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
01
Bidirectional Optimality Theory
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‑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
01
Bidirectional Optimality Theory
An introduction
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
01
A programme for bidirectional phonology and phonetics and their acquisition and evolution
A
programme for bidirectional phonology and phonetics and their acquisition and evolution
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’s and Mattasusch’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
01
A note on the emergence of subject salience
A
note on the emergence of subject salience
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
01
Language acquisition and language change in bidirectional Optimality Theory
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
01
Sense and simplicity
Bidirectionality in differential case marking
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
01
On the interaction of tense, aspect and modality in Dutch
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
01
Production and comprehension in context
The case of word order freezing
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
01
Bayesian interpretation and Optimality Theory
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 “grammar” 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
01
Bidirectional grammar and bidirectional optimization
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’s and the speaker’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
01
On bidirectional Optimality Theory for dynamic contexts
1
A01
Anton Benz
Benz, Anton
Anton
Benz
benz@zas.gwz–berlin.de
01
In this paper we study context–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–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
01
Bidirectional Optimality Theory
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‑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
01
Bidirectional Optimality Theory
An introduction
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
01
A programme for bidirectional phonology and phonetics and their acquisition and evolution
A
programme for bidirectional phonology and phonetics and their acquisition and evolution
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’s and Mattasusch’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
01
A note on the emergence of subject salience
A
note on the emergence of subject salience
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
01
Language acquisition and language change in bidirectional Optimality Theory
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
01
Sense and simplicity
Bidirectionality in differential case marking
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
01
On the interaction of tense, aspect and modality in Dutch
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
01
Production and comprehension in context
The case of word order freezing
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
01
Bayesian interpretation and Optimality Theory
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 “grammar” 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
01
Bidirectional grammar and bidirectional optimization
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’s and the speaker’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
01
On bidirectional Optimality Theory for dynamic contexts
1
A01
Anton Benz
Benz, Anton
Anton
Benz
benz@zas.gwz–berlin.de
01
In this paper we study context–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–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