UCB#2-AEG ‘09
What does knowledge of language consist of?
Where does it come from?
What does knowledge of language consist of?
Where does it come from?
•  Two views that shape (psycho)linguistic debates
•  Two views that shape (psycho)linguistic debates
•  Universal Grammar view:
•  Constructionist (Cognitive Linguistics) view:
–  Language consists of pairings of form and function
(“constructions”)
–  Processing mechanisms access representations that
combine syntactic, semantic, pragmatic constraints
–  Language is learnable on the basis of independently
motivated cognitive processes
–  The lexicon and syntax form a continuum of varying levels
of complexity.
–  syntax is the “generative” engine of language
–  syntactically driven mechanisms drive parsing
–  syntactic module (“language organ”) is universal and genetically
determined
–  syntax is qualitatively different than lexicon
–  Chomsky, many traditional linguists; also to some extent Pinker,
Marcus…
1
Traditional Universal
Grammar hypothesis
Constructionist/
CogLing approach
Language-specific knowledge
(representations) are “innate”
No domain-specific knowledge of
language is biologically determined
2
Nativists argue that the input is insufficient to learn language
“language faculty” “language organ”; Competing, interacting semantic/
syntax is special: modularity
syntactic/pragmatic cues
Underlying levels of syntactic
representation
Lakoff, Langacker, Talmy, Croft, Jackendoff, Fillmore, Sag, Bybee, Bates,
Tomasello, Elman, Goldberg,…
Nativists have concluded there must exist
“Universal Grammar” and a
“Language Acquisition Device”
WysiWyg: what you see is what you
get
3
syntax as autonomous, modular system of “innate”
linguistic knowledge
4
syntax as autonomous, modular system of “innate”
linguistic knowledge
“core grammar”
Or just recursion?
General, universal syntactic
principles with parameter
settings on those principles
General, universal syntactic principle
(Hauser, Chomsky and Fitch 2002)
5
6
1
UCB#2-AEG ‘09
Universal grammar hypothesis
Principles & Parameters (UG)
•  Universal principles with language specific parameter settings
on those principles.
Language A will have
PREpositions if and only if it
has VO word order.
Input: On the table
•  “Principles and Parameters approach (P&P)”
7
8
Principles & Parameters (UG)
Principles & Parameters (UG)
Language A will have
PREpositions if and only if it
has VO word order.
Language A allows subject
arguments to be omitted
Input: Wants her to go.
Input: the table ON
9
•  How are parameters supposed to be set exactly?
10
Re: “head direction” parameter: VO<-> PO
•  A problem: Oddball constructions often provide
misleading triggers:
Bagels, I like.
Re: subject-omission parameter:
Love ya.
11
12
2
UCB#2-AEG ‘09
Language is filled with semi-regular phrasal form-function correspondences
that must be learned
Idiosyncrasies (Berson and Goldberg, forthcoming):
Many a <time period> <Subj-Aux Inversion S>
e.g. “Many a night
•  Nativists recognize this, and therefore postulate
PRIVILEDGED TRIGGERS (also claimed to be innately
given).
•  E.g., Subject-drop parameter must involve witnessing
instances of 3rd person subject omission:
•  (She) wants to go.
13
Construction Label
Mad Magazine construction
example
Him, a doctor?!
N P N construction
house by house; day after day
Time away construction
Twistin the night away
What's X doingY?!
“periphery”
Or “residue”
What's that fly doing in my soup?!
Nominal Extraposition construction
It's amazing the difference!
Stranded preposition construction
Who did he give that to?
“core grammar”
Fillmore, Kay and O’Connor 1988; Culicover 1999; Jackendoff 2003;
15
Williams 1994; Zwicky 1974, Lambrecht 1994…
“periphery”
P&P design (actual):
16
Argument structure CONSTRUCTIONS
Meaning
X causes Y to receive Z
Subj V Obj Obj2
She gave him something.
She daxed him something.
X moves (to) Y
Subj V PP
She whooshed down the street.
She went down the street.
X causes Y to move Z
Subj V Obj PP
She sneezed the foam off the cappuccino.
She put the ball in the box.
X causes Y to become Z
Subj V Obj RP
She kissed him unconscious.
He made her crazy.
lexicon
“core grammar”
17
Form
Example
18
3
UCB#2-AEG ‘09
“periphery”
P&P design (actual):
Constructionist view of knowledge of language
:construction
(learned formfunction pairing)
lexicon
“core grammar”
:inheritance link
Boldface: greater
frequency
(“entrenchment”)
19
Differing predictions for acquisition
20
Arguments for nativist view of language:?
Universal grammar position:
Syntax is modular, genetically determined, not learned but
“acquired.”
Dissimilarities between syntax and lexicon.
Constructionist (interactionist) perspective:
Grammar critically involves meaning and function, is
learned by categorization over the input, constrained by
processing demands and attentional biases.
Parallels between syntax and lexicon.
21
22
4