Hợp nhất lý thuyết cú pháp và độ khó trong xử lý câu thông qua bộ phân tích kiểu tối giản nối kết

Cognitive Neurodynamics - Tập 3 - Trang 297-316 - 2009
Sabrina Gerth1, Peter beim Graben2
1Department of Linguistics, University of Potsdam, Potsdam/Golm, Germany
2School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, Berkshire, UK

Tóm tắt

Lý thuyết cú pháp cung cấp một hệ thống phong phú về các giả định biểu diễn liên quan đến kiến thức và quá trình ngôn ngữ. Những ràng buộc chi tiết và được thúc đẩy độc lập về kiến thức ngữ pháp như vậy nên đóng vai trò trong việc hiểu câu. Tuy nhiên, hầu hết các lời giải thích dựa trên ngữ pháp về độ khó trong xử lý trong tài liệu hiện có đã cố gắng sử dụng các biểu diễn và quá trình ngữ pháp tự thân để giải thích độ khó trong xử lý mà không xem xét rằng mô tả về nhận thức cao hơn trong tâm trí và não bộ bao gồm hai cấp độ: một mặt, ở cấp độ vĩ mô, việc tính toán ký hiệu được thực hiện, và mặt khác, ở cấp độ vi mô, việc tính toán được đạt được thông qua các quá trình trong một hệ thống động. Một câu hỏi quan trọng là làm thế nào lý thuyết ngôn ngữ và hệ thống động có thể được hợp nhất để cung cấp một lời giải thích cho các hiệu ứng xử lý. Tại đây, chúng tôi trình bày một sự hợp nhất như vậy cho một tài khoản cụ thể về lý thuyết cú pháp: cụ thể là một bộ phân tích cho Ngữ pháp Tối thiểu của Stabler, trong khuôn khổ của các kiến trúc Tích hợp Kết nối/Symbolic của Smolensky. Trong các mô phỏng, chúng tôi chứng minh rằng bộ phân tích kiểu tối giản dựa trên kết nối tạo ra các dự đoán phản ánh những phát hiện thực nghiệm chung từ nghiên cứu tâm lý ngôn ngữ.

Từ khóa

#Lý thuyết cú pháp #xử lý câu #bộ phân tích tối giản #hệ thống động #nghiên cứu tâm lý ngôn ngữ.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Bader M (1996) Sprachverstehen: Syntax und Prosodie beim Lesen. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen Bader M, Meng M (1999) Subject-object ambiguities in German embedded clauses: an across-the-board comparision. J Psycholinguist Res 28(2):121–143 beim Graben P, Gerth S, Vasishth S (2008a) Towards dynamical system models of language-related brain potentials. Cogn Neurodyn 2(3):229–255 beim Graben P, Pinotsis D, Saddy D, Potthast R (2008b) Language processing with dynamic fields. Cogn Neurodyn 2(2):79–88 beim Graben P, Atmanspacher H (2009) Extending the philosophical significance of the idea of complementarity. In: Atmanspacher H, Primas H (eds) Recasting reality. Springer, Berlin, pp 99–113 beim Graben P, Potthast R (2009) Inverse problems in dynamic cognitive modeling. Chaos 19(1):015103 beim Graben P, Barrett A, Atmanspacher H (2009) Stability criteria for the contextual emergence of macrostates in neural networks. Netw Comput Neural Syst 20(3):177–195 Berg G (1992) A connectionist parser with recursive sentence structure and lexical disambiguation. In: Proceedings of the 10th national conference on artificial intelligence, pp 32–37 Chomsky N (1981) Lectures on government and binding. Foris Chomsky N (1995) The minimalist program. MIT Press, Cambridge Christiansen MH, Chater N (1999) Toward a connectionist model of recursion in human linguistic performance. Cogn Sci 23(4):157–205 Dolan CP, Smolensky P (1989) Tensor product production system: A modular architecture and representation. Connect Sci 1(1):53–68 Elman JL (1995) Language as a dynamical system. In: Port RF, van Gelder T (eds), Mind as motion: explorations in the dynamics of cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 195–223 Fanselow G, Schlesewsky M, Cavar D, Kliegl R (1999) Optimal parsing: syntactic parsing preferences and optimality theory. Rutgers Optim Arch pp 367–1299 Farkas I, Crocker MW (2008) Syntactic systematicity in sentence processing with a recurrent self-organizing network. Neurocomputing 71:1172–1179 Ferreira F, Henderson JM (1990) Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 16:555–568 Frazier L (1979) On comprehending sentences: syntactic parsing strategies. PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs Frazier L (1985) Syntactic complexity. In: Dowty D, Karttunen L, Zwicky A (eds), Natural language parsing. Cambridge University Press Frazier L, Rayner K (1982) Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cogn Psychol 14:178–210 Freeman WJ (2007) Definitions of state variables and state space for brain-computer interface. Part 1. Multiple hierarchical levels of brain function. Cogn Neurodyn 1:3–14 Frisch S, Schlesewsky M, Saddy D, Alpermann A (2002) The P600 as an indicator of syntactic ambiguity. Cognition 85:B83–B92 Gerth S (2006) Parsing mit minimalistischen, gewichteten Grammatiken und deren Zustandsraumdarstellung. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Universität Potsdam Gibson E (1998) Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68:1–76 Frey W, Gärtner HM (2002) On the treatment of scrambling and adjunction in Minimalist Grammars. In: Jäger G, Monachesi P, Penn G, Wintner S (eds) Proceedings of formal grammars, pp 41–52 Haegeman L (1994) Introduction to government & binding theory. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford Hagoort P (2003) How the brain solves the binding problem for language: a neurocomputational model of syntactic processing. NeuroImage 20:S18–S29 Hagoort P (2005) On Broca, brain, and binding: a new framework. Trends Cogn Sci 9(9):416–423 Hale JT (2003a) Grammar, uncertainty and sentence processing. PhD thesis, The Johns Hopkins University Hale JT (2003b) The information conveyed by words in sentences. J Psycholinguist Res32(2):101–123 Hale JT (2006) Uncertainty about the rest of the sentence. Cogn Sci 30(4):643–672 Harkema H (2001) Parsing minimalist languages. PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles Hemforth B (1993) Kognitives Parsing: Repräsentation und Verarbeitung kognitiven Wissens. Infix, Sankt Augustin Hemforth B (2000) German sentence processing. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dodrecht Hertz J, Krogh A, Palmer RG (1991) Introduction to the theory of neural computation. Perseus Books, Cambridge Hopcroft JE, Ullman JD (1979) Introduction to automata theory, languages, and computation. Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park Hopfield JJ (1982) Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 79(8):2554–2558 Joshi AK, Schabes Y (1997) Tree-adjoining grammars. In: Salomma A, Rosenberg G (eds) Handbook of formal languages and automata, vol 3. Springer, Berlin, pp 69–124 Joshi AK, Levy L, Takahashi M (1975) Tree adjunct grammars. J Comput Syst Sci 10(1):136–163 Lawrence S, Giles CL, Fong S (2000) Natural language grammatical inference with recurrent neural networks. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 12(1):126–140 Legendre G, Miyata Y, Smolensky P (1990a) Harmonic grammar—a formal multi-level connectionist theory of linguistic well-formedness: theoretical foundations. In: Proceedings of the 12th annual conference cognitive science society. Cognitive Science Society, Cambridge, pp 388–395 Legendre G, Miyata Y, Smolensky P (1990b) Harmonic grammar—a formal multi-level connectionist theory of linguistic well-formedness: an application. In: Proceedings 12th annual conference cognitive science society. Cognitive Science Society, Cambridge, pp 884–891 Michaelis J (2001) Derivational minimalism is mildly context-sensitive. In: Moortgat M (ed) Logical aspects of computational linguistics, vol 2014. Springer, Berlin, pp 179–198 (Lecture notes in artificial intelligence) Mizraji E (1989) Context-dependent associations in linear distributed memories. Bull Math Biol 51(2):195–205 Mizraji E (1992) Vector logics: The matrix-vector representation of logical calculus. Fuzzy Sets Syst 50:179–185 Niyogi S, Berwick RC (2005) A minimalist implementation of Hale-Keyser incorporation theory. In: Sciullo AMD (ed) UG and external systems language, brain and computation, linguistik aktuell/linguistics today, vol 75. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 269–288 Osterhout L, Holcomb PJ, Swinney DA (1994) Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 20(4):786–803 Pollard C, Sag IA (1994) Head-driven phrase structure grammar. University of Chicago Press, Chicago Potthast R, beim Graben P (2009) Inverse problems in neural field theory. SIAM J Appl Dyn Syst (in press) Prince A, Smolensky P (1997) Optimality: from neural networks to universal grammar. Science 275:1604–1610 Siegelmann HT, Sontag ED (1995) On the computational power of neural nets. J Comput Syst Sci 50(1):132–150 Smolensky P (1986) Information processing in dynamical systems: foundations of harmony theory. In: Rumelhart DE, McClelland JL, the PDP Research Group (eds) Parallel distributed processing: explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol I. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 194–281 (Chap 6) Smolensky P (1990) Tensor product variable binding and the representation of symbolic structures in connectionist systems. Artif Intell 46:159–216 Smolensky P (2006) Harmony in linguistic cognition. Cogn Sci 30:779–801 Smolensky P, Legendre G (2006a) The harmonic mind. from neural computation to optimality-theoretic grammar, vol 1: cognitive architecture. MIT Press, Cambridge Smolensky P, Legendre G (2006b) The harmonic mind. From neural computation to optimality-theoretic grammar, vol 2: linguistic and philosophic implications. MIT Press, Cambridge Stabler EP (1997) Derivational minimalism. In: Retoré C (ed) Logical Aspects of computational linguistics, springer lecture notes in computer science, vol 1328. Springer, New York, pp 68–95 Stabler EP (2000) Minimalist Grammars and recognition. In: CSLI (ed) Linguistic form and its computation, Rohrer, Rossdeutscher and Kamp, pp 327–352 Stabler EP (2004) Varieties of crossing dependencies: structure dependence and mild context sensitivity. Cogn Sci 28:699–720 Stabler EP, Keenan EL (2003) Structural similarity within and among languages. Theor Comput Sci 293:345–363 Staudacher P (1990) Ansätze und Probleme prinzipienorientierten Parsens. In: Felix SW, Kanngießer S, Rickheit G (eds) Sprache und Wissen. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen, pp 151–189 Tabor W (2000) Fractal encoding of context-free grammars in connectionist networks. Expert Syst Int J Knowl Eng Neural Netw 17(1):41–56 Tabor W (2003) Learning exponential state-growth languages by hill climbing. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 14(2):444–446 Tabor W, Tanenhaus MK (1999) Dynamical models of sentence processing. Cogn Sci 23(4):491–515 Tabor W, Juliano C, Tanenhaus MK (1997) Parsing in a dynamical system: An attractor-based account of the interaction of lexical and structural constraints in sentence processing. Lang Cogn Process 12(2/3):211–271 Traxler M, Gernsbacher MA (eds) (2006) Handbook of psycholinguistics. Elsevier, Oxford Vosse T, Kempen G (2000) Syntactic structure assembly in human parsing: a computational model based on competitive inhibition and a lexicalist grammar. Cognition 75:105–143 Vosse T, Kempen G (this issue) The Unification space implemented as a localist neural net: predictions and error-tolerance in a constraint-based parser. Cogn Neurodyn Weyerts H, Penke M, Muente TF, Heinze HJ, Clahsen H (2002) Word order in sentence processing: an experimental study of verb placement in German. J Psycholinguist Res 31(3):211–268