219-7677 10 7500817 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 201611161226 ONIX title feed eng 01 EUR
608009077 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code LA 180 Eb 15 9789027284525 06 10.1075/la.180 13 2011027681 DG 002 02 01 LA 02 0166-0829 Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 180 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Bidirectional Optimality Theory</TitleText> 01 la.180 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.180 1 B01 Anton Benz Benz, Anton Anton Benz ZAS Berlin 2 B01 Jason Mattausch Mattausch, Jason Jason Mattausch Providence University, Taiwan 01 eng 286 v 279 LAN009000 v.2006 CFK 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.GENER Generative linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.SYNTAX Syntax 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 <i>Bidirectional Optimality Theory</i> (BiOT) emerged at the turn of the millennium as a fusion of Radical Pragmatics and Optimality Theoretic Semantics. It stirred a wealth of new research in the pragmatics&#8209;semantics interface and heavily influenced e.g. the development of evolutionary and game theoretic approaches. Optimality Theory holds that linguistic output can be understood as the optimized products of ranked constraints. At the centre of BiOT is the insight that this optimisation has to take place both in production and interpretation, and that the production-interpretation cycle has to lead back to the original input. BiOT is now generally interpreted as a description of diachronically stable and cognitively optimal form–meaning pairs. It found applications beyond the semantics-pragmatics interface in language acquisition, historical linguistics, phonology, syntax, and typology. This book provides a state of the art overview of these developments. It collects nine chapters by leading scientists in the field. 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.180.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255631.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255631.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.180.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.180.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.180.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.180.hb.png 10 01 JB code la.180.01int 1 32 32 Article 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Bidirectional Optimality Theory</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">An introduction</Subtitle> 1 A01 Anton Benz Benz, Anton Anton Benz 2 A01 Jason Mattausch Mattausch, Jason Jason Mattausch 10 01 JB code la.180.02boe 33 72 40 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">A programme for bidirectional phonology and phonetics and their acquisition and evolution</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>A </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">programme for bidirectional phonology and phonetics and their acquisition and evolution</TitleWithoutPrefix> 1 A01 Paul Boersma Boersma, Paul Paul Boersma 01 This paper summarizes an existing bidirectional six-level model of phonology and phonetics (and a bit of morphology). Bidirectionality in this case refers to the modelling of both the speaking process (production) and the listening process (comprehension). The elements of the grammar (the constraints) are bidirectional in the sense that the speaker and listener use the same sets of constraints, with the same rankings. In contrast with Blutner&#8217;s and Mattasusch&#8217;s bidirectional OT models, the evaluation is the simplest possible, i.e. it is performed unidirectionally in both directions of processing; still, listener-oriented effects tend to emerge from having learning algorithms for the comprehension direction alone. This paper describes a great number of learning algorithms in both directions of processing, and their typical results across one or multiple generations. 10 01 JB code la.180.03mat 73 96 24 Article 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">A note on the emergence of subject salience</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>A </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">note on the emergence of subject salience</TitleWithoutPrefix> 1 A01 Jason Mattausch Mattausch, Jason Jason Mattausch Providence University, Taichung, Taiwan, R.O.C. 01 This paper demonstrates a potential explanation for the salience of grammatical subjects using a statistically driven, evolutionary model based on bidirectional Optimality Theory. 10 01 JB code la.180.04hen 97 124 28 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Language acquisition and language change in bidirectional Optimality Theory</TitleText> 1 A01 Petra Hendriks Hendriks, Petra Petra Hendriks University of Groningen 2 A01 Jacolien van Rij Rij, Jacolien van Jacolien van Rij University of Groningen 10 01 JB code la.180.05swa 125 150 26 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Sense and simplicity</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Bidirectionality in differential case marking</Subtitle> 1 A01 Peter de Swart Swart, Peter de Peter de Swart Center for Language and Cognition Groningen University of Groningen 01 I show that two different motivations drive the differential case marking of direct objects cross-linguistically. On the one hand, direct objects can be marked to signal their markedness with respect to certain semantic features (local distinguishability). Opposed to this we find systems where overt object marking is dependent on global distinguishability and is only applied in cases of actual ambiguity or comparison between subject and object features. In some DOM systems we even find both strategies at work. I argue that these two strategies correspond to different modes of optimization. Whereas local DOM systems can be modeled by referring only to productive optimization, global systems require a model in which interpretive optimization plays a role as well. I introduce an asymmetric model of bidirectional optimization in which the outcome of production is constrained by interpretation. This model will be shown to provide a straightforward analysis of different DOM patterns, in contrast to existing models of bidirectional optimization. 10 01 JB code la.180.06van 151 168 18 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On the interaction of tense, aspect and modality in Dutch</TitleText> 1 A01 Richard van Gerrevink Gerrevink, Richard van Richard van Gerrevink Radboud University Nijmegen 2 A01 Helen de Hoop Hoop, Helen de Helen de Hoop Radboud University Nijmegen 01 In this chapter the interplay between tense, aspect and modality in the interpretation of modal auxiliaries in three different past tenses in Dutch is studied. After discussing the semantic effects of these factors separately, it is shown that each factor exerts a different, conflicting force on the meaning of a proposition. It is argued that a bidirectional optimality theoretic model explains how Dutch speakers use the various past tense modal constructions in the Dutch language in order to convey different interpretations. 10 01 JB code la.180.07bou 169 190 22 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Production and comprehension in context</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">The case of word order freezing</Subtitle> 1 A01 Gerlof Bouma Bouma, Gerlof Gerlof Bouma Center for Language and Cognition, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen 01 <i>Freezing</i> refers to a loss of word order freedom found across typologically very different languages. It occurs when argument identifying mechanisms such as agreement and case do not sufficiently distinguish verbal arguments. Word order can in such situations be said to be exceptionally used to unambiguously distinguish the arguments. In the optimality-theoretic literature it has been shown that a bidirectional grammar can elegantly capture this word order freezing. Bidirectional optimality-theoretic grammar, however, does not typically deal well with ambiguity and optionality. This leads to problems in modeling word order, where these two types of variation do appear. In this paper, I will show that by adopting a notion of grammaticality in Optimality Theory we shall call <i>stratified strong bidirectionality</i> and by looking more seriously at the role of the context and argument markedness in comprehension, we can successfully model both word order freezing and word order freedom in bidirectional Optimality Theory. 10 01 JB code la.180.08zee 191 220 30 Article 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Bayesian interpretation and Optimality Theory</TitleText> 1 A01 Henk Zeevat Zeevat, Henk Henk Zeevat ILLC, University of Amsterdam 01 The paper explores the consequences of reinterpreting OT pragmatics of Zeevat (2009) as a Bayesian account of natural language interpretation, not unlike Bayesian accounts of vision. In such accounts, a model of the most probable interpretations in the context is combined with a model of NL production to give the most probable interpretation of a given form. It is argued that pragmatics can be equated with the model of probability maximisation of interpretations while &#8220;grammar&#8221; can be equated with the human capacity of mapping thoughts to utterances or any theoretical model of that capacity. The Bayesian model by itself does not give communicative success, it is merely a better model for estimating the most probable interpretation. It is essential that the speaker also estimates the most probable interpretation of her utterance, to see if the hearer will get her right. This allows alternative formulations with an increased probability of being understood as intended. One claim of this paper is that this self-monitoring is partially automatised and accounts for such phenomena as particle insertion and word order freezing. The simplest brain architecture is as two associative processes, one leading from forms to interpretations, the other from intentions to forms that can inhibit each other. A form that in the interpretation process does not assign the strongest activation to the speaker intention is inhibited, an interpretation that does not most strongly activate the form is inhibited. This dual inhibition model assigns a natural temporal structure to the development of linguistic skills. The production skills must be good before they can contribute to communicative success in their role of inhibiting interpretation. Similarly, the interpretational skills must be well developed before they can be useful role in production. 10 01 JB code la.180.09blu 221 248 28 Article 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Bidirectional grammar and bidirectional optimization</TitleText> 1 A01 Reinhard Blutner Blutner, Reinhard Reinhard Blutner 2 A01 Anatoli Strigin Strigin, Anatoli Anatoli Strigin 01 The human language faculty is a bidirectional system, i.e. it can be used by processes of approximately equal computational complexity to understand and to generate utterances of a language. We assume the general framework of optimality theory and treat the language faculty as a constraint-based system where the very same constraints are uses both in comprehension and in generation. In the simplest case comprehension and generation can be modelled by unidirectional optimization: finding an optimal interpretations for a given speech input in the case of comprehension; producing an optimal expression for a given message in case of generation. In the simplest case, the speaker and the listener roles are strictly separated. However, there are linguistic observations which indicate that the listener&#8217;s and the speaker&#8217;s perspectives are integrated to some extent. Bidirectional optimization is an explicit proposal for doing the integration. In this article we propose a general architecture of the language faculty and discuss the precise extent to which speakers are listener-oriented and/or listeners are speaker-oriented. Interestingly, this extent does not seem to vary with regard to the different subsystems considered: the sensorimotor system, the system of grammar proper and the conceptual-intentional system (pragmatics). Though the experimental evidence is not very strong at the moment it seems in online processing the speaker takes the hearer into account but not <i>vice versa</i>. Besides the online (actual processing) view of bidirectionality we discuss bidirectional optimization as an offline phenomenon taking place during language acquisition, and giving raise to fossilization phenomena. 10 01 JB code la.180.10ben 249 276 28 Article 10 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On bidirectional Optimality Theory for dynamic contexts</TitleText> 1 A01 Anton Benz Benz, Anton Anton Benz benz@zas.gwz–berlin.de 01 In this paper we study context&#8211;sensitive versions of bidirectional Optimality Theory (OT) which can be used to model online communication. Our guiding examples are taken from anaphora resolution. We discuss a puzzle presented by Jason Mattausch which shows that context&#8211;sensitivity may lead into circularity. In order to represent it, we have to introduce more expressive mathematical structures for BiOT. We call the fundamental structures <i>Blutner structures</i>. A core problem is to account for the epistemic asymmetry between speaker and hearer in online communication. This leads us to Blutner structures which combine bidirectional OT with Dynamic Semantics. 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20111128 2011 John Benjamins 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027255631 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 jbe-platform.com 09 WORLD 21 01 00 99.00 EUR R 01 00 83.00 GBP Z 01 gen 00 149.00 USD S 264009076 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code LA 180 Hb 15 9789027255631 13 2011027681 BB 01 LA 02 0166-0829 Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 180 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Bidirectional Optimality Theory</TitleText> 01 la.180 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.180 1 B01 Anton Benz Benz, Anton Anton Benz ZAS Berlin 2 B01 Jason Mattausch Mattausch, Jason Jason Mattausch Providence University, Taiwan 01 eng 286 v 279 LAN009000 v.2006 CFK 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.GENER Generative linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.SYNTAX Syntax 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 <i>Bidirectional Optimality Theory</i> (BiOT) emerged at the turn of the millennium as a fusion of Radical Pragmatics and Optimality Theoretic Semantics. It stirred a wealth of new research in the pragmatics&#8209;semantics interface and heavily influenced e.g. the development of evolutionary and game theoretic approaches. Optimality Theory holds that linguistic output can be understood as the optimized products of ranked constraints. At the centre of BiOT is the insight that this optimisation has to take place both in production and interpretation, and that the production-interpretation cycle has to lead back to the original input. BiOT is now generally interpreted as a description of diachronically stable and cognitively optimal form–meaning pairs. It found applications beyond the semantics-pragmatics interface in language acquisition, historical linguistics, phonology, syntax, and typology. This book provides a state of the art overview of these developments. It collects nine chapters by leading scientists in the field. 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.180.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255631.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255631.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.180.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.180.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.180.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.180.hb.png 10 01 JB code la.180.01int 1 32 32 Article 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Bidirectional Optimality Theory</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">An introduction</Subtitle> 1 A01 Anton Benz Benz, Anton Anton Benz 2 A01 Jason Mattausch Mattausch, Jason Jason Mattausch 10 01 JB code la.180.02boe 33 72 40 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">A programme for bidirectional phonology and phonetics and their acquisition and evolution</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>A </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">programme for bidirectional phonology and phonetics and their acquisition and evolution</TitleWithoutPrefix> 1 A01 Paul Boersma Boersma, Paul Paul Boersma 01 This paper summarizes an existing bidirectional six-level model of phonology and phonetics (and a bit of morphology). Bidirectionality in this case refers to the modelling of both the speaking process (production) and the listening process (comprehension). The elements of the grammar (the constraints) are bidirectional in the sense that the speaker and listener use the same sets of constraints, with the same rankings. In contrast with Blutner&#8217;s and Mattasusch&#8217;s bidirectional OT models, the evaluation is the simplest possible, i.e. it is performed unidirectionally in both directions of processing; still, listener-oriented effects tend to emerge from having learning algorithms for the comprehension direction alone. This paper describes a great number of learning algorithms in both directions of processing, and their typical results across one or multiple generations. 10 01 JB code la.180.03mat 73 96 24 Article 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">A note on the emergence of subject salience</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>A </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">note on the emergence of subject salience</TitleWithoutPrefix> 1 A01 Jason Mattausch Mattausch, Jason Jason Mattausch Providence University, Taichung, Taiwan, R.O.C. 01 This paper demonstrates a potential explanation for the salience of grammatical subjects using a statistically driven, evolutionary model based on bidirectional Optimality Theory. 10 01 JB code la.180.04hen 97 124 28 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Language acquisition and language change in bidirectional Optimality Theory</TitleText> 1 A01 Petra Hendriks Hendriks, Petra Petra Hendriks University of Groningen 2 A01 Jacolien van Rij Rij, Jacolien van Jacolien van Rij University of Groningen 10 01 JB code la.180.05swa 125 150 26 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Sense and simplicity</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Bidirectionality in differential case marking</Subtitle> 1 A01 Peter de Swart Swart, Peter de Peter de Swart Center for Language and Cognition Groningen University of Groningen 01 I show that two different motivations drive the differential case marking of direct objects cross-linguistically. On the one hand, direct objects can be marked to signal their markedness with respect to certain semantic features (local distinguishability). Opposed to this we find systems where overt object marking is dependent on global distinguishability and is only applied in cases of actual ambiguity or comparison between subject and object features. In some DOM systems we even find both strategies at work. I argue that these two strategies correspond to different modes of optimization. Whereas local DOM systems can be modeled by referring only to productive optimization, global systems require a model in which interpretive optimization plays a role as well. I introduce an asymmetric model of bidirectional optimization in which the outcome of production is constrained by interpretation. This model will be shown to provide a straightforward analysis of different DOM patterns, in contrast to existing models of bidirectional optimization. 10 01 JB code la.180.06van 151 168 18 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On the interaction of tense, aspect and modality in Dutch</TitleText> 1 A01 Richard van Gerrevink Gerrevink, Richard van Richard van Gerrevink Radboud University Nijmegen 2 A01 Helen de Hoop Hoop, Helen de Helen de Hoop Radboud University Nijmegen 01 In this chapter the interplay between tense, aspect and modality in the interpretation of modal auxiliaries in three different past tenses in Dutch is studied. After discussing the semantic effects of these factors separately, it is shown that each factor exerts a different, conflicting force on the meaning of a proposition. It is argued that a bidirectional optimality theoretic model explains how Dutch speakers use the various past tense modal constructions in the Dutch language in order to convey different interpretations. 10 01 JB code la.180.07bou 169 190 22 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Production and comprehension in context</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">The case of word order freezing</Subtitle> 1 A01 Gerlof Bouma Bouma, Gerlof Gerlof Bouma Center for Language and Cognition, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen 01 <i>Freezing</i> refers to a loss of word order freedom found across typologically very different languages. It occurs when argument identifying mechanisms such as agreement and case do not sufficiently distinguish verbal arguments. Word order can in such situations be said to be exceptionally used to unambiguously distinguish the arguments. In the optimality-theoretic literature it has been shown that a bidirectional grammar can elegantly capture this word order freezing. Bidirectional optimality-theoretic grammar, however, does not typically deal well with ambiguity and optionality. This leads to problems in modeling word order, where these two types of variation do appear. In this paper, I will show that by adopting a notion of grammaticality in Optimality Theory we shall call <i>stratified strong bidirectionality</i> and by looking more seriously at the role of the context and argument markedness in comprehension, we can successfully model both word order freezing and word order freedom in bidirectional Optimality Theory. 10 01 JB code la.180.08zee 191 220 30 Article 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Bayesian interpretation and Optimality Theory</TitleText> 1 A01 Henk Zeevat Zeevat, Henk Henk Zeevat ILLC, University of Amsterdam 01 The paper explores the consequences of reinterpreting OT pragmatics of Zeevat (2009) as a Bayesian account of natural language interpretation, not unlike Bayesian accounts of vision. In such accounts, a model of the most probable interpretations in the context is combined with a model of NL production to give the most probable interpretation of a given form. It is argued that pragmatics can be equated with the model of probability maximisation of interpretations while &#8220;grammar&#8221; can be equated with the human capacity of mapping thoughts to utterances or any theoretical model of that capacity. The Bayesian model by itself does not give communicative success, it is merely a better model for estimating the most probable interpretation. It is essential that the speaker also estimates the most probable interpretation of her utterance, to see if the hearer will get her right. This allows alternative formulations with an increased probability of being understood as intended. One claim of this paper is that this self-monitoring is partially automatised and accounts for such phenomena as particle insertion and word order freezing. The simplest brain architecture is as two associative processes, one leading from forms to interpretations, the other from intentions to forms that can inhibit each other. A form that in the interpretation process does not assign the strongest activation to the speaker intention is inhibited, an interpretation that does not most strongly activate the form is inhibited. This dual inhibition model assigns a natural temporal structure to the development of linguistic skills. The production skills must be good before they can contribute to communicative success in their role of inhibiting interpretation. Similarly, the interpretational skills must be well developed before they can be useful role in production. 10 01 JB code la.180.09blu 221 248 28 Article 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Bidirectional grammar and bidirectional optimization</TitleText> 1 A01 Reinhard Blutner Blutner, Reinhard Reinhard Blutner 2 A01 Anatoli Strigin Strigin, Anatoli Anatoli Strigin 01 The human language faculty is a bidirectional system, i.e. it can be used by processes of approximately equal computational complexity to understand and to generate utterances of a language. We assume the general framework of optimality theory and treat the language faculty as a constraint-based system where the very same constraints are uses both in comprehension and in generation. In the simplest case comprehension and generation can be modelled by unidirectional optimization: finding an optimal interpretations for a given speech input in the case of comprehension; producing an optimal expression for a given message in case of generation. In the simplest case, the speaker and the listener roles are strictly separated. However, there are linguistic observations which indicate that the listener&#8217;s and the speaker&#8217;s perspectives are integrated to some extent. Bidirectional optimization is an explicit proposal for doing the integration. In this article we propose a general architecture of the language faculty and discuss the precise extent to which speakers are listener-oriented and/or listeners are speaker-oriented. Interestingly, this extent does not seem to vary with regard to the different subsystems considered: the sensorimotor system, the system of grammar proper and the conceptual-intentional system (pragmatics). Though the experimental evidence is not very strong at the moment it seems in online processing the speaker takes the hearer into account but not <i>vice versa</i>. Besides the online (actual processing) view of bidirectionality we discuss bidirectional optimization as an offline phenomenon taking place during language acquisition, and giving raise to fossilization phenomena. 10 01 JB code la.180.10ben 249 276 28 Article 10 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On bidirectional Optimality Theory for dynamic contexts</TitleText> 1 A01 Anton Benz Benz, Anton Anton Benz benz@zas.gwz–berlin.de 01 In this paper we study context&#8211;sensitive versions of bidirectional Optimality Theory (OT) which can be used to model online communication. Our guiding examples are taken from anaphora resolution. We discuss a puzzle presented by Jason Mattausch which shows that context&#8211;sensitivity may lead into circularity. In order to represent it, we have to introduce more expressive mathematical structures for BiOT. We call the fundamental structures <i>Blutner structures</i>. A core problem is to account for the epistemic asymmetry between speaker and hearer in online communication. This leads us to Blutner structures which combine bidirectional OT with Dynamic Semantics. 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20111128 2011 John Benjamins 02 WORLD 01 245 mm 02 164 mm 08 680 gr 01 JB 1 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 +31 20 6739773 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 https://benjamins.com 01 WORLD US CA MX 21 42 18 01 02 JB 1 00 99.00 EUR R 02 02 JB 1 00 104.94 EUR R 01 JB 10 bebc +44 1202 712 934 +44 1202 712 913 sales@bebc.co.uk 03 GB 21 18 02 02 JB 1 00 83.00 GBP Z 01 JB 2 John Benjamins North America +1 800 562-5666 +1 703 661-1501 benjamins@presswarehouse.com 01 https://benjamins.com 01 US CA MX 21 1 18 01 gen 02 JB 1 00 149.00 USD