Modeling morphological learning, typology, and change : What can the neural sequence-to-sequence framework contribute?

• Autorzy: Elsner Micha , Sims Andrea D. , Erdmann Alexander , Hernandez Antonio , Jaffe Evan , Jin Lifeng , Booker Johnson Martha , Karim Shuan , King David L. , Lamberti Nunes Luana , Oh Byung-Doh , Rasmussen Nathan , Shain Cory , Antetomaso Stephanie , Dickinson Kendra V. , Diewald Noah , McKenzie Michelle , Stevens-Guille Symon

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15398/jlm.v7i1.244

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

We survey research using neural sequence-to-sequence models as computational models of morphological learning and learnability. We discuss their use in determining the predictability of inflectional exponents, in making predictions about language acquisition and in modeling language change. Finally, we make some proposals for future work in these areas.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

morphology; computational modeling; typology

• Wydawca: Instytut Podstaw Informatyki PAN
• Czasopismo: Journal of Language Modelling
• Rocznik: 2019
• Tom: Vol. 7, No. 1
• Strony: 53--98
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 140 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Elsner Micha

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Sims Andrea D.

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Erdmann Alexander

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Hernandez Antonio

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Jaffe Evan

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Jin Lifeng

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Booker Johnson Martha

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Karim Shuan

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

King David L.

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Lamberti Nunes Luana

• Department of Spanish and Portuguese, The Ohio State University

autor

Oh Byung-Doh

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Rasmussen Nathan

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Shain Cory

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Antetomaso Stephanie

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Dickinson Kendra V.

• Department of Spanish and Portuguese, The Ohio State University

autor

Diewald Noah

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

McKenzie Michelle

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

autor

Stevens-Guille Symon

• Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University

Bibliografia

• [1] Daniel M. Abrams and Steven H. Strogatz (2003), Linguistics: Modelling the dynamics of language death, Nature, 424 (6951): 900.
• [2] Farrell Ackerman, James P. Blevins, and Robert Malouf (2009), Parts and wholes: Patterns of relatedness in complex morphological systems and why they matter, Analogy in grammar: Form and acquisition, pp. 54-82.
• [3] Farrell Ackerman and Robert Malouf (2013), Morphological organization: The low conditional entropy conjecture, Language, 89 (3): 429-464.
• [4] Farrell Ackerman and Robert Malouf (2015), The No Blur Principle effects as an emergent property of language systems, in Anna E. Jurgensen, Hannah Sande, Spencer Lamoureux, Kenny Baclawski, and Alison Zerbe, editors, Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, p. 1-14, Berkeley Linguistics Society.
• [5] Roee Aharoni and Yoav Goldberg (2017), Morphological inflection generation with hard monotonic attention, in Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 2004-2015.
• [6] Adam Albright (2002a), The identification of bases in morphological paradigms, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles.
• [7] Adam Albright (2002b), Islands of reliability for regular morphology: Evidence from Italian, Language, 78 (4): 684-709.
• [8] Adam Albright and Bruce Hayes (2002), Modeling English past tense intuitions with minimal generalization, in Proceedings of the Sixth Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics Special Interest Group in Computational Phonology in Philadelphia, July 2002, pp. 58-69.
• [9] Ben Ambridge, Julian M. Pine, Caroline F. Rowland, Franklin Chang, and Amy Bidgood (2013), The retreat from overgeneralization in child language acquisition: Word learning, morphology, and verb argument structure, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4 (1): 47-62.
• [10] Stephen R. Anderson (1992), A-morphous morphology, Cambridge University Press.
• [11] Stephen R. Anderson (2004), Morphological universals and diachrony, in Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle, editors, Yearbook of morphology 2004, pp. 1-17, Springer.
• [12] Mark Aronoff (1994), Morphology by itself: Stems and inflectional classes, MIT Press.
• [13] R. Harald Baayen (2001), Word frequency distributions, Kluwer.
• [14] R. Harald Baayen (2007), Storage and computation in the mental lexicon, in Gonia Jarema and Gary Libben, editors, The mental lexicon: Core perspectives, pp. 81-104, Elsevier.
• [15] Matthew Baerman (2012), Paradigmatic chaos in Nuer, Language, 88 (3): 467-494.
• [16] Matthew Baerman (2014), Covert systematicity in a distributionally complex system, Journal of Linguistics, 50 (1): 1-47.
• [17] Matthew Baerman, Dunstan Brown, and Greville G. Corbett (2017), Morphological complexity, Cambridge University Press.
• [18] Dzmitry Bahdanau, Kyunghyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio (2014), Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate, arXiv reprint arXiv:1409.0473.
• [19] Sacha Beniamine, Olivier Bonami, and Joyce McDonough (2017), When segmentation helps: Implicative structure and morph boundaries in the Navajo verb, in Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Morphology, pp. 11-15.
• [20] Sacha Beniamine, Olivier Bonami, and Benoît Sagot (2018), Inferring inflection classes with description length, Journal of Language Modelling, 5 (3): 465-525.
• [21] Jean Berko (1958), The child’s learning of English morphology, Word, 14 (2-3): 150-177.
• [22] Raymond Bertram, Robert Schreuder, and R. Harald Baayen (2000), The balance of storage and computation in morphological processing: The role of word formation type, affixal homonymy, and productivity, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26 (2): 489-511.
• [23] James P. Blevins (2004), Inflection classes and economy, in Gereon Müller, Lutz Gunkel, and Gisela Zifonun, editors, Explorations in nominal inflection, pp. 51-95, Mouton de Gruyter.
• [24] James P. Blevins (2006), Word-based morphology, Journal of Linguistics, 42 (3): 511-573.
• [25] James P. Blevins (2013), American descriptivism (‘structuralism’), in Keith Allan, editor, The Oxford handbook of the history of linguistics, pp. 419-437, Oxford University Press.
• [26] James P. Blevins (2016), Word and paradigm morphology, Oxford University Press.
• [27] James P. Blevins, Petar Milin, and Michael Ramscar (2017), The Zipfian paradigm cell filling problem, in Ferenc Kiefer, James P. Blevins, and Huba Bartos, editors, Perspectives on morphological organization: Data and analyses, pp. 141-158, Brill.
• [28] Harry Bochner (1993), Simplicity in generative morphology, Mouton de Gruyter.
• [29] Olivier Bonami and S. Beniamine (2016), Joint predictiveness in inflectional paradigms, Word Structure, 9 (2): 156-182.
• [30] Gilles Boyé and Gauvain Schalchli (2019), Realistic data and paradigms: The paradigm cell finding problem, Morphology, 29 (2): 199-248.
• [31] Dunstan Brown, Greville G. Corbett, Norman Fraser, Andrew Hippisley, and Alan Timberlake (1996), Russian noun stress and Network Morphology, Journal of Linguistics, 34: 53-107.
• [32] Dunstan Brown and Andrew Hippisley (2012), Network morphology: A defaults-based theory of word structure, Cambridge University Press.
• [33] Joan Bybee (1995), Diachronic and typological properties of morphology and their implications for representation, in Morphological aspects of language processing, pp. 225-246, Erlbaum Hillsdale.
• [34] Joan Bybee (2003), Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency, in Brian D. Joseph and Richard D. Janda, editors, The handbook of historical linguistics, pp. 602-623, Blackwell.
• [35] Joan Bybee and Carol Moder (1983), Morphological classes as natural categories, Language, 59 (2): 251-270.
• [36] Andrew Carstairs (1987), Allomorphy in inflexion, Croom Helm.
• [37] Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy (1994), Inflection classes, gender, and the principle of contrast, Language, 70 (4): 737-788.
• [38] Andrew Carstairs-McCarthy (2010), The evolution of morphology, Oxford University Press.
• [39] Xavier Castelló, Lucía Loureiro-Porto, and Maxi San Miguel (2013), Agent-based models of language competition, International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 221: 21-51.
• [40] Christos Christodoulopoulos, Sharon Goldwater, and Mark Steedman (2010), Two decades of unsupervised POS induction: How far have we come?, in Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 575-584, Association for Computational Linguistics.
• [41] Grzegorz Chrupała, Georgiana Dinu, and Josef Van Genabith (2008), Learning morphology with Morfette, in Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’08).
• [42] Eve V. Clark (1987), The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition, in Brian MacWhinney, editor, Mechanisms of language acquisition, pp. 1-33, Erlbaum.
• [43] Greville G. Corbett, Andrew Hippisley, Dunstan Brown, and Paul Marriott (2001), Frequency, regularity and the paradigm: A perspective from Russian on a complex relation, in Joan Bybee and Paul J. Hopper, editors, Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, pp. 201-226, John Benjamins.
• [44] Maria Corkery, Yevgen Matusevych, and Sharon Goldwater (2019), Are we there yet? Encoder-decoder neural networks as cognitive models of English past tense inflection, in Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 3868-3877, Association for Computational Linguistics, Florence, Italy, doi: 10.18653/v1/P19-1376, https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P19-1376.
• [45] Ryan Cotterell, Christo Kirov, Mans Hulden, and Jason Eisner (2018a), On the complexity and typology of inflectional morphological systems, arxiv preprint arXiv:1807.02747.
• [46] Ryan Cotterell, Christo Kirov, Mans Hulden, and Jason Eisner (2018b), On the diachronic stability of irregularity in inflectional morphology, ar xiv preprint arXiv:1804.08262.
• [47] Ryan Cotterell, Christo Kirov, John Sylak-Glassman, Géraldine Walther, Ekaterina Vylomova, Arya D McCarthy, Katharina Kann, Sebastian Mielke, Garrett Nicolai, Miikka Silfverberg, et al. (2018c), The CoNLL-SIGMORPHON 2018 shared task: Universal morphological reinflection, arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.07125.
• [48] Ryan Cotterell, Christo Kirov, John Sylak-Glassman, Géraldine Walther, Ekaterina Vylomova, Patrick Xia, Manaal Faruqui, Sandra Kübler, David Yarowsky, Jason Eisner, et al. (2017), CoNLL-SIGMORPHON 2017 shared task: Universal morphological reinflection in 52 languages, ar xiv preprint arXiv:1706.09031.
• [49] Ryan Cotterell, Christo Kirov, John Sylak-Glassman, David Yarowsky, Jason Eisner, and Mans Hulden (2016), The SIGMORPHON 2016 shared task-morphological reinflection, in Proceedings of the 14th SIGMORPHON Workshop on Computational Research in Phonetics, Phonology, and Morphology, pp. 10-22.
• [50] Ryan Cotterell, Nanyun Peng, and Jason Eisner (2015), Modeling word forms using latent underlying morphs and phonology, Transactions of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 3 (1).
• [51] Ewa Dąbrowska (2008), The effects of frequency and neighbourhood density on adult speakers’ productivity with Polish case inflections: An empirical test of usage-based approaches to morphology, Journal of Memory and Language, 58 (4): 931-951.
• [52] Rick Dale and Gary Lupyan (2012), Understanding the origins of morphological diversity: The linguistic niche hypothesis, Advances in Complex Systems, 15(03n04):1150017.
• [53] Nancy C. Dorian (1978), The fate of morphological complexity in language death: Evidence from East Sutherland Gaelic, Language, 54 (3): 590-609.
• [54] Wolfgang U. Dressler (2003), Naturalness and morphological change, in Brian D. Joseph and Richard D. Janda, editors, Handbook of historical linguistics, pp. 461-471, Blackwell.
• [55] Wolfgang U. Dressler, Marianne Kilani-Schoch, Natalia Gagarina, Lina Pestal, and Markus Pöchtrager (2006), On the typology of inflection class systems, Folia Linguistica, 40 (1-2): 51-74.
• [56] Markus Dreyer and Jason Eisner (2011), Discovering morphological paradigms from plain text using a Dirichlet process mixture model, in Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 616-627, Association for Computational Linguistics.
• [57] Greg Durrett and John DeNero (2013), Supervised learning of complete morphological paradigms, in Proceedings of the 2013 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pp. 1185-1195.
• [58] Manaal Faruqui, Yulia Tsvetkov, Graham Neubig, and Chris Dyer (2016), Morphological inflection generation using character sequence to sequence learning, in Proceedings of NAACL-HLT, pp. 634-643.
• [59] Raphael A. Finkel and Gregory T. Stump (2009), Principal parts and degrees of paradigmatic transparency, in James P. Blevins and Juliette Blevins, editors, Analogy in grammar: Form and acquisition, pp. 13-53, Oxford University Press.
• [60] Bill Forshaw, Lucinda Davidson, Barbara Kelly, Rachel Nordlinger, Gillian Wigglesworth, and Joe Blythe (2017), The acquisition of Murrinhpatha (Northern Australia), in Michael Fortescue, Marianne Mithun, and Nicholas Evans, editors, The Oxford Handbook of Polysynthesis, pp. 473-494, Oxford University Press.
• [61] Stella Frank and Kenny Smith (2018), A model of linguistic accommodation leading to language simplification, PsyArXiv preprint: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/4ynwu.
• [62] Éric Gaussier (1999), Unsupervised learning of derivational morphology from inflectional lexicons, in Andrew Kehler and Andreas Stolcke, editors, Unsupervised learning in natural language processing: Proceedings of the workshop, pp. 24-30, Association for Computational Linguistics.
• [63] Jane Gillette, Henry Gleitman, Lila Gleitman, and Anne Lederer (1999), Human simulations of vocabulary learning, Cognition, 73 (2): 135-176.
• [64] John Goldsmith (2001), Unsupervised learning of the morphology of a natural language, Computational Linguistics, 27 (2): 153-198.
• [65] Sharon Goldwater, Mark Johnson, and Thomas L Griffiths (2006), Interpolating between types and tokens by estimating power-law generators, in Bernhard Schölkopf, John C. Platt, and Thomas Hoffman, editors, Advances in neural information processing systems 19, pp. 459-466, Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation.
• [66] Kyle Gorman, Arya D. McCarthy, Ryan Cotterell, Ekaterina Vylomova, Miikka Silfverberg, and Magdalena Markowska (2019), Weird inflects but OK: Making sense of morphological generation errors, in Proceedings of the 23rd Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL), pp. 140-151, Association for Computational Linguistics, Hong Kong, China, https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/D19-6714.
• [67] Joseph H. Greenberg (1960), A quantitative approach to the morphological typology of language, International Journal of American Linguistics, 26 (3): 178-194.
• [68] Morris Halle and Alex Marantz (1993), Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection, in Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, editors, The view from building 20, pp. 111-176, MIT Press.
• [69] Morris Halle and Alex Marantz (2008), Clarifying “blur”: Paradigms, defaults, and inflectional classes, in Asaf Bachrach and Andrew Nevins, editors, Inflectional identity, pp. 55-72, Mouton de Gruyter.
• [70] Mary Hare and Jeffrey L. Elman (1995), Learning and morphological change, Cognition, 56 (1): 61-98.
• [71] Heidi Harley and Rolf Noyer (2003), Distributed Morphology, in Lisa Cheng and Rint Sybesma, editors, The Second GLOT International state-of-the-article book, pp. 463-496, de Gruyter Mouton.
• [72] Alice C. Harris (2008), On the explanation of typologically unusual structures, in Jeff Good, editor, Linguistic universals and language change, pp. 54-76, Oxford University Press.
• [73] Junxian He, Graham Neubig, and Taylor Berg-Kirkpatrick (2018), Unsupervised Learning of Syntactic Structure with Invertible Neural Projections, in Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 1292-1302, Association for Computational Linguistics, Brussels, Belgium, https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/D18-1160.
• [74] Hans Henrich Hock (1991), Principles of historical linguistics, Mouton de Gruyter.
• [75] Hans Henrich Hock and Brian D. Joseph (1996), Language history, language change and language relationship: An introduction to historical and comparative linguistics, Mouton de Gruyter.
• [76] Charles F. Hockett (1954), Two models of grammatical description, Word, 10: 210-234.
• [77] Yi Ting Huang and Steven Pinker (2010), Lexical semantics and irregular inflection, Language and Cognitive Processes, 25 (10): 1411-1461.
• [78] Carole Ann Jamieson (1982), Conflated subsystems marking person and aspect in Chiquihuitlán Mazatec verbs, International Journal of American Linguistics, 48 (2): 139-167.
• [79] Lifeng Jin, William Schuler, Finale Doshi-Velez, Timothy A. Miller, and Lane Schwartz (2018), Unsupervised grammar induction with depth-bounded PCFG, Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 6: 211-224, https://github.com/lifengjin/db-pcfg.
• [80] Mark Johnson, Thomas L. Griffiths, and Sharon Goldwater (2006), Adaptor grammars: A framework for specifying compositional nonparametric Bayesian models, in Bernhard Schölkopf, John C. Platt, and Thomas Hoffman, editors, Advances in neural information processing systems 19, pp. 641-648, Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation.
• [81] Brian D. Joseph (2003), Morphologization from syntax, in Brian D. Joseph and Richard D. Janda, editors, The handbook of historical linguistics, pp. 472-492, Blackwell.
• [82] Brian D. Joseph (2011), Children rule, or do they (as far as innovations are concerned)?, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14 (2): 156-158.
• [83] Dunja Jutronic (2001), Morphological changes in the urban vernacular of the city of Split, International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 147: 65-78.
• [84] Michael L. Kalish, Thomas L. Griffiths, and Stephan Lewandowsky (2007), Iterated learning: Intergenerational knowledge transmission reveals inductive biases, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14 (2): 288-294.
• [85] Herman Kamper, Shane Settle, Gregory Shakhnarovich, and Karen Livescu (2017), Visually grounded learning of keyword prediction from untranscribed speech, arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.08136.
• [86] Katharina Kann, Ryan Cotterell, and Hinrich Schütze (2017), Neural multi-source morphological reinflection, in Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 1, Long Papers, pp. 514-524.
• [87] Katharina Kann and Hinrich Schütze (2016), MED: The LMU system for the SIGMORPHON 2016 shared task on morphological reinflection, in Proceedings of the 14th SIGMORPHON Workshop on Computational Research in Phonetics, Phonology, and Morphology, pp. 62-70.
• [88] Shuan Karim (2019), Competition between formatives and the diversity of ezafat, Presented at the 24th International Conference on Historical Linguistics (ICHL24).
• [89] Kazuya Kawakami, Chris Dyer, and Phil Blunsom (2018), Unsupervised word discovery with segmental neural language models, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1811.09353.
• [90] Aleksandr E. Kibrik (1998), Archi, in Andrew Spencer and Arnold M. Zwicky, editors, The handbook of morphology, pp. 455-476, Blackwell.
• [91] David King, Andrea D. Sims, and Micha Elsner (2020), Interpreting sequence-to-sequence models for Russian inflectional morphology, in Proceedings of the Society for Computation in Linguistics (SCiL), Society for Computation in Linguistics, New Orleans, USA.
• [92] David King and Michael White (2018), The OSU realizer for SRST’18: Neural sequence-to-sequence inflection and incremental locality-based linearization, in Proceedings of the First Workshop on Multilingual Surface Realisation, pp. 39-48.
• [93] Paul Kiparsky (1968), Linguistic universals and linguistic change, in Emmon Bach and Robert T. Harms, editors, Universals in linguistic theory, pp. 170-202, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
• [94] Simon Kirby and James Hurford (1997), Learning, culture and evolution in the origin of linguistic constraints, in Fourth European conference on artificial life, pp. 493-502, Citeseer.
• [95] Simon Kirby and James R. Hurford (2002), The emergence of linguistic structure: An overview of the iterated learning model, in Angelo Cangelosi and Domenico Parisi, editors, Simulating the evolution of language, pp. 121-147, Springer.
• [96] Christo Kirov and Ryan Cotterell (2018), Recurrent neural networks in linguistic theory: Revisiting Pinker and Prince (1988) and the Past Tense Debate, arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.04783.
• [97] Christo Kirov, Ryan Cotterell, John Sylak-Glassman, Géraldine Walther, Ekaterina Vylomova, Patrick Xia, Manaal Faruqui, Sebastian Mielke, Arya D. McCarthy, Sandra Kübler, et al. (2018), UniMorph 2.0: Universal morphology, arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.11101.
• [98] William Labov (1971), The study of language in its social context, in Joshua A. Fishman, editor, Advances in the sociology of language, vol. 1, pp. 152-216, Mouton.
• [99] William Labov (2001), Principles of linguistic change, vol. 2: Social factors, Blackwell.
• [100] William Labov (2007), Transmission and diffusion, Language, 83 (2): 344-387.
• [101] Claire Lefebvre (1996), The tense, mood, and aspect system of Haitian Creole and the problem of transmission of grammar in creole genesis, Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 11 (2): 231-311.
• [102] Constantine Lignos and Charles Yang (2018), Morphology and language acquisition, in Andrew Hippisley and Gregory T. Stump, editors, Cambridge handbook of morphology, pp. 765-791, Cambridge University Press.
• [103] Martin Maiden (2005), Morphological autonomy and diachrony, in Yearbook of morphology 2004, pp. 137-175, Springer.
• [104] Robert Malouf (2017), Abstractive morphological learning with a recurrent neural network, Morphology, 27 (4): 431-458.
• [105] Michael Maratsos (2000), More overregularizations after all: New data and discussion on Marcus, Pinker, Ullman, Hollander, Rosen & Xu, Journal of Child Language, 27 (1): 183-212.
• [106] P.H. Matthews (1972), Inflectional morphology: A theoretical study based on aspects of Latin verb conjugation, Cambridge University Press.
• [107] Petar Milin, Dusica Filipović Djurdjević, and Fermín Moscoso del Prado Martín (2009), The simultaneous effects of inflectional paradigms and classes on lexical recognition: Evidence from Serbian, Journal of Memory and Language, 60: 50-64.
• [108] Lesley Milroy (2007), Off the shelf or under the counter? On the social dynamics of sound changes, Topics in English Linguistics, 53: 149.
• [109] Fermín Moscoso del Prado Martín, Aleksandar Kostić, and R. Harald Baayen (2004), Putting the bits together: An information theoretical perspective on morphological processing, Cognition, 94: 1-18.
• [110] Gereon Müller (2007), Notes on paradigm economy, Morphology, 17 (1): 1-38.
• [111] Thomas Müller, Helmut Schmid, and Hinrich Schütze (2013), Efficient higher-order CRFs for morphological tagging, in Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 322-332.
• [112] Garrett Nicolai, Colin Cherry, and Grzegorz Kondrak (2015), Inflection generation as discriminative string transduction, in Proceedings of the 2015 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies, pp. 922-931.
• [113] Joakim Nivre, Marie-Catherine De Marneffe, Filip Ginter, Yoav Goldberg, Jan Hajic, Christopher D Manning, Ryan T McDonald, Slav Petrov, Sampo Pyysalo, Natalia Silveira, et al. (2016), Universal dependencies v1: A multilingual treebank collection., in Proceedings of LREC.
• [114] Anna Papafragou, Kimberly Cassidy, and Lila Gleitman (2007), When we think about thinking: The acquisition of belief verbs, Cognition, 105 (1): 125-165.
• [115] Jeff Parker (2016), Inflectional complexity and cognitive processing: An experimental and corpus-based investigation of Russian nouns, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Cultures, The Ohio State University.
• [116] Jeff Parker, Robert Reynolds, and Andrea D. Sims (2019), The role of language-specific network properties in the emergence of inflectional irregularity, in Andrea D. Sims, Adam Ussishkin, Jeff Parker, and Samantha Wray, editors, Morphological typology and linguistic cognition, Cambridge University Press, to appear.
• [117] Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Soumith Chintala, Gregory Chanan, Edward Yang, Zachary DeVito, Zeming Lin, Alban Desmaison, Luca Antiga, and Adam Lerer (2017), Automatic differentiation in PyTorch, in NIPS 2017 Autodiff Workshop.
• [118] Slav Petrov, Leon Barrett, Romain Thibaux, and Dan Klein (2006), Learning accurate, compact, and interpretable tree annotation, in Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 433-440, Association for Computational Linguistics.
• [119] Steven Pinker and Alan Prince (1988), On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition, Cognition, 28 (1-2): 73-193.
• [120] Vito Pirrelli, Marcello Ferro, and Claudia Marzi (2015), Computational complexity of abstractive morphology, in Matthew Baerman, Dunstan Brown, and Greville G. Corbett, editors, Understanding and measuring morphological complexity, pp. 141-166, Oxford University Press.
• [121] Brandon Prickett, Aaron Traylor, and Joe Pater (2018), Seq2Seq models with dropout can learn generalizable reduplication, in Proceedings of the Fifteenth Workshop on Computational Research in Phonetics, Phonology, and Morphology, pp. 93-100, Association for Computational Linguistics, Brussels, Belgium, doi: 10.18653/v1/W18-5810, https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W18-5810.
• [122] Florencia Reali and Thomas L Griffiths (2009), The evolution of frequency distributions: Relating regularization to inductive biases through iterated learning, Cognition, 111 (3): 317-328.
• [123] David E. Rumelhart and James L. McClelland (1986), On learning the past tenses of English verbs, in James L. McClelland, David E. Rumelhart, and PDP Research Group, editors, Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 2: Psychological and biological models, pp. 216-271, MIT Press.
• [124] Yoav Seginer (2007), Fast unsupervised incremental parsing, in Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, pp. 384-391.
• [125] Miikka Silfverberg, Ling Liu, and Mans Hulden (2018), A computational model for the linguistic notion of morphological paradigm, in Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 1615-1626.
• [126] Andrea D. Sims (2006), Minding the gaps: Inflectional defectiveness in paradigmatic morphology, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University.
• [127] Andrea D. Sims and Jeff Parker (2016), How inflection class systems work: On the informativity of implicative structure, Word Structure, 9 (2): 215-239.
• [128] Royal Skousen (1989), Analogical modeling of language, Springer Science & Business Media.
• [129] Andrew Spencer (2012), Identifying stems, Word Structure, 5 (1): 88-108.
• [130] Gregory T. Stump (2001), Inflectional morphology: A theory of paradigm structure, Cambridge University Press.
• [131] Gregory T. Stump and Raphael A. Finkel (2013), Morphological typology: From word to paradigm, Cambridge University Press.
• [132] Gregory T. Stump and Raphael A. Finkel (2015), The complexity of inflectional systems, Linguistics Vanguard, 1 (1): 101-117.
• [133] Ilya Sutskever, Oriol Vinyals, and Quoc V. Le (2014), Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks, in Zoubin Ghahramani, Max Welling, Corinna Cortes, Neil D. Lawrence, and Kilian Q. Weinberger, editors, Advances in neural information processing systems 27, pp. 3104-3112, Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation.
• [134] Haukur Þorgeirsson (2017), Testing Vocabular Clarity in insula Scandinavian, Folia Linguistica, 51 (3): 505-526.
• [135] Peter Tiersma (1982), Local and general markedness, Language, 58 (4): 832-849.
• [136] Peter Trudgill (2011), Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity, Oxford University Press.
• [137] Wolfgang U. Wurzel (1989), Inflectional morphology and naturalness, Kluwer.
• [138] Wolfgang U. Wurzel (2000), Inflectional system and markedness, in Aditi Lahiri, editor, Analogy, levelling, markedness: Principles of change in phonology and morphology, pp. 193-214, Mouton de Gruyter.
• [139] Aris Xanthos, Sabine Laaha, Steven Gillis, Ursula Stephany, Ayhan Aksu-Koç, Anastasia Christofidou, Natalia Gagarina, Gordana Hrzica, F Nihan Ketrez, Marianne Kilani-Schoch, et al. (2011), On the role of morphological richness in the early development of noun and verb inflection, First Language, 31 (4): 461-479.
• [140] Charles Yang (2017), Rage against the machine: Evaluation metrics in the 21st century, Language Acquisition, 24 (2): 100-125.