Abstract
Linguistic category learning has been shown to be highly sensitive to linear order, and depending on the task, differentially sensitive to the information provided by preceding category markers (premarkers, e.g., gendered articles) or succeeding category markers (postmarkers, e.g., gendered suffixes). Given that numerous systems for marking grammatical categories exist in natural languages, it follows that a better understanding of these findings can shed light on the factors underlying this diversity. In two discriminative learning simulations and an artificial language learning experiment, we identify two factors that modulate linear order effects in linguistic category learning: category structure and the level of abstraction in a category hierarchy. Regarding category structure, we find that postmarking brings an advantage for learning category diagnostic stimulus dimensions, an effect not present when categories are non‐confusable. Regarding levels of abstraction, we find that premarking of super‐ordinate categories (e.g., noun class) facilitates learning of subordinate categories (e.g., nouns). We present detailed simulations using a plausible candidate mechanism for the observed effects, along with a comprehensive analysis of linear order effects within an expectation‐based account of learning. Our findings indicate that linguistic category learning is differentially guided by pre‐ and postmarking, and that the influence of each is modulated by the specific characteristics of a given category system.
Highlights
Natural languages abound with regularities, patterns, and conventions
We have presented a unified account of linear order effects in different kinds of category systems that provides more insight in the role of categories and category marking systems in language
Given the present evidence and our interpretation within an expectation-based learning account, we conclude that whenever category-relevant features are in competition with irrelevant features, postmarking facilitates category formation. We suggest that this could be whenever categories have to be formed from a completely naive point of view, for example, in first language acquisition, or when category systems need to be reshaped, as often necessary in second language learning
Summary
Natural languages abound with regularities, patterns, and conventions. philosophers have long noted that to say language is ruled by convention is something of a platitude (Lewis, 2008). According to typological analyses, postmarking is the most frequent grammatical marking pattern in languages across the world (irrespective of whether the markers are bound morphemes, e.g., Hawkins & Gilligan, 1988, or free morphemes, Bybee, Pagliuca, & Perkins, 1990). This observation has triggered a considerable debate about whether and how the linear order in which categories are marked makes a difference to language processing, to language production, or—as we will investigate here—to language learning
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
