Wyniki wyszukiwania - BazTech

Ograniczanie wyników

2 Journal of Language Modelling

Znaleziono wyników: 2

Liczba wyników na stronie

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Wyszukiwano:
w słowach kluczowych: Universal Grammar

Sortuj według:

Ogranicz wyniki do:

The CoreGram Project : theoretical linguistics, theory development, and verification

Müller S.

Journal of Language Modelling

2015

Vol. 3, No. 1

21--86

This paper describes the CoreGram project, a multilingual grammar engineering project that develops HPSG grammars for several typologically diverse languages that share a common core. The paper provides a general motivation for doing theoretical linguistics the way it is done in the CoreGram project, and is therefore not exclusively targeted at computational linguists. I argue for a constraint-based approach to language rather than a generative-enumerative one and discuss issues of formalization. Recent advantages in language acquisition research are mentioned and conclusions on how theories should be constructed are drawn. The paper discusses some of the highlights in the implemented grammars, gives a brief overview of central theoretical concepts and their implementation in the TRALE system, and compares the CoreGram project with other multilingual grammar engineering projects.

A cognitively plausible model for grammar induction

Katzir R.

Journal of Language Modelling

2014

Vol. 2, No. 2

213--248

This paper aims to bring theoretical linguistics and cognition-general theories of learning into closer contact. I argue that linguists’ notions of rich Universal Grammars (UGs) are well-founded, but that cognition-general learning approaches are viable as well and that the two can and should co-exist and support each other. Specifically, I use the observation that any theory of UG provides a learning criterion – the total memory space used to store a grammar and its encoding of the input – that supports learning according to the principle of Minimum Description-Length. This mapping from UGs to learners maintains a minimal ontological commitment: the learner for a particular UG uses only what is already required to account for linguistic competence in adults. I suggest that such learners should be our null hypothesis regarding the child’s learning mechanism, and that furthermore, the mapping from theories of UG to learners provides a framework for comparing theories of UG.