Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T22:23:42.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Estonian Case Inflection Made Simple

A Case Study in Word and Paradigm Morphology with Linear Discriminative Learning

from Part II - Structure of Complex Words

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2020

Lívia Körtvélyessy
Affiliation:
P. J. Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia
Pavol Štekauer
Affiliation:
P. J. Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia
Get access

Summary

According to word and paradigm morphology (Matthews 1974, Blevins 2016), the word is the basic cognitive unit over which paradigmatic analogy operates to predict form and meaning of novel forms. Baayen et al. (2019b, 2018) introduced a computational formalization of word and paradigm morphology which makes it possible to model the production and comprehension of complex words without requiring exponents, morphemes, inflectional classes, and separate treatment of regular and irregular morphology. This computational model, Linear Discriminative Learning (LDL), makes use of simple matrix algebra to move from words’ forms to meanings (comprehension) and from words’ meanings to their forms (production). In Baayen et al. (2018), we showed that LDL makes accurate predictions for Latin verb conjugations. The present study reports results for noun declension in Estonian. Consistent with previous findings, the model’s predictions for comprehension and production are highly accurate. Importantly, the model achieves this high accuracy without being informed about stems, exponents, and inflectional classes.The speech errors produced by the model look like errors that native speakers might make. When the model is trained on incomplete paradigms, comprehension accuracy for unseen forms is hardly affected, but production accuracy decreases, reflecting the well-known asymmetry between comprehension and production.

Type
Chapter
Information
Complex Words
Advances in Morphology
, pp. 119 - 141
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baayen, R. H., Chuang, Y.-Y. and Blevins, J. P. (2018). Inflectional morphology with linear mappings. The Mental Lexicon, (13)2, 232270.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Chuang, Y.-Y. and Heitmeier, M. (2019a). WpmWithLdl: Implementation of Word and Paradigm Morphology with Linear Discriminative Learning. R package version 1.3.1.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Chuang, Y.-Y., Shafaei-Bajestan, E. and Blevins, J. P. (2019b). The discriminative lexicon: a unified computational model for the lexicon and lexical processing in comprehension and production grounded not in (de)composition but in linear discriminative learning. Complexity, 4895891, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, L. (1983). English Word Formation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blevins, J. P. (2008). Declension classes in Estonian. Linguistica Uralica, 44(4), 241267.Google Scholar
Blevins, J. P. (2016). Word and Paradigm Morphology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butz, M. V. and Kutter, E. F. (2016). How the Mind Comes into Being: Introducing Cognitive Science from a Functional and Computational Perspective, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1993). The Lexicon in Acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Erelt, M., ed. (2003). Estonian Language, Tallinn: Estonian Academy Publishers.Google Scholar
Gahl, S. (2008). Time and thyme are not homophones: the effect of lemma frequency on word durations in spontaneous speech. Language, 84(3), 474496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gershkoff-Stowe, L. and Hahn, E. R. (2013). Word comprehension and production asymmetries in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114(4), 489509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halle, M. and Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Hale, K. and Keyser, S. J., eds., The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Vol. 24, Current Studies in Linguistics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 111176.Google Scholar
Harm, M. W. and Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: co-operative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111, 662720.Google Scholar
Harris, A. C. (2009). Exuberant exponence in batsbi. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 27(2), 267303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, A. C. (2017). Multiple Exponence, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ingram, D. (1974). The relation between comprehension and production. In Schiefelbusch, R. L. and Lloyd, L. L., eds., Language Perspectives – Acquisition, Retardation, and Intervention, Baltimore: University Park Press, pp. 313334.Google Scholar
Lõo, K., Järvikivi, J. and Baayen, R. (2018a). Whole-word frequency and inflectional paradigm size facilitate Estonian case-inflected noun processing. Cognition, 175, 2025.Google Scholar
Lõo, K., Järvikivi, J., Tomaschek, F., Tucker, B. and Baayen, R. (2018b). Production of Estonian case-inflected nouns shows whole-word frequency and paradigmatic effects. Morphology, 1(28), 7197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landauer, T. and Dumais, S. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: the latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2), 211240.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. (2006). The language of space in yélî dnye. In Grammars of Space: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 157203.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. and Majid, A. (2013). The island of time: yélî Dnye, the language of Rossel island. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 111.Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (2010). Introducing Morphology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Kita, S., Haun, D. and Levinson, S. C. (2004). Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 108114.Google Scholar
Marantz, A. (2013). No escape from morphemes in morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(7), 905916.Google Scholar
Matthews, P. H. (1974). Morphology. An Introduction to the Theory of Word Structure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. J. (1981). A prosodic theory of non-concatenative morphology. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 373418.Google Scholar
Morgan, B. Q. and Oberdeck, L. M. (1930). Active and passive vocabulary. In Bagster-Collins, E. W., ed., Studies in Modern Language Teaching, London: Macmillan, pp. 213221.Google Scholar
Newman, J. and Rice, S. (2006). Transitivity schemas of English eat and drink in the BNC. In Gries, S. T. and Stefanowitsch, A., eds., Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 225260.Google Scholar
O’Neill, G. (2014). Humming, whistling, singing, and yelling in Pirahã context and channels of communication in FDG. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA), 24(2), 349375.Google Scholar
Plag, I. (2003). Word Formation in English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Plag, I., Homann, J. and Kunter, G. (2017). Homophony and morphology: the acoustics of word-final S in English 1. Journal of Linguistics, 53(1), 181216.Google Scholar
Stump, G. (2001). Inflectional Morphology: A Theory of Paradigm Structure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. Language Typology and Syntactic Description, 3, 57149.Google Scholar
Ussishkin, A. (2005). A fixed prosodic theory of nonconcatenative templaticmorphology. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 23(1), 169218.Google Scholar
Viitso, T.-R. (2003). Structure of the Estonian language: phonology, morphology and word formation. In Erelt, M., ed., Estonian Language, Tallinn: Estonian Academy Publishers, pp. 9129.Google Scholar
Widrow, B. and Hoff, M. E. (1960). Adaptive switching circuits. 1960 WESCON Convention Record Part IV, 96–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, R. and Morgan, W. (1980). The Navajo Language: A Grammar and Colloquial Dictionary, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Zwitserlood, P. (2018). Processing and representation of morphological complexity in native language comprehension and production. In Booij, G. E., ed., The Construction of Words. Advances in Construction Morphology, Cham: Springer, pp. 583602.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×