X-within-X Structures and the Nature of Categories

This paper discusses the existence of X-within-X structures in language. Constraints to same-category embedding have been the focus in a number of recent studies. These studies follow a long-standing tradition in linguistic theory that assumes a ban on the adjacency of same-category elements. In the present work, data drawn from a typologically broad variety of languages suggest that the postulated constraints are not so robust. It is shown that X-within-X structures do exist in language. In this context, an argument is made in favor of an unrestricted conceptualization of Merge, independent from category distributions, while recursion is taken to be a property of procedures and not of structures. The discussion of X-within-X patterns provides insights with respect to the attested category distributions, the nature of categories, and the language faculty, from a biologically plausible point of view

From Comparative Languistics to Comparative (Bio)linguistics: Reflections on Variation

nature and the orientation of current work in the field of (comparative) lingu-istics

What’s in (a) Label? Neural Origins and Behavioral Manifestations of Identity Avoidance in Language and Cognition

The present work defends the idea that grammatical categories are not in- trinsic to mergeable items, taking as a departure point Lenneberg’s (1967, 1975) claim that syntactic objects are definable only contextually. It is ar- gued that there are four different strands of inquiry that are of interest when one seeks to build an evolutionarily plausible theory of labels and operation Label: (i) linguistic constraints on adjacent elements of the same type such as Repetition/Identity Avoidance ([*XX]), (ii) data that flout these constraints ([XX]), (iii) disorders that raise questions as to whether the locus of impairment is a categorial feature per se, and (iv) operation Label as a candidate for human uniqueness. After discussing categorial identity through these perspectives, this work first traces the origins and manifesta-tions of Identity Avoidance in language and other domains of human cog-nition, with emphasis on attention orienting. Second, it pro- poses a new processing principle, the Novel Information Bias, that (i) cap- tures linguistic Identity Avoidance based on how the brain decodes types and tokens and (ii) explains the universal fact that generally the existence of adjacent occur-rences of syntactically and/or phonologically identical tokens is severely constrained

A demonstration of the uncomputability of parametric models of language acquisition and a biologically plausible alternative

This work received support from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement n° 746652 and from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities under the Ramón y Cajal grant agreement n. RYC2018-025456-I (to EL).The logical problem of language acquisition has been at the forefront of psycholinguistics and behavioral neuroscience for decades. One of the most influential answers to the problem of how successful acquisition occurs on the basis of noisy input suggests that the child is aided by innate principles and parameters (P&P). These are conceived aspart of our biological endowment for language. Previous work on the computability of parametric models has focused on the process of parameter-setting,leaving settability unaddressed. Settability is a key notion in parametric models since it provides an answer to the logical problem of language acquisition: the setting of one parameter carries implications for the settability of others, minimizing the child's task. However, a mathematical analysis of the expected probability of successful computation of settability relations has not been carried out. We report results from a novel program developed to calculate the probability of successful computation of a network of 62 linguistic parameters as attested in 28 languages, spanning across 5 language families. The results reveal that some parameters have an extremely low probability of successful computation, such that trillions of unsuccessful computations are expected before a successful setting occurs. Using the same program, we performed an additional second analysis to a different network, covering 94 parameters from58 languages and 15 language families. In this case, the estimated number of expected unsuccessful computations rose from trillions to quadrillions. These results raise concerns about the computational feasibility of the highly influential P&P approach to language development. Merging insights from various acquisition models, including some developed within P&P, a biologically plausible alternative is offered for the process of deciphering a target grammar in the acquisition of both spoken and signed languages. Overall, our analysis of the P&P approach to language acquisition centers learnability and computability constraints as the major factors for determining the psychological plausibility of grammar development

Entangled Parametric Hierarchies: Problems for an Overspecified Universal Grammar

This study addresses the feasibility of the classical notion of parameter in linguistic theory from the perspective of parametric hierarchies. A novel program-based analysis is implemented in order to show certain empirical problems related to these hierarchies. The program was developed on the basis of an enriched data base spanning 23 contemporary and 5 ancient languages. The empirical issues uncovered cast doubt on classical parametric models of language acquisition as well as on the conceptualization of an overspecified Universal Grammar that has parameters among its primitives. Pinpointing these issues leads to the proposal that (i) the (bio)logical problem of language acquisition does not amount to a process of triggering innately pre-wired values of parameters and (ii) it paves the way for viewing language, epigenetic ('parametric') variation as an externalization-related epiphenomenon, whose learning component may be more important than what sometimes is assumed

What’s in (a) Label? Neural Origins and Behavioral Manifestations of Identity Avoidance in Language and Cognition

The present work defends the idea that grammatical categories are not in- trinsic to mergeable items, taking as a departure point Lenneberg’s (1967, 1975) claim that syntactic objects are definable only contextually. It is ar- gued that there are four different strands of inquiry that are of interest when one seeks to build an evolutionarily plausible theory of labels and operation Label: (i) linguistic constraints on adjacent elements of the same type such as Repetition/Identity Avoidance ([*XX]), (ii) data that flout these constraints ([XX]), (iii) disorders that raise questions as to whether the locus of impairment is a categorial feature per se, and (iv) operation Label as a candidate for human uniqueness. After discussing categorial identity through these perspectives, this work first traces the origins and manifesta-tions of Identity Avoidance in language and other domains of human cog-nition, with emphasis on attention orienting. Second, it pro- poses a new processing principle, the Novel Information Bias, that (i) cap- tures linguistic Identity Avoidance based on how the brain decodes types and tokens and (ii) explains the universal fact that generally the existence of adjacent occur-rences of syntactically and/or phonologically identical tokens is severely constrained

The role of minority language bilingualism in spotting agreement attraction errors: Evidence from Italian varieties

Bilingual adaptations remain a subject of ongoing debate, with varying results reported across cognitive domains. A possible way to disentangle the apparent inconsistency of results is to focus on the domain of language processing, which is what the bilingual experience boils down to. This study delves into the role of the bilingual experience on the processing of agreement mismatches. Given the underrepresentation of minority bilingual speakers of non-standard varieties, we advance a unique comparative perspective that includes monolinguals, standard language bilinguals, and different groups of minority language bilinguals, taking advantage of the rich linguistic diversity of the Italian peninsula. This comparative approach can reveal the impact of various sociolinguistic aspects of the bilingual experience across different bilingual trajectories. We developed an auditory acceptability judgement task in Italian, featuring Subject-Verb agreement mismatches. Participants evaluated the stimuli on a 5-point Likert scale and reaction times were recorded. The results do not reveal significant differences between the speakers of standard languages: Italian monolinguals and Italian-Spanish bilinguals. Instead, significant differences are found between monolinguals and the two groups of minority language bidialectals, as well as between the bidialectal groups themselves: Italian-Pavese bidialectals were faster than both Italian-Agrigentino bidialectals and Italian monolinguals, while Italian-Agrigentino bidialectals were less accurate than both Italian-Pavese bidialectals and Italian monolinguals. This intricate picture is explained through variables associated with second language use and language switching. Our findings suggest that if bilingualism is viewed as a yes/no phenotype, it is unavoidable that the bilingual experience will remain a mystery linked to intensely debated results. If, however, one accepts that bilingual adaptations are shaped by the environmental ecology of each trajectory, variation across bilingual processing outcomes is unsurprising. Overall, we argue that specific sociolinguistic factors behind each bilingual experience can reveal where bilingual adaptations on language and cognition stem from.European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement n˚ 945413Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV) through 1 Martí i Franquès COFUND Doctoral FellowshipsSpanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033) under the research project No. PID2021-124399NA-I0

On trade-offs in bilingualism and moving beyond the stacking the deck fallacy

Despite a meteoric rise, results in the cognitive science of bilingualism present with significant inconsistency. In parallel, there is a striking absence of an ecologically valid theory within bilingualism research. How should one interpret the totality of available data that can pull in opposing directions? To proceed, we need to identify which practices impede progression. Hitherto, we bring to the fore an undiscussed practice, contextualizing how it impacts the ability to embed the available results into an overarching theory. We suggest that a STACKING THE DECK FALLACY – the tendency to engage differently with available evidence, directing focus to specific sub-samples – hampers theory formation. We put forth a proposal for making progress, building on the premise that what is lacking in the field is a unifying perspective that reconciles seemingly contradictory results. We suggest that the necessary shift of perspective towards progress crucially entails linking the notions of SPECTRUM and TRADE-OFF