallel Distributed Processing: Implications for Cognition and Development , 1988 .

[10]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  A Distributed Connectionist Production System , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[11]  S. Blumstein,et al.  Phonological processing and lexical access in aphasia , 1988, Brain and Language.

[12]  Gerry T. M. Altmann,et al.  Ambiguity, parsing strategies, and computational models , 1988 .

[13]  J. Fodor,et al.  Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis , 1988, Cognition.

[14]  David Caplan,et al.  Disorders of Syntactic Comprehension , 1988 .

[15]  David S. Touretzky,et al.  A distributed connectionist representation for concept structures , 1987 .

[16]  James L. McClelland.  The Case for Interactionism in Language Processing. , 1987 .

[17]  C. Clifton,et al.  The independence of syntactic processing , 1986 .

[18]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  Language and Memory , 1986, Cogn. Sci..

[19]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Distributed Representations , 1986, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[20]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Mechanisms of Sentence Processing: Assigning Roles to Constituents of Sentences , 1986 .

[21]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Learning internal representations by error propagation , 1986 .

[22]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Parallel distributed processing: explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1: foundations , 1986 .

[23]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Schemata and Sequential Thought Processes in PDP Models , 1986 .

[24]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences , 1983 .

[25]  Eric Wanner,et al.  Language acquisition: the state of the art , 1982 .

[26]  Marcel Adam Just,et al.  Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension , 1982 .

[27]  M. Mattson,et al.  From words to meaning: A semantic illusion , 1981 .

[28]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[29]  D. Swinney.  Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects , 1979 .

[30]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Evidence for Multiple Stages in the Processing of Ambiguous Words in Syntactic Contexts. , 1979 .

[31]  James L. McClelland.  On the time relations of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. , 1979 .

[32]  Mitchell P. Marcus,et al.  A theory of syntactic recognition for natural language , 1979 .

[33]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Psychology and language : an introduction to psycholinguistics , 1979 .

[34]  Charles J. Fillmore,et al.  THE CASE FOR CASE. , 1967 .

[35]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Learning distributed representations of concepts. , 1989 .

[36]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 1.: an account of basic findings , 1988 .

[37]  A. H. Kawamoto.  Distributed Representations of Ambiguous Words and Their Resolution in a Connectionist Network , 1988 .

[38]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Learning Subsequential Structure in Simple Recurrent Networks , 1988, NIPS.

[39]  Robert B. Allen,et al.  Several Studies on Natural Language ·and Back-Propagation , 1987 .

[40]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Theories of sentence processing , 1987 .

[41]  Alan H. Kawamoto,et al.  Dynamic processes in the (re)solution of lexical ambiguity , 1985 .

[42]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. , 1982, Psychological review.

[43]  Mark Steedman,et al.  The use of context by the psychological parser , 1981 .

[44]  Gregg C. Oden,et al.  Semantic constraints and judged preference for interpretations of ambiguous sentences , 1978 .