Plural morphology in compounding is not good evidence to support the dual mechanism model

J. Hayes; V. Murphy; L. Peters; Pamela Smith; N. Davey

Plural morphology in compounding is not good evidence to support the dual mechanism model

J. Hayes
, V. Murphy
, L. Peters
, Pamela Smith
, N. Davey

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

33 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The compounding phenomena is considered to be good evidence to support the dual mechanism model of morphological processing (Pinker & Prince, 1992). However evidence from initial neural net modeling has shown that a single route associative memory based account might provide an equally, if not more valid explanation of the treatment of plurals in compounds. Further neural net modeling and empirical work is proposed to test this single route account

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Proceedings of the Fourth International conference on Cognitive Modeling
Editors	E. M. Altmann, A. Cleermans, C. D. Schunn, W. D. Gray
Publication status	Published - 2001

Access to Document

900903Accepted author manuscript, 18.6 KB

Cite this

@inproceedings{c742538ef4cf4f18b63c3d5b7fa003e1,

title = "Plural morphology in compounding is not good evidence to support the dual mechanism model",

abstract = "The compounding phenomena is considered to be good evidence to support the dual mechanism model of morphological processing (Pinker \& Prince, 1992). However evidence from initial neural net modeling has shown that a single route associative memory based account might provide an equally, if not more valid explanation of the treatment of plurals in compounds. Further neural net modeling and empirical work is proposed to test this single route account",

author = "J. Hayes and V. Murphy and L. Peters and Pamela Smith and N. Davey",

year = "2001",

language = "English",

isbn = "0-8058-4041-7",

editor = "Altmann, \{E. M.\} and A. Cleermans and Schunn, \{C. D.\} and Gray, \{W. D.\}",

booktitle = "Proceedings of the Fourth International conference on Cognitive Modeling",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Plural morphology in compounding is not good evidence to support the dual mechanism model

AU - Hayes, J.

AU - Murphy, V.

AU - Peters, L.

AU - Smith, Pamela

AU - Davey, N.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - The compounding phenomena is considered to be good evidence to support the dual mechanism model of morphological processing (Pinker & Prince, 1992). However evidence from initial neural net modeling has shown that a single route associative memory based account might provide an equally, if not more valid explanation of the treatment of plurals in compounds. Further neural net modeling and empirical work is proposed to test this single route account

AB - The compounding phenomena is considered to be good evidence to support the dual mechanism model of morphological processing (Pinker & Prince, 1992). However evidence from initial neural net modeling has shown that a single route associative memory based account might provide an equally, if not more valid explanation of the treatment of plurals in compounds. Further neural net modeling and empirical work is proposed to test this single route account

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 0-8058-4041-7

BT - Proceedings of the Fourth International conference on Cognitive Modeling

A2 - Altmann, E. M.

A2 - Cleermans, A.

A2 - Schunn, C. D.

A2 - Gray, W. D.

ER -

Plural morphology in compounding is not good evidence to support the dual mechanism model

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this