The dual-mechanism model of inflectional morphology: A connectionist critique

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (6):1026-1027 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Clahsen has added to the body of evidence that, on average, regular and irregular inflected words behave differently. However, the dual-mechanism account he supports predicts a crisp distinction; the empirical data instead suggest a fuzzy one, more in line with single-mechanism connectionist models.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

On the cross-linguistic validity of a dual-mechanism model.Margherita Orsolini - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (6):1033-1035.
The Dual-Mechanism Debate.Martina Penke - 2012 - In Markus Werning, Wolfram Hinzen & Edouard Machery, The Oxford Handbook of Compositionality. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
The English past tense: Analogy redux.Steve Chandler - 2010 - Cognitive Linguistics 21 (3):371-417.
Use impacts morphological representation.Joan Bybee - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (6):1016-1017.
Atomic lexical entries.David Lightfoot - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (6):1029-1030.
Overtensing and the effect of regularity.Joseph Paul Stemberger - 2002 - Cognitive Science 26 (6):737-766.
The dual nature of the language faculty.Harald Clahsen - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (6):1046-1055.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
133 (#334,615)

6 months
19 (#603,192)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references