How the Probabilistic Structure of Grammatical Context Shapes Speech.

communicative distributions communicative efficiency power laws sampling invariance speech variance

Journal

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 1099-4300
Titre abrégé: Entropy (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101243874

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 Jan 2020
Historique:
received: 31 10 2019
revised: 06 01 2020
accepted: 07 01 2020
entrez: 8 12 2020
pubmed: 9 12 2020
medline: 9 12 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Does systematic covariation in the usage patterns of forms shape the sublexical variance observed in conversational speech? We address this question in terms of a recently proposed discriminative theory of human communication that argues that the distribution of events in communicative contexts should maintain mutual predictability between language users, present evidence that the distributions of words in the empirical contexts in which they are learned and used are geometric, and thus support this. Here, we extend this analysis to a corpus of conversational English, showing that the distribution of grammatical regularities and the sub-distributions of tokens discriminated by them are also geometric. Further analyses reveal a range of structural differences in the distribution of types in parts of speech categories that further support the suggestion that linguistic distributions (and codes) are subcategorized by context at multiple levels of abstraction. Finally, a series of analyses of the variation in spoken language reveals that quantifiable differences in the structure of lexical subcategories appears in turn to systematically shape sublexical variation in speech signal.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33285865
pii: e22010090
doi: 10.3390/e22010090
pmc: PMC7516525
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Références

Percept Psychophys. 1980 Oct;28(4):267-83
pubmed: 7465310
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 May 29;115(22):5720-5725
pubmed: 29760059
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Jul 1;111(26):9419-24
pubmed: 24979792
J Psycholinguist Res. 2003 Jan;32(1):25-36
pubmed: 12647561
Lang Speech. 2013 Sep;56(Pt 3):395-417
pubmed: 24416963
Top Cogn Sci. 2009 Jan;1(1):175-88
pubmed: 25164804
Psychon Bull Rev. 2014 Oct;21(5):1112-30
pubmed: 24664880
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 Sep;33(5):914-30
pubmed: 17723069
Top Cogn Sci. 2018 Jan;10(1):209-224
pubmed: 29218788
Mem Cognit. 2005 Apr;33(3):430-46
pubmed: 16156179
Cognition. 2003 Nov;90(1):51-89
pubmed: 14597270
Top Cogn Sci. 2014 Jan;6(1):5-42
pubmed: 24421073
Cognition. 2012 Mar;122(3):292-305
pubmed: 22169657
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Mar 1;108(9):3526-9
pubmed: 21278332
Clin Linguist Phon. 2010 Jan;24(4-5):245-60
pubmed: 20345255
Brain Lang. 2002 Apr-Jun;81(1-3):162-73
pubmed: 12081389
J Acoust Soc Am. 1997 Jun;101(6):3728-40
pubmed: 9193060
Biometrics. 1990 Dec;46(4):1005-16
pubmed: 1964808
J Mem Lang. 2011 Aug 1;65(2):161-175
pubmed: 21765590

Auteurs

Maja Linke (M)

Department of Linguistics, University of Tuebingen, Wilhelmstraße 19, 72074 Tuebingen, Germany.

Michael Ramscar (M)

Department of Linguistics, University of Tuebingen, Wilhelmstraße 19, 72074 Tuebingen, Germany.

Classifications MeSH