Distributed Representations, Simple Recurrent Networks, And Grammatical Structure

• Baker, C.L.(1979). Syntactic theory and the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry, 10, 533-581.

  Google Scholar 

• Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B.(1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar.In E.Wanners, & L.Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition:The state of the art. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Chafe, W.(1970). Meaning and the structure of language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Chalmers, D.J.(1990). Syntactic transformations on distributed representations.Center for Research on Concepts and Cognition, Indiana University.

• Chomsky, N.(1957). Syntactic structures.The Hague:Mouton.

• Dell, G.(1986). A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283-321.

  Google Scholar 

• Dolan, C., & Dyer, M.G.(1987). Symbolic schemata in connectionist memories:Role binding and the evolution of structure (Technical Report UCLA-AI-87-11). Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles, Arti-ficial Intelligence Laboratory.

  Google Scholar 

• Dolan, C.P., & Smolensky, P.(1988). Implementing a connectionist production system using tensor products (Technical Report UCLA-AI-88-15). Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.

  Google Scholar 

• Elman, J.L.(1989). Representation and structure in connectionist models (Technical Report CRL-8903). San Diego, CA: University of California, San Diego, Center for Research in Language.

  Google Scholar 

• Elman, J.L.(1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14, 179-211.

  Google Scholar 

• Fauconnier, G.(1985)Mental spaces. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Feldman, J.A. & Ballard, D.H.(1982). Connectionist models and their properties. Cognitive Science, 6, 205-254.

  Google Scholar 

• Fillmore, C.J.(1982). Frame semantics.In Linguistics in the morning calm. Seoul: Hansin.

  Google Scholar 

• Flury, G.(1988). Common principal components and related multivariate models. New York: Wiley.

  Google Scholar 

• Fodor, J.(1976). The language of thought. Harvester Press, Sussex.

  Google Scholar 

• Fodor, J., & Pylyshyn, Z.(1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture:A critical analysis.In S.Pinker & J.Mehler (Eds.), Connections and symbols. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Forster, K.I.(1979). Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor.In W.E.Cooper, & E. Walker (Eds.), Sentence processing:Psychotinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  Google Scholar 

• Gasser, M., & Lee, C-D.(1990). Networks that learn phonology.Computer Science Department, Indiana University.

• Givon, T.(1984). Syntax:A functional-typological introduction.Volume 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  Google Scholar 

• Gold, E.M.(1967). Language identification in the limit. Information and Control, 16, 447-474.

  Google Scholar 

• Gonzalez, R.C., & Wintz, P.(1977). Digital image processing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

  Google Scholar 

• Grosjean, F.(1980). Spoken word recognition processes and the gating paradigm. Perception & Psychophysics, 28, 267-283.

  Google Scholar 

• Hanson, S.J., & Burr, D.J.(1987). Knowledge representation in connectionist networks. Bell Communications Research, Morristown, New Jersey.

  Google Scholar 

• Hare, M.(1990). The role of similarity in Hungarian vowel harmony:A connectionist account (CRL Technical Report 9004). San Diego, CA: University of California, Center for Research in Language.

  Google Scholar 

• Hare, M., Corina, D., & Cottrell, G.(1988). Connectionist perspective on prosodic structure (CRL Newsletter, Vol. 3, No. 2). San Diego, CA: University of California, Center for Research in Language.

  Google Scholar 

• Hinton, G.E.(1988). Representing part-whole hierarchies in connectionist networks (Technical Report CRG-TR-88-2).University of Toronto, Connectionist Research Group.

• Hinton, G.E., McClelland, J.L., & Rumelhart, D.E.(1986). Distributed representations, in D.E.Rumelhart, & J.L.McClelland (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing:Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Hopper, P.J., & Thompson, S.A.(1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language, 56, 251-299.

  Google Scholar 

• Hornik, K., Stinchcombe, M., & White, H.(in press). Multi-layer feedforward networks are universal approx-imators. Neural Networks.

• Jordan, M.I.(1986). Serial order:A parallel distributed processing approach (Technical Report 8604). San Diego, CA: University of California, San Diego, Institute for Cognitive Science.

  Google Scholar 

• Kawamoto, A.H.(1988). Distributed representations of ambiguous words and their resolution in a connectionist network.In S.L.Small, G.W.Cottrell, & M.K.Tanenhaus (Eds.), Lexical ambiguity resolution:Perspectives from psycholinguistics, neuropsychology, and artificial intelligence. SanMateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

  Google Scholar 

• Kirsh, D.(in press). When is information represented explicitly?In J.Hanson (Ed.), Information, thought, and content. Vancouver: University of British Columbia.

• Kuno, S.(1987). functional syntax:Anaphora, discourse and empathy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Kutas, M.(1988). Event-related brain potentials (ERPs)elicited during rapid serial presentation of congruous and incongruous sentences.In R.Rohrbaugh, J.Rohrbaugh, & P.Parasuramen (Eds.), Current trends in brain potential research (EEG Supplement 40). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

  Google Scholar 

• Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S.A.(1980). Reading senseless sentences:Brain potentials reflect semantic inconguity. Science, 207, 203-205.

  Google Scholar 

• Lakoff, G.(1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things:What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Langacker, R.W.(1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar:Theoretical perspectives.Volume 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Langacker, R.W.(1988). A usage-based model. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 50, 127-161.

  Google Scholar 

• MacWhinney, B., Leinbach, J., Taraban, R., & McDonald, J.(1989). Language learning:Cues or rules?Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 255-277.

  Google Scholar 

• Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L.K.(1980). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 8, 1-71.

  Google Scholar 

• McClelland, J.L.(1987). The case for interactionism in language processing.In M.Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII:The psychology of reading. London: Erlbaum.

  Google Scholar 

• McClelland, J.L., St.John, M., & Taraban, R.(1989). Sentence comprehension:A parallel distributed processing approach.Manuscript, Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University.

• McMillan, C, & Smolensky, P.(1988). Analyzing a connectionist model as a system of soft rules (Technical Report CU-CS-303-88).University of Colorado, Boulder, Department of Computer Science.

• Miikkulainen, R., & Dyer, M.(1989a). Encoding input/output representations in connectionist cognitive systems. In D.S.Touretzky, G.E.Hinton, & T.J.Sejnowski (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1988 Connectionist Models Summer School. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

  Google Scholar 

• Miikkulainen, R., & Dyer, M.(1989b). A modular neural network architecture for sequential paraphrasing of script-based stories.In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, IEEE.

• Mozer, M.(1988). A focused back-propagation algorithm for temporal pattern recognition.(Technical Report CRG-TR-88-3).University of Toronto, Departments of Psychology and Computer Science.

• Mozer, M.C., & Smolensky, P.(1989). Skeletoniwtion:A technique for trimming the fat from a network via relevance assessment (Technical Report CU-CS-421-89).University of Colorado, Boulder, Department of Computer Science.

• Oden, G.(1978). Semantic constraints and judged preference for interpretations of ambiguous sentences. Memory and Cognition, 6, 26-37.

  Google Scholar 

• Pinker, S.(1989). Learnability and cognition:The acquisition of argument structure, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Pollack, J.B.(1988). Recursive auto-associative memory:Decising compositional distributed representations. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  Google Scholar 

• Pollack, J.B.(in press). Recursive distributed representations. Artificial Intelligence.

• Ramsey, W.(1989). The philosophical implications of connectionism.Ph.D.thesis, University of California, San Diego.

  Google Scholar 

• Reich, P.A., & Dell, G.S.(1977). Finiteness and embedding.In E.L.Blansitt, Jr., & P.Maher (Eds.), The third LACUS forum. Columbia, SC: Hornbeam Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Rumelhart, D.E., Hinton, G.E., & Williams, R.J.(1986). Learning internal representations by error propagation. In D.E.Rumelhart, & J.L.McClelland (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing:Explorations in the microstruc-ture of cognition (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Rumelhart, D.E., & McClelland, J.L.(1986a). PDP Models and general issues in cognitive science.In D.E. Rumelhart, & J.L.McClelland (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing:Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Rumelhart, D.E., & McClelland, J.L.(1986b). On learning the past tenses of English verbs.In D.E.Rumelhart, & J.L.McClelland (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing:Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Salasoo, A., & Pisoni, D.B.(1985). Interaction of knowledge sources in spoken word identification. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 210-231.

  Google Scholar 

• Sanger, D.(1989). Contribution analysis:A technique for assigning responsibilities to hidden units in connectionist networks (Technical Report CU-CS-435-89).University of Colorado, Boulder, Department of Computer Science.

• Schlesinger, I.M.(1971). On linguistic competence.IN Y.Bar-Hillel (Ed.), Pragmatics of natural languages. Dordrecht, Holland:Reidel.

  Google Scholar 

• Sejnowski, T.J., & Rosenberg, C.R.(1987). Parallel networks that learn to pronounce English text. Complex Systems, 1, 145-168.

  Google Scholar 

• Servan-Schreiber, D., Cleeremans, A., & McClelland, J.L.(1991). Graded state machines:The representation of temporal contingencies in simple recurrent networks. Machine Learning, 7, 161-193.

  Google Scholar 

• Shastri, L., & Ajjanagadde, V.(1989). A conneclionist system for rule based reasoning with multi-place predicates and variables (Technical Report MS-CIS-8905).University of Pennsylvania, Computer and Information Science Department.

• Smolensky, P.(1987a). On variable binding and the representation of symbolic structures in connectionist systems (Technical Report CU-CS-355-87).University of Colorado, Boulder, Department of Computer Science.

• Smolensky, P.(1987b). On the proper treatment of connectionsm (Technical Report CU-CS-377-87).University of Colorado, Boulder, Department of Computer Science. Smolensky, P.(1987c).Putting together connectionism-again (Technical Report CU-CS-378-87).University of Colorado, Boulder, Department of Computer Science.

• Smolensky, P.(1988). On the proper treatment of connectionism. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11.

• Smolensky, P.(in press). Tensor product variable binding and the representation of symbolic structures in connectionist systems. Artificial Intelligence.

• St.John, M., & McClelland, J.L.(in press). Learning and applying contextual constraints in sentence comprehension (Technical Report). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, Department of Psychology.

• Stemberger, J.P.(1985). The lexicon in a model of language production. New York: Garland Publishing.

  Google Scholar 

• Stinchcombe, M., & White, H.(1989). Universal approximation using feedforward networks with non-sigmoid hidden layer activation functions. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, Washington, D.C.

• Stolz, W.(1967). A study of the ability to decode grammatically novel sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 867-873.

  Google Scholar 

• Tanenhaus, M.K., Garnseyh, S.M., & Boland, J.(in press). Combinatory lexical information and language comprehension.In G.Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing:Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

• Touretzky, D.S.(1986). BoltzCONS:Reconciling connectionism with the recursive nature of stacks and trees. Proceedings of the Eight Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  Google Scholar 

• Touretzky, D.S.(1989). Rules and maps in connectionist symbol processing (Technical Report CMU-CS-89-158). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, Department of Computer Science.

  Google Scholar 

• Touretzky, D.S.(1989). Towards a connectionist phonology:The "many maps"approach to sequence manipulation. Proceedings of the nth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 188-195.

• Touretzky, D.S., & Hinton, G.E.(1985). Symbols among the neurons:Details of a connectionist inference architecture. Proceedings of the Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles.

• Touretzky, D.S., & Wheeler, D.W.(1989). A connectionist implementation of cognitive phonology (Technical Report CMU-CS-89-144). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, School of Computer Science.

  Google Scholar 

• Van Gelder, T.J.(in press). Compositionality:Variations on a classical theme. Cognitive Science.

Download references