Relative clause processing depends on the grammatical role of the head noun in the subordinate clause. This has traditionally been explained in terms of cognitive limitations. We suggest that structure-related processing differences arise from differences in experience with these structures. We present a connectionist model which learns to produce utterances with relative clauses from exposure to message-sentence pairs. The model shows how various factors such as frequent subsequences, structural variations, and meaning conspire to create differences in the processing of these structures. The predictions of this learning-based account have been confirmed in behavioral studies with adults. This work shows that structural regularities that govern relative clause processing can be explained within a usage-based approach to recursion.
AMBRIDGE, BEN, EVAN KIDD, CAROLINE F. ROWLAND & ANNA L. THEAKSTON
2015. The ubiquity of frequency effects in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language 42:2 ► pp. 239 ff.
BROUWER, Susanne, Deniz ÖZKAN & Aylin C. KÜNTAY
2019. Verb-based prediction during language processing: the case of Dutch and Turkish. Journal of Child Language 46:1 ► pp. 80 ff.
Chan, Angel, Stephen Matthews, Nicole Tse, Annie Lam, Franklin Chang & Evan Kidd
2021. Revisiting Subject–Object Asymmetry in the Production of Cantonese Relative Clauses: Evidence From Elicited Production in 3-Year-Olds. Frontiers in Psychology 12
CHAN, ANGEL, WENCHUN YANG, FRANKLIN CHANG & EVAN KIDD
2018. Four-year-old Cantonese-speaking children's online processing of relative clauses: a permutation analysis. Journal of Child Language 45:1 ► pp. 174 ff.
CHEN, JIDONG & YASUHIRO SHIRAI
2015. The acquisition of relative clauses in spontaneous child speech in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Child Language 42:2 ► pp. 394 ff.
Dell, Gary S. & Franklin Chang
2014. The P-chain: relating sentence production and its disorders to comprehension and acquisition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 369:1634 ► pp. 20120394 ff.
Diessel, Holger
2019. The Grammar Network,
Green, Kieran & John W. Schwieter
2018. Using more native-like language acquisition processes in the foreign language classroom. Cogent Education 5:1 ► pp. 1429134 ff.
Hinaut, Xavier, Florian Lance, Colas Droin, Maxime Petit, Gregoire Pointeau & Peter Ford Dominey
2015. Corticostriatal response selection in sentence production: Insights from neural network simulation with reservoir computing. Brain and Language 150 ► pp. 54 ff.
Janciauskas, Marius & Franklin Chang
2018. Input and Age‐Dependent Variation in Second Language Learning: A Connectionist Account. Cognitive Science 42:S2 ► pp. 519 ff.
Khoe, Yung Han, Chara Tsoukala, Gerrit Jan Kootstra & Stefan L. Frank
2023. Is structural priming between different languages a learning effect? Modelling priming as error-driven implicit learning. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 38:4 ► pp. 537 ff.
Scontras, Gregory, William Badecker, Lisa Shank, Eunice Lim & Evelina Fedorenko
2015. Syntactic Complexity Effects in Sentence Production. Cognitive Science 39:3 ► pp. 559 ff.
Tooley, Kristen M, Martin J Pickering & Matthew J Traxler
2019. Lexically-mediated syntactic priming effects in comprehension: Sources of facilitation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 72:9 ► pp. 2176 ff.
Traxler, Matthew J.
2015. Priming of early closure: evidence for the lexical boost during sentence comprehension. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 30:4 ► pp. 478 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.