MacWhinney B, Leinbach J
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.
Cognition. 1991 Aug;40(1-2):121-57. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(91)90048-9.
In a recent issue of this journal, Pinker and Prince (1988) and Lachter and Bever (1988) presented detailed critiques of Rumelhart and McClelland's (1986) connectionist model of the child's learning of the phonological form of the English past tense. In order to address these criticisms, a new connectionist model was constructed using the back-propagation algorithm, a larger input corpus, a fuller paradigm, and a new phonological representation. This new implementation successfully addressed the criticisms of the phonological representation used by Rumelhart and McClelland. It did a much better job of learning the past tense using a fuller input set with realistic frequencies of occurrence. Ancillary simulations using the same network were able to deal with the homonymy problem and the generation of forms like "ated" from "ate". The one feature not provided by the new model was a way of modeling early correct production of irregular forms. The success of the new model can be used to help clarify the extent to which the published critiques apply to a particular connectionist implementation as opposed to fundamental principles underlying the broader connectionist conceptualization.
在本期刊最近的一期中,平克和普林斯(1988年)以及拉克特和贝弗(1988年)对鲁梅尔哈特和麦克莱兰(1986年)关于儿童学习英语过去式语音形式的联结主义模型进行了详细批判。为了回应这些批评,使用反向传播算法、更大的输入语料库、更完整的范式和新的语音表征构建了一个新的联结主义模型。这个新的模型成功回应了对鲁梅尔哈特和麦克莱兰所使用的语音表征的批评。在使用具有实际出现频率的更完整输入集学习过去式方面,它做得更好。使用同一网络进行的辅助模拟能够处理同音异形词问题以及由“ate”生成“ated”这样的形式。新模型未提供的一个特性是对不规则形式早期正确产出进行建模的方法。新模型的成功可用于帮助阐明已发表的批评在何种程度上适用于特定的联结主义实现方式,而非更广泛的联结主义概念化所依据的基本原则。