rules versus analogy. two different camps tons of studies done evidence goes both ways
TRANSCRIPT
Rules versus Analogy
Rules versus Analogy
Two different campsTons of studies doneEvidence goes both ways
Rule Approaches
● Only the bare minimum is stored in the brain● Storage is costly (like first computers)● Processing is cheap
Rule Approaches
● Only the bare minimum is stored in the brain● Storage is costly (like first computers)● Processing is cheap
– It would be dumb to store sentences when they can be built up with rules
– It would be dumb to store phonetic detail when it can be predicted (e.g. aspiration, flapping)
Rule Approaches
● Acquisition entails learning rules then storing them and applying them as needed– /kæt/ is stored– rules convert it into [khæɁ]
Rule Approaches
● Acquisition entails learning rules then storing them and applying them as needed– /kæt/ is stored– rules convert it into [khæɁ]– morphemes are stored (walk and -ed)– rule adds -ed to walk to produce walked
● Why store walked and take up the space?
Analogical Approaches
● Everything is stored● Storage is cheap (like modern computers)● Processing is costly
– Storing sentences as wholes is OK– Storing phonetic detail is OK
Analogical Approaches
● Acquisition entail making connections between words, sentences, morphemes that are similar– similar meaning (rob, steal)– similar sound (flip, blip)– similar spelling (phantom, physical)– associatively related (doctor, nurse)– contextually related (like, like, like, teen girls)
Analogical Approaches
● No need to make rules, store them, or apply them● Production is using stored information or finding
patterns between words, sentences and applying them to new contexts
Analogical Approaches
● No need to make rules, store them, or apply them● Production is using stored information or finding
patterns between words, sentences and applying them to new contexts– analogy
● drive is to drove as dive is to ?● ring is to rang as bring is to ?
Rules vs. Analogy in Phonology
● /t/ has many allophones– [ɾ] butter– [ʔ] gotten– [ ]∅ percent of– [t] star– [t=] cat– [tʰ] take
Rules vs. Analogy in Phonology
● /t/ has many allophones– [ɾ] butter– [ʔ] gotten– [ ]∅ percent of– [t] star– [t=]cat– [tʰ]take
● How do we know which one to use?
Rules vs. Analogy in Phonology
● Rules say we learn generalizations, store them, and apply them– [ɾ] is used between vowels when second is
unstressed– [ʔ] is used word finally or in a syllable coda– [t] is used after /s/ or before a stressless syllable– [tʰ] is used word initially or before a stressed
syllable
Rules vs. Analogy in Phonology
● Rules say we learn generalizations, store them, and apply them– Given a new word hetpal we apply rule to
determine /t/ is pronounced [ʔ] – If rules weren't real how could we know how to
pronounce it?
Rules vs. Analogy in Phonology
● Rules say we learn generalizations, store them, and apply them– Given a new word hetpal we apply rule to
determine /t/ is pronounced [ʔ] – If rules weren't real how could we know how to
pronounce it?– Problem: pronunciation varies: [khæt][khæɁ]– Solution: make certain rules variable
Rules vs. Analogy in Phonology
● Analogy says we store things with massive connections to similar things– Given a new word hetpal, words that are similar are
activated and we apply the pattern in the stored words to determine /t/ is pronounced [ʔ]
– If rules weren't real how could we know how to pronounce it? Because there are patterns among stored words
– Problem: pronunciation varies: [khæt][khæɁ]– Solution: words are stored with both, so the pattern is
variable
Can you predict pronunciation with analogy?
● 3,719 instances of /t/ taken from read sentences.
● Context of each /t/ put in database. The encoding of the /t/ of meet as a flap in the sentence – I know I didn't meet her . . . early enough – 1) ɾ, 2) word boundary, 3) m, 4) i, 5) word
boundary, 6) ɚ, 7) pause 8) primary stress, 9) unstressed, 10) meet
Leave one out simulation
● Most “errors” are actually possible pronunciations.– Chest can be [ʧɛs] as easily as [ʧɛst=]– The final /t/ in comment on can be deleted or realized as an aspirate or unreleased stop. – [ʔ] is most often predicted to be [t=]; they are often interchangeable.
● Vietnam, nightmare, and light.
Are rules or analogy more robust/
● Rules require specific information to make predictions– If the info isn't there no prediction can be made
Are rules or analogy more robust?
● Rules require specific information to make prediction– If the info isn't there no prediction can be made
● Analogy just needs some information, not specific info– If some info is missing, the rest can be used
How to predict flap
● Analogy doesn't require specific info, just some info● What if we delete stress info?
– I know I didn't meet her . . . early enough – 1) ɾ, 2) word boundary, 3) m, 4) i, 5) word
boundary, 6) ɚ, 7) pause 8) primary stress, 9) unstressed, 10) meet
How to predict flap
● Analogy doesn't require specific info, just some info● What if we delete stress info?
– I know I didn't meet her . . . early enough – 1) ɾ, 2) word boundary, 3) m, 4) i, 5) word boundary, 6) ɚ,
7) pause 8) primary stress, 9) unstressed, 10) meet● 64% correct with stress, 62% without● Rules can't even make a prediction
Which sounds better?
● nobler more noble● commoner more common● carefuler more careful● harder more hard● greener more green● accurater more accurate● angrier more angry● mellower more mellow● unhappier more unhappy
English comparative adjectives (Elzinga)
● Some adjectives take the suffix -er while others are preceded by more– more important, *importanter, more fake, *faker
● How do you know which one?
English comparative adjectives (Elzinga)
● Rules say:– Add -er if the adjective is monosyllabic.– Use more if the adjective is disyllabic and if it’s
stressed on the first syllable and ends in -y, le, ow.
– Otherwise use more.
English comparative adjectives (Elzinga)
● Rules say:– Add -er if the adjective is monosyllabic.– Use more if the adjective is disyllabic and if it’s
stressed on the first syllable and ends in -y, le, ow.– Otherwise use more.
● Analogy says:– Find similar words and apply the pattern they have.
English comparative adjectives (Elzinga)
● Of 485 test cases, 93.6% are correctly predicted by these rules– Problems:
● How can people follow rules they can’t formulate?● How do you account for variation? ● Requires lots of computation, little storage (problem?)● If you leave a variable out, you can’t make good predictions
English comparative adjectives (Elzinga)
● Analogy to other adjectives predicted 92.6% correct (leave on out simulation)– 93.6 vs. 92.6 not different
English Past Tense
● What is the past tense of:– queed– nace– bize– lum– fleep– shilk– gleed– scoil– flet– tesh– spling– chake– gude– gare– nold– chind
Dual-route model
● Regular verbs are derived by rule: add -ed– Regular past tense formed are not stored
(walked, regarded)– Regular past tense forms are not connected to
other regular past tense forms (no analogy)● Irregular verbs are stored as wholes with
connections to other irregular past tense forms (analogy)
Dual-route model
● People asked to give past tense
Dual-route Model
Dual-route Model
● People appear to use analogy for irregulars● People appear not to use analogy for regulars
Single-route Model
● Analogy is used for both regulars and irregulars
● Can it replicate findings?
