Abstract
Recent artificial-grammar learning (AGL) paradigms driven by the Chomsky hierarchy paved the way for direct comparisons between humans and animals in the learning of center embedding ([A[AB]B]). The AnBn grammars used by the first generation of such research lacked a crucial property of center embedding, where the pairs of elements are explicitly matched ([A1 [A2 B2] B1]). This type of indexing is implemented in the second-generation AnBn grammars. This paper reviews recent studies using such grammars. Against the premises of these studies, we argue that even those newer AnBn grammars cannot test the learning of syntactic hierarchy. These studies nonetheless provide detailed information about the conditions under which human adults can learn an AnBn grammar with indexing. This knowledge serves to interpret recent animal studies, which make surprising claims about animals’ ability to handle center embedding.
Highlights
Center Embedding and AnBn GrammarsOne of the properties that make humans unique among animals is language, which has several components including phonology, lexicon, and syntax
Recent artificial-grammar learning (AGL) paradigms driven by the Chomsky hierarchy paved the way for direct comparisons between humans and animals in the learning of center embedding ([A[AB]B])
Because finite-state grammars had been observed in nonhuman animals (Berwick et al 2011, Fitch & Hauser 2004), the crucial question is whether we can artificially induce, in animals, the learning of a “context-free” AnBn grammar equipped with center embedding
Summary
One of the properties that make humans unique among animals is language, which has several components including phonology, lexicon, and syntax. The strategy of just counting the numbers of As and Bs does not help, because both grammatical and ungrammatical strings have the same number of As and Bs. The implementation of explicit indexing in the AnBn grammar has led many authors to assume that the second-generation studies have tested the learning and processing of syntactic hierarchy (Bahlmann et al 2008, de Vries et al 2008, Fedor et al 2012, Fitch & Friederici 2012, Friederici et al 2011, Lai & Poletiek 2011, Mueller et al 2010)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
