...
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Psychology >All P's or mixed vegetables?
【24h】

All P's or mixed vegetables?

机译:全P还是混合蔬菜?

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

In a beautifully written, cogently argued paper MacDonald (2013), presents the theoretical framework that guides one of the most creative and influential research programs in the language sciences. The PDC began with empirical demonstrations that readers are remarkably sensitive to distributional patterns in the input. These empirical demonstrations were accompanied by theoretical arguments that ambiguity resolution can be modeled by constraint-based (probabilistic) systems that learn these patterns from experience (also see Tanenhaus and Trueswell, 1995; Tabor et al., 1997). This research was part of a wave of research in the 1990's that answered long-standing questions in real-time language comprehension and early language acquisition, with variations of “It's the input, stupid” (e.g., Saffran, Aslin, and Newport's seminal work on statistical learning, Saffran et al., 1996).
机译:MacDonald(2013)在一篇优美而有力的论文中提出了理论框架,该理论框架指导了语言科学领域最具创造力和影响力的研究计划之一。 PDC从经验证明开始,即读者对输入中的分布模式非常敏感。这些经验证明伴随着理论上的争论,即歧义解决可以通过基于约束的(概率)系统来建模,该系统从经验中学习这些模式(另见Tanenhaus和Trueswell,1995; Tabor等,1997)。这项研究是1990年代一波研究浪潮的一部分,该浪潮回答了实时语言理解和早期语言习得中长期存在的问题,并出现了“输入就是愚蠢”(例如Saffran,Aslin和Newport的开创性著作) (Saffran等,1996)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号