Dutch plural inflection: the exception that proves the analogy
- Author
- Emmanuel Keuleers (UGent) , Dominiek Sandra, Walter Daelemans, Steven Gillis, Gert Durieux and Evelyn Martens
- Organization
- Abstract
- We develop the view that inflection is driven partly by non-phonological analogy and that non-phonological information is of particular importance to the inflection of non-canonical roots, which in the view of [Marcus, G. F., Brinkmann, U., Clahsen, H., Wiese, R., & Pinker, S. (1995). German inflection: the exception that proves the rule. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 189-256.] are inflected by a symbolic rule process. We used the Dutch plural to evaluate these claims. An analysis of corpus data shows that a model using non-phonological information (orthography) produces significantly fewer errors on plurals of non-canonical Dutch nouns, in particular borrowings, than a model that includes only phonological information. Moreover, we show that a double default system, as proposed by Pinker [Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules. London: Phoenix.], does not offer an advantage over the latter model. A second study, examining the use of orthography in an online plural production task, shows that, in Dutch, the chosen pseudoword plural is significantly affected by non-phonological information. A final simulation study confirms that these results are in line with a model of inflectional morphology that explains the inflection of non-canonical roots by non-phonological analogy instead of by a default rule process.
- Keywords
- inflection, morphology, default, memory based learning, dual mechanism model, RULES, MODEL, MORPHOLOGY, LANGUAGE-ACQUISITION, DUAL-ROUTE, PAST-TENSE, analogy, similarity, non-canonical roots, Dutch plural, rules, GERMAN INFLECTION
Downloads
-
(...).pdf
- full text
- |
- UGent only
- |
- |
- 239.40 KB
Citation
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication: http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-4151937
- MLA
- Keuleers, Emmanuel, et al. “Dutch Plural Inflection: The Exception That Proves the Analogy.” COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, vol. 54, no. 4, 2007, pp. 283–318, doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.07.002.
- APA
- Keuleers, E., Sandra, D., Daelemans, W., Gillis, S., Durieux, G., & Martens, E. (2007). Dutch plural inflection: the exception that proves the analogy. COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 54(4), 283–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.07.002
- Chicago author-date
- Keuleers, Emmanuel, Dominiek Sandra, Walter Daelemans, Steven Gillis, Gert Durieux, and Evelyn Martens. 2007. “Dutch Plural Inflection: The Exception That Proves the Analogy.” COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 54 (4): 283–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.07.002.
- Chicago author-date (all authors)
- Keuleers, Emmanuel, Dominiek Sandra, Walter Daelemans, Steven Gillis, Gert Durieux, and Evelyn Martens. 2007. “Dutch Plural Inflection: The Exception That Proves the Analogy.” COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 54 (4): 283–318. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.07.002.
- Vancouver
- 1.Keuleers E, Sandra D, Daelemans W, Gillis S, Durieux G, Martens E. Dutch plural inflection: the exception that proves the analogy. COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY. 2007;54(4):283–318.
- IEEE
- [1]E. Keuleers, D. Sandra, W. Daelemans, S. Gillis, G. Durieux, and E. Martens, “Dutch plural inflection: the exception that proves the analogy,” COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 283–318, 2007.
@article{4151937,
abstract = {{We develop the view that inflection is driven partly by non-phonological analogy and that non-phonological information is of particular importance to the inflection of non-canonical roots, which in the view of [Marcus, G. F., Brinkmann, U., Clahsen, H., Wiese, R., & Pinker, S. (1995). German inflection: the exception that proves the rule. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 189-256.] are inflected by a symbolic rule process. We used the Dutch plural to evaluate these claims. An analysis of corpus data shows that a model using non-phonological information (orthography) produces significantly fewer errors on plurals of non-canonical Dutch nouns, in particular borrowings, than a model that includes only phonological information. Moreover, we show that a double default system, as proposed by Pinker [Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules. London: Phoenix.], does not offer an advantage over the latter model. A second study, examining the use of orthography in an online plural production task, shows that, in Dutch, the chosen pseudoword plural is significantly affected by non-phonological information. A final simulation study confirms that these results are in line with a model of inflectional morphology that explains the inflection of non-canonical roots by non-phonological analogy instead of by a default rule process.}},
author = {{Keuleers, Emmanuel and Sandra, Dominiek and Daelemans, Walter and Gillis, Steven and Durieux, Gert and Martens, Evelyn}},
issn = {{0010-0285}},
journal = {{COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY}},
keywords = {{inflection,morphology,default,memory based learning,dual mechanism model,RULES,MODEL,MORPHOLOGY,LANGUAGE-ACQUISITION,DUAL-ROUTE,PAST-TENSE,analogy,similarity,non-canonical roots,Dutch plural,rules,GERMAN INFLECTION}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{4}},
pages = {{283--318}},
title = {{Dutch plural inflection: the exception that proves the analogy}},
url = {{http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.07.002}},
volume = {{54}},
year = {{2007}},
}
- Altmetric
- View in Altmetric
- Web of Science
- Times cited: