Semantic Influences on Syntactic Acceptability Ratings

A high prevalence of syntactic gradience is well attested, but a comprehensive explanation is still needed. In the present paper, we look into the question of whether semantic influences could account for parts of the observed gradience. Results from two experiments suggest that semantic influences can have a degrading effect on the acceptability of grammatical items. However, we did not observe that they had an ameliorating effect, which still leaves a good deal of the observed gradience in need of an explanation

MG Parsing as a Model of Gradient Acceptability in Syntactic Islands

It is well-known that the acceptability judgments at the core of current syntactic theories are continuous. However, an open debate is whether the source of such gradience is situated in the grammar itself, or can be derived from extra-grammatical factors. In this paper, we propose the use of a top-down parser for Minimalist grammars (Stabler, 2013; Kobele et al., 2013; Graf et al., 2017), as a formal model of how gradient acceptability can arise from categorical grammars. As a test case, we target the acceptability judgments for island effects collected by Sprouse et al. (2012a)

A Computational Model Of Cognitive Constraints In Syntactic Locality

This dissertation is broadly concerned with the question: how do human cognitive limitations influence difficult sentences? The focus is a class of grammatical restrictions, locality constraints. The majority of relations between words are local; the relations between question words and their governors are not. Locality constraints restrict the formation of these non-local dependencies. Though necessary, the origin, operation, and scope of locality constraints is a controversial topic in the literature. The dissertation describes the implementation of a computational model that clarifies these issues. The model tests, against behavioral data, a series of cognitive constraints argued to account for locality. The result is an explanatory model predictive of a variety of cross-linguistic locality data. The model distinguishes those cognitive limitations that affect locality processing, and addresses the competence-performance debate by determining how and when cognitive constraints explain human behavior. The results provide insight into the nature of locality constraints, and promote language models sensitive to human cognitive limitations

Data convergence in syntactic theory and the role of sentence pairs

Most acceptability judgments reported in the syntactic literature are obtained by linguists being their own informants. For well-represented languages like English, this method of data collection is best described as a process of community agreement, given that linguists typically discuss their judgments with colleagues. However, the process itself is comparably opaque, and the reliability of its output has been questioned. Recent studies looking into this criticism have shown that judgments reported in the literature for English can be replicated in quantitative experiments to a near-perfect degree. However, the focus of those studies has been on testing sentence pairs. We argue that replication of only contrasts is not sufcient, because theory building necessarily includes comparison across pairs and across papers. Thus, we test items at large, i. e. independent of counterparts. We created a corpus of grammaticality judgments on sequences of American English reported in articles published in Linguistic Inquiry and then collected experimental ratings for a random subset of them. Overall, expert ratings and experimental ratings converge to a good degree, but there are numerous instances in which ratings do not converge. Based on this, we argue that for theory-critical data, the process of community agreement should be accompanied by quantitative methods whenever possible

Locality and Accessibility in Wh-Questions

Even in relatively configurational languages, such as English, speakers frequently have a choice between different constituent orders. Many of these word order variations have been linked to complexity (Hawkins 2005; inter alia). For example, heavy-NP shift is more likely if the shifted NP is more complex than the NP it shifts over (Wasow 1997). Other cases of word order variations, however, have not been considered in these terms. The choice between different wh-phrase orders, as in (1), has been said to be determined by (categorical) grammatical constraints, such as Superiorit

A program for experimental syntax: Finding the relationship between acceptability and grammatical knowlege

There has always been interest in the methodology of acceptability judgment collection, as well as the reliability of the results. It seems, though, that the past several years have seen an increase in the number of studies employing formal experimental techniques for the collection of acceptability judgments, so much so that the term experimental syntax has come to be applied to the use of those techniques. The question this dissertation asks is whether the extent of the utility of experimental syntax is to find areas in which informal judgment collection was insufficient, or whether there is a complementary research program for experimental syntax that is more than just a methodological footnote to the informal judgment collection of theoretical syn- tax. This dissertation is a first attempt at a tentative yes: the tools of experimental syntax can be used to explore the relationship between acceptability judgments and the form or nature of grammatical knowledge, not just the content of grammatical knowledge. This dissertation begins by identifying several recent claims about the nature of grammatical knowledge that have been made based upon hypotheses about the nature of acceptability judgments. Each chapter applies the tools of experimental syntax to those hypotheses in an attempt to refine our understanding of the relationship between acceptability and grammatical knowledge. The claims investigated include: that grammatical knowledge is gradient, that grammatical knowledge is sensitive to context effects, that the stability or instability of acceptability reflects underlying differences in grammatical knowledge, that processing effects affect acceptability, and that acceptability judgments have nothing further to contribute to debates over the number and nature of dependency forming operations. Using wh-movement and Island effects as the empirical basis of the research, the results of these studies suggest that the relationship between acceptability and grammatical knowledge is much more complicated than previously thought. The overarching conclusion is that there is a program for experimental syntax that is independent of simple data collection: only through the tools of experimental syntax can we achieve a better understanding of the nature of acceptability, and how it relates to the nature of grammatical knowledge

Islands in the grammar? Standards of evidence

When considering how a complex system operates, the observable behavior depends upon both architectural properties of the system and the principles governing its operation. As a simple example, the behavior of computer chess programs depends upon both the processing speed and resources of the computer and the programmed rules that determine how the computer selects its next move. Despite having very similar search techniques, a computer from the 1990s might make a move that its 1970s forerunner would overlook simply because it had more raw computational power. From the naïve observer’s perspective, however, it is not superficially evident if a particular move is dispreferred or overlooked because of computational limitations or the search strategy and decision algorithm. In the case of computers, evidence for the source of any particular behavior can ultimately be found by inspecting the code and tracking the decision process of the computer. But with the human mind, such options are not yet available. The preference for certain behaviors and the dispreference for others may theoretically follow from cognitive limitations or from task-related principles that preclude certain kinds of cognitive operations, or from some combination of the two. This uncertainty gives rise to the fundamental problem of finding evidence for one explanation over the other. Such a problem arises in the analysis of syntactic island effects – the focu

Cognitive constraints and island effects

Competence-based theories of island effects play a central role in generative grammar, yet the graded nature of many syntactic islands has never been properly accounted for. Categorical syntactic accounts of island effects have persisted in spite of a wealth of data suggesting that island effects are not categorical in nature and that nonstructural manipulations that leave island structures intact can radically alter judgments of island violations. We argue here, building on work by Paul Deane, Robert Kluender, and others, that processing factors have the potential to account for this otherwise unexplained variation in acceptability judgments. We report the results of self-paced reading experiments and controlled acceptability studies that explore the relationship between processing costs and judgments of acceptability. In each of the three self-paced reading studies, the data indicate that the processing cost of different types of island violations can be significantly reduced to a degree comparable to that of nonisland filler-gap constructions by manipulating a single nonstructural factor. Moreover, this reduction in processing cost is accompanied by significant improvements in acceptability. This evidence favors the hypothesis that island-violating constructions involve numerous processing pressures that aggregate to drive processing difficulty above a threshold, resulting in unacceptability. We examine the implications of these findings for the grammar of filler-gap dependencies

Artificial Intelligence and National Security

As technology advances at an exponential rate, it is becoming increasingly important to consider the ramifications of that technology in the geopolitical environment, and especially as it pertains to American national security. One of the most important categories of technological innovation that will likely disrupt the global balance of geopolitical power, especially along the US-China axis, is the advent and growing sophistication of artificial intelligence. In order to address the new and evolving national security challenges that will accompany this disruption, this paper seeks to define and explain the disparity in artificial intelligence capabilities between the United States and China. First, it will describe the contemporary situation regarding the AI capabilities of both China and the United States, as well the implications of those capabilities as they relate to American national security interests. Additionally, this paper will identify the major contributing factors that are driving and/or mitigating artificial intelligence development in each country. Moreover, this paper will explain the discrepancies found to exist between the two countries in terms of the discrepancies found between their contributing and mitigating factors. Lastly, this paper will discuss the possible implications of these findings for the national security of the United States