Explanation and Constructions: Response to Adger
2013; Wiley; Volume: 28; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/mila.12028
ISSN1468-0017
Autores Tópico(s)Language and cultural evolution
ResumoMind & LanguageVolume 28, Issue 4 p. 479-491 SYNTAX SYMPOSIUM Explanation and Constructions: Response to Adger ADELE E. GOLDBERG, Corresponding Author ADELE E. GOLDBERG Council of the Humanities, Princeton University Address for correspondence: Council of the Humanities, 2-C-17 Green Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA. Email:[email protected]Search for more papers by this author ADELE E. GOLDBERG, Corresponding Author ADELE E. GOLDBERG Council of the Humanities, Princeton University Address for correspondence: Council of the Humanities, 2-C-17 Green Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA. Email:[email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 02 September 2013 https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12028Citations: 6 I would like to thank Morten Christiansen, Dan Everett, David Kemmerer, Laura Michaelis, Stefan Müller, Clarice Robenalt and Liz Wonnacott for helpful feedback on an earlier draft. Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat References Abbot-Smith, K., Dittmar, M. and Tomasello, T. 2007: Graded representations in the acquisition of English and German transitive constructions. Cognitive Development, 23, 48-66. Ackerman, F. and Nikolaeva, I. 2004: Comparative Grammar and Grammatical Theory: A Construction-Based Study of Morphosyntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI. Alishahi, A. and Stevenson, S. 2008: A computational model of early argument structure acquisition. Cognitive Science, 32, 789-834. Ambridge, B., Pine, J. M., Rowland, C. F., Freudenthal, D. and Chang, F. 2012: Avoiding dative overgeneralisation errors: semantics, statistics or both?, Language and Cognitive Processes, 1-37. Arbib, M. and Lee, J. 2008: Describing visual scenes: towards a neurolingistics based on construction grammar. Brain Research, 1226, 146-62. Baronchelli A, Chater, N., Pastor-Satorras, R. and Christiansen, M. H. 2012: The biological origin of linguistic diversity. PLoS ONE, 7(10), e48029. Bates, E. and MacWhinney, B. 1987: Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 157-93. Beckner, C., Ellis, N. C., Blythe, R., Holland, J., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Larsen-Freeman, D. and Schoenemann, T. 2009: Language is a complex adaptive system. Language Learning, December, 1-26. Bekkering, F., Wohlschlager, A. and Gattis, M. 2000. Imitation of gestures in children is goal-directed. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 153-64. Bergen, B. and Chang, N. 2005: Embodied construction grammar in simulation-based language understanding. In J-O. Ostman and M. Fried (eds), Construction Grammars: Cognitive and Cross-Language Dimensions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Blevins, J. P. 2001: Realisation-based lexicalism. Journal of Linguistics, 37, 355-65. Blumberg, M. 2005: Basic Instinct: The Genesis of Behavior. New York: Thunder's Mouth Press/Avalon Publishing. H. C. Boas (ed.) 2010: Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. H. C Boas and I. A. Sag (eds) 2012: Sign-based Construction Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Bod, R. 1998: Beyond Grammar: An Experience-Based Theory of Language. Stanford, CA: CSLI. Bod, R. 2009: From exemplar to grammar: integrating analogy and probability learning. Cognitive Science, 13(2), 311-41. Bolinger, D. 1977: Meaning and Form. London: Longman. Booij, G. 2010: Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Boyd, J. K. and Goldberg, A. E. 2011: Learning what not to say: categorization and statistical preemption in the production of a-adjectives. Language, 87, 55-83. Bybee, J. 2010: Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. J. Bybee, J. Haiman and S. Thompson (eds) 1997: Essays on Language Function and Language Type. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Cameron-Faulkner, T., Lieven, E., and Tomasello, M. 2003: A construction based analysis of child directed speech. Cognitive Science, 27, 843-73. Chomsky, N. 1965: Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Christiansen, M. H. and Chater, N. 2008: Language as shaped by the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31(5), 489-508. Clark, E. V. 1987: The principle of contrast: a constraint on language acquisition. In B. MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1-33. Croft, W. 2001: Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Csibra, G., Gergely, G., Biró, S., Koós, O. and Brockbank, M. 1999: Goal-attribution and without agency cues: the perception of 'pure reason' in infancy. Cognition, 72, 237-67. Culicover, P. W. 1999: Syntactic Nuts: Hard Cases, Syntactic Theory and Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Culicover, P. W. and Jackendoff, R. 2005: Simpler Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Deák, G. 2000: Hunting the fox of word learning: why 'constraints' fail to capture it. Developmental Review, 20, 29-80. Dowty, D. 1991: Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67, 547-619. Dryer, M. 1997: Are grammatical relations universal? In J. Bybee, J. Haiman and S. Thompson (eds), Essays on Language Function and Language Type. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 115-43. Ellefson, M. R. and Christiansen, M. H. 2000: Subjacency constraints without universal grammar: evidence from artificial language learning and connectionist modeling. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 645–50: Elman, J., Bates, E., Johnson, M., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D. and Plunkett, K. 1996: Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Evans, N. and Levinson, S. 2009: The myth of language universals: language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 429-92. Everett, D. L. 2009: Pirahã culture and grammar: a response to some criticisms. Language, 85(2), 405-42. Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P. and O'Connor, M. C. 1988: Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: the case of let alone. Language, 64, 501-38. Fiser, J. and Aslin, R. N. 2002: Statistical learning of new visual feature combinations by infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 99, 15822-6. Givón, T. 1991: Isomorphism in the grammatical code: cognitive and biological considerations. Studies in Language, 1, 85-114. Goldberg, A. E. 1992: The inherent semantics of argument structure: the case of the English ditransitive construction. Cognitive Linguistics, 3, 37-74. Goldberg, A. E. 1995: Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. Goldberg, A. E. 2000: Patient arguments of causative verbs can be omitted: the role of information structure in argument distribution. Language Sciences, 34, 503-24. Goldberg, A. E. 2004: But do we need universal grammar? Comment on Lidz et al. 2003, Cognition, 94, 77-84. Goldberg, A. E. 2006: Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Goldberg, A. E. and van der Auwera, J. 2012: This is to count as a construction, Folia Linguistica, 46, 109-32. Gómez, R. L. and Gerken, L. 2000: Infant artificial language learning and language acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(5), 178-86. Gries, S. T. 2003: Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study of Particle Placement. New York: Continuum. Gregory, M. L. and Michaelis, L. A. 2001: Topicalization and left dislocation: a functional opposition revisited. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(11), 1665-1706. Gropen, J., Pinker, S., Hollander, M., Goldberg, R. and Wilson, R. 1989: The learnability and acquisition of the dative alternation in English. Language, 65(2), 203-57. Haspelmath, M. 2008: Parametric versus functional explanation of syntactic universals. In T. Biberauer (ed.), The Limits of Syntactic Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 75-107. Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N. and Fitch, W. T. 2002: The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298(5598), 1569-79. Heath, J. 1977: Choctaw cases. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 3, 204-13. Herrmann, E., Call, J., Hernández-Lloreda, M. V., Hare, B. and Tomasello, M. 2007: Humans have evolved specialized skills of social cognition: the cultural intelligence hypothesis. Science, 317(5843), 1360-6. Hudson Kam, C. and Newport, E. L. 2009: Getting it right by getting it wrong: when learners change languages. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 30-66. Hsu, A. S. and Chater, N. 2010: The logical problem of language acquisition: a probabilistic perspective. Cognitive Science, 34(6), 972-1016. Jackendoff, R. and Pinker, S. 2005: The nature of the language faculty and its implications for evolution of language: reply to Fitch, Hauser and Chomsky. Cognition, 95, 201-36. Javanovic, B., Kiraly, I. I., Elsner, B., Gergely, G., Prinz, W., Aschersleben, G. and Jovanovic, B. 2007: The role of effects for infants' perception of action goals. Psychologia, 50(4), 273-90. Karmiloff-Smith, A. 2006: The tortuous route from genes to behavior: a neuroconstructivist approach. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 6, 9-17. Kemmerer, D. 2006: Action verbs, argument structure constructions and the mirror neuron system. In M. Arbib (ed.), Action to Language via the Mirror Neuron System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 347-72. Kirby, S. 2000: Syntax without natural selection: how compositionality emerges from vocabulary in a population of learners. In C. Knight (ed.), The Evolutionary Emergence of Language: Social Function and the Origins of Linguistic Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-19. Kuhl, P. K. 2000: A new view of language acquisition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 97(22), 11850-7. Lakoff, G. 1969: On Generative Semantics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club. Lakoff, G. 1987: Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things : What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Lakusta, L. and Landau, B. 2005: Starting at the end: the importance of goals in spatial language. Cognition, 96, 1-33. Lakusta, L., Wagner, L., O'Hearn, K. and Landau, B. 2007: Conceptual foundations of spatial language: evidence for a goal bias in infants. Language Learning and Development, 3(3), 179-97. Lander, E. S. and Schork, N. J. 1994: Genetic dissection of complex traits. Science, 265(5181), 2037-48. Langacker, R. W. 1987: Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Volume I. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Lappin, S. and Shieber, S. M. 2007: Machine learning theory and practice as a source of insightinto universal grammar. Journal of Linguistics, 43(2), 393-427. Levine, B. and Postal, P. 2012: A corrupted linguistics. Available at: ling.auf.net/lingbuzz /001634 Lidz, J., Gleitman, H. and Gleitman, L. 2003: Understanding how input matters: verb learning and the footprint of universal grammar. Cognition, 87, 151-78. Lieven, E., Behrens, H., Speakers, J. and Tomasello, M. 2003: Early syntactic creativity: a usage-based approach. Journal of Child Language, 30, 333-70. Michaelis, L. 2012: Making the case for construction grammar. In H. C. Boas and I. Sag (eds), Sign-Based Construction Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI. Michaelis, L. A. and Lambrecht, K. 1996: Toward a construction-based model of language function: the case of nominal extraposition. Language, 72, 215-47. Mintz, T. H., Newport, E. L. and Bever, T. G. 2002: The distributional structure of grammatical categories in speech to young children. Cognitive Science, 26(4), 393-424. Müller, S. 2012: Core-Gram. Available at: http://hpsg.fu-berlin.de/Projects/CoreGram.html Pearl, L. and Sprouse, J. 2012: Syntactic islands and learning biases: combining exper- imental syntax and computational modeling. Ms., Cognitive Science, University of California at Irvine. Perfors, A., Kemp, C., Tenenbaum, J. and Wonnacott, E. 2007: Learning inductive constraints: the acquisition of verb argument constructions. Machine Learning and Cognitive Science of Language Acquisition. Workshop, University College London. Piantadosi, S., Stearns, L., Everett, D. and Gibson, E. 2012: A corpus analysis of Pirahã grammar: an investigation of recursion. Presentation at the LSA conference in Portland, OR, 7 January. Prinz, W. 1990: A common coding approach to perception and action. In O. Neumann and W. Prinz (eds), Relationships between Perception And Action: Current Approaches. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 167-201. Prinz, W. 1997: Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9(2), 129-54. Pullum, G. K. and Scholz, B. C. 2002: Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 19(1–2), 9-50. Regier, T. and Zheng, M. 2003: An attentional constraint on spatial meaning. In R. Alterman and D. Kirsch (eds), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. Robertson, S. S. and Suci, G. J. 1980: Event perception in children in early stages of language production. Child Development, 51, 89-96. Saffran, J. R. 2003: Statistical language learning: mechanisms and constraints. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(4), 110-4. Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R. and Newport, E. 1996: Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants Science, 274(5294), 1926-8. Saussure, F. de 1916: Course in General Linguistics. New York: Philosophical Library. Simone, R. and Vallauri, E. L. 2010: Natural constraints on language. Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure, 63, 205-24. Spencer, A. 2001: The paradigm-based model of morphosyntax. Transactions of the Philological Society, 99(2), 279-314. Talmy, L. 1988: Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49-100. Tomasello, M. 2003: Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Tomasello, M. 2004: What kind of evidence could refute the UG hypothesis? Commentary on Wunderlich. Studies in Language, 28(3), 642-5. Tomasello, M. 2008: Origins of Human Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Traugott, E. C. 2008: 'All that he endeavoured to prove was …': on the emergence of grammatical constructions in dialogual and dialogic contexts. In R. Cooper and R. Kempson (eds), Language in Flux: Dialogue Coordination, Language Variation, Change and Evolution. London: Kings College Publications, 143-77. Van Valin, R. Jr. 1990: Semantic parameters of split intransitivity. Language, 66, 212-60. Woodward, A. L. 1998: Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor's reach. Cognition, 69, 1-34. Wonnacott, E., Newport, E. L. and Tanenhaus, M. K. 2008: Acquiring and processing verb argument structure: distributional learning in a miniature language. Cognitive Psychology, 56(3), 165-209. Citing Literature Volume28, Issue4September 2013Pages 479-491 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Referência(s)