2010
DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511750526
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Language, Usage and Cognition

Abstract: Language demonstrates structure while also showing considerable variation at all levels: languages differ from one another while still being shaped by the same principles; utterances within a language differ from one another while exhibiting the same structural patterns; languages change over time, but in fairly regular ways. This book focuses on the dynamic processes that create languages and give them their structure and variance. It outlines a theory of language that addresses the nature of grammar, taking … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

44
711
0
286

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,200 publications
(1,041 citation statements)
references
References 229 publications
44
711
0
286
Order By: Relevance
“…Such findings and others like it are suggestive of access to universal grammatical principles (e.g., Dekydtspotter, Sprouse, & Anderson, 1998;Dekydtspotter, Sprouse, & Swanson, 2001;Hopp, 2005 In principle, it should be relatively easy to disprove claims of a logical problem: Show that there are no instances of PoS or, when it is agreed by all that input alone is insufficient to explain resulting competence, that the grammatical knowledge in question falls out straightforwardly from domain general cognition and/or processing principles. That there is no logical problem has been argued rather extensively (e.g., Bybee, 2010;Evans, 2014;Gerken, Wilson, & Lewis, 2005;Goldberg, 2013;Gries, 2012;O'Grady, 2005;Redington, Charter, & Finch, 1998;Tomasello, 2003). No cognitive-based theory denies the reality of low or even zero input frequencies, that is, properties and constructions that appear rarely or not at all in the input.…”
Section: What Is Different About Generative Approaches? Poverty Of Thmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such findings and others like it are suggestive of access to universal grammatical principles (e.g., Dekydtspotter, Sprouse, & Anderson, 1998;Dekydtspotter, Sprouse, & Swanson, 2001;Hopp, 2005 In principle, it should be relatively easy to disprove claims of a logical problem: Show that there are no instances of PoS or, when it is agreed by all that input alone is insufficient to explain resulting competence, that the grammatical knowledge in question falls out straightforwardly from domain general cognition and/or processing principles. That there is no logical problem has been argued rather extensively (e.g., Bybee, 2010;Evans, 2014;Gerken, Wilson, & Lewis, 2005;Goldberg, 2013;Gries, 2012;O'Grady, 2005;Redington, Charter, & Finch, 1998;Tomasello, 2003). No cognitive-based theory denies the reality of low or even zero input frequencies, that is, properties and constructions that appear rarely or not at all in the input.…”
Section: What Is Different About Generative Approaches? Poverty Of Thmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to develop a coherent morphological analysis of a language, the diachronic aspect of that language should be taken into consideration, as diachronic changes allow for deeper comprehension of the basis of language (Bybee, 2010). The study follows a synchronic-diachronic approach.…”
Section: Sampling Methods and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This suggests that the frequency information stored in the exemplar cluster of an individual word has a larger conditioning effect than the frequency information stored with other members in an inflectional paradigm, as transmitted through associative networks (Bybee 1985(Bybee , 2010. Consequently, even though there may exist an effect exerted by the frequency of other words in a paradigm, that is by lemma frequency, the influence of the frequency information stored with individual words, that is form frequency, appears to be more important.…”
Section: Form Versus Lemma Frequencymentioning
confidence: 99%