Comparing solutions to the linking problem using an integrated quantitative framework of language acquisition

Abstract

To successfully learn language-and more specifically how to use verbs correctly-children must solve the linking problem: they must learn the mapping between the thematic roles specified by a verb's lexical semantics and the syntactic argument positions specified by a verb's syntactic frame. We use an empirically-grounded and integrated quantitative framework involving corpus analysis, experimental meta-analysis, and computational modeling to implement minimally distinct versions of mapping approaches that (i) are either specified a priori or develop during language acquisition, and (ii) rely on either an absolute or a relative thematic role system. Using successful verb class learning as an evaluation metric, we embed each approach within a concrete model of the acquisition process and see which learning assumptions are able to match children's verb learning behavior at three, four, and five years old. Our current results support a trajectory where children (i) may not have prior expectations about linking patterns between ages three and five, and (ii) begin with a relative thematic system, progressing towards optionality between a relative and an absolute system. We discuss implications of our results for both theories of syntactic representation and theories of how those representations are acquired. We also discuss the broader contribution of this study as a concrete modeling framework that can be updated with new linking theories, corpora, and experimental results.

Finite complements trigger reality responses in attitude verb acquisition… but so do non-finite complements

“…Specifically, when acquiring belief verbs, children make a classic "false belief" error-they are lured by reality when there is a mismatch between the subject's belief and reality. This same reality error is not observed in the acquisition of other mental state verbs, such as want (Harrigan et al 2019, Rakoczy et al 2007.…”

“…The observations that think and want have different syntactic distributions and that children are differentiating these verbs early on serve as a starting point for hypothesizing that syntax may play a role in children's early hypotheses about attitude verb acquisition. However, both want and think occur quite frequently in child-directed input (Harrigan 2015, Harrigan et al 2019, Wellman & Wooley 1990. Given that it is not clear what other information might be co-occurring in the child's environment, more evidence is needed to determine the role of syntax in driving this categorization.…”

“…Given that it is not clear what other information might be co-occurring in the child's environment, more evidence is needed to determine the role of syntax in driving this categorization. Harrigan et al (2019) seek to better understand the contribution of syntax in acquiring attitude verbs. In a novel methodology, they demonstrate children's sensitivity to syntax in interpreting an unknown attitude verb, hope.…”

“…Attitude verbs are a class of words for which linguistic cues might be particularly valuable, or even necessary, given that one cannot directly observe events of thinking or wanting. Harrigan, Hacquard & Lidz (2019) investigate syntactic bootstrapping for attitude verbs, and find evidence that children are sensitive to syntactic structure when interpreting a lesser-known attitude verb, hope. These findings support the original goal of the syntactic bootstrapping hypothesis, but more work is still needed to fully understand the role that syntax plays in acquiring attitude verbs.…”

“…These findings support the original goal of the syntactic bootstrapping hypothesis, but more work is still needed to fully understand the role that syntax plays in acquiring attitude verbs. This paper explores the boundaries of syntactic bootstrapping for attitude verbs, expanding on the findings from Harrigan et al (2019), testing the role of syntax in interpreting a truly novel attitude verb. The findings of the current study suggest that although syntax is a valuable cue for the learner about attitude verb meaning, it may not be available to the learner at every point in development.…”