| 1 |
A verb-frame frequency account of constraints on long-distance dependencies in English
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Dependency locality as an explanatory principle for word order
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Levy (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Extraction from subjects: Differences in acceptability depend on the discourse function of the construction
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
Syntactic dependencies correspond to word pairs with high mutual information
|
|
|
|
In: Association for Computational Linguistics (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Word Order Predicts Cross‐Linguistic Differences in the Production of Redundant Color and Number Modifiers
|
|
|
|
In: MIT web domain (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
Communication efficiency of color naming across languages provides a new framework for the evolution of color terms
|
|
|
|
In: PMC (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
The Natural Stories corpus: a reading-time corpus of English texts containing rare syntactic constructions
|
|
|
|
In: Springer Netherlands (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
How Efficiency Shapes Human Language ; How Efficiency Shapes Human Language, TICS 2019
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Levy via Courtney Crummett (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
Comprehenders model the nature of noise in the environment
|
|
|
|
In: PMC (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
Partial Truths: Adults Choose to Mention Agents and Patients in Proportion to Informativity, Even If It Doesn’t Fully Disambiguate the Message
|
|
|
|
In: MIT Press (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
Word Forms Are Structured for Efficient Use
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson via Courtney Crummett (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 12 |
Color naming across languages reflects color use
|
|
|
|
In: National Academy of Sciences (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 13 |
Tracking Colisteners’ Knowledge States During Language Comprehension
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson via Courtney Crummett (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 14 |
SNAP judgments: A small N acceptability paradigm (SNAP) for linguistic acceptability judgments: Online Appendices
|
|
|
|
In: Language (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 15 |
Words cluster phonetically beyond phonotactic regularities
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson via Courtney Crummett (2017)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 16 |
A meta-analysis of syntactic priming in language production
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson via Courtney Crummett (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 17 |
Wordform Similarity Increases With Semantic Similarity: An Analysis of 100 Languages
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson via Courtney Crummett (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 18 |
Processing temporal presuppositions: an event-related potential study
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson via Courtney Crummett (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 19 |
L2 processing as noisy channel language comprehension
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson via Courtney Crummett (2016)
|
|
Abstract:
The thesis in this paper is that L2 speakers differ from L1 speakers in their ability to do memory storage and retrieval about linguistic structure. We would like to suggest it is possible to go farther than this thesis and develop a computational-level theory which explains why this mechanistic difference between L2 and L1 speakers exists. For this purpose, we believe a noisy channel model (Shannon, 1948; Levy, 2008; Levy, Bicknell, Slattery & Rayner, 2009; Gibson, Bergen & Piantadosi, 2013) could be a good start. Under the reasonable assumption that L2 speakers have a less precise probabilistic representation of the syntax of their L2 language than L1 speakers do, the noisy channel model straightforwardly predicts that L2 comprehenders will depend more on world knowledge and discourse factors when interpreting and recalling utterances (cf. Gibson, Sandberg, Fedorenko, Bergen & Kiran, 2015, for this assumption applied to language processing for persons with aphasia). Also, under the assumption that L2 speakers assume a higher error rate than L1 speakers do, the noisy channel model predicts that they will be more affected by alternative parses which are not directly compatible with the form of an utterance.
|
|
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/113026
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 20 |
Don’t Underestimate the Benefits of Being Misunderstood
|
|
|
|
In: Prof. Gibson via Courtney Crummett (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
