LINGUIST List 20.3491|
Fri Oct 16 2009
Calls: Lang Acquisition, Computational Ling, Psycholing/Lithuania
Editor for this issue: Kate Wu
LINGUIST is pleased to announce the launch of an exciting new feature: Easy Abstracts! Easy Abs is a free abstract submission and review facility designed to help conference organizers and reviewers accept and process abstracts online. Just go to: http://www.linguistlist.org/confcustom, and begin your conference customization process today! With Easy Abstracts, submission and review will be as easy as 1-2-3!
Word Representational Dimensions
Message 1: Word Representational Dimensions
From: Basilio Calderone <basilio.calderoneu-paris10.fr>
Subject: Word Representational Dimensions
E-mail this message to a friend
Full Title: Word Representational Dimensions
Short Title: WoRD
Date: 02-Sep-2010 - 05-Sep-2010
Location: Vilnius, Lithuania
Contact Person: Basilio Calderone
Meeting Email: basilio.calderoneu-paris10.fr
Linguistic Field(s): Cognitive Science; Computational Linguistics; Language
Acquisition; Phonology; Psycholinguistics
Call Deadline: 13-Nov-2009
Workshop 'WoRD: Word Representational Dimensions' within the 43rd Annual
Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europea (SLE), Vilnius University,
Lithuania, 2-5 September 2010
Call for Papers
Within the framework of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica
Europea held at Vilnius University, Lithuania, we would like to propose a
workshop on the cognitive and functional mechanisms that account for the
formation and representation of the morpho-phonological word in the mental
lexicon. The workshop encourages researches and discussions around
psycholinguistic and psychologically-oriented computational models of language
acquisition, with an emphasis on word learning and representation. Lexical
representations are known to have a multidimensional nature, as demonstrated by
long-standing psycholinguistic research on the role of phonological,
morphological, morpho-phonological and phonotactic regularities affecting
lexical processing. On one hand, models that emphasize the roles of activation
and competition in spoken word recognition (Luce and Pisoni 1998; Marslen-Wilson
1989, among others) have largely shown that the lexical level is marked by
competitive effects associated with similarity neighborhood activation;
similarly, following the most recent models of morpho-lexical processing,
morphemes are not recognized in isolation but rather relationally in the context
of other phonologically similar material, and the two factors that mostly shape
the morpho-lexical routine are neighborhood density and relative frequency of
the morpheme (Luce, Pisoni and Goldinger 1990; Burani and Laudanna 2003, among
others). On the other hand, the investigation of probabilistic phonotactic
information, referring to the sub-lexical level in terms of probabilities of
segments and sequences of segments, demonstrates that the legality and
probability of phonotactic patterns has demonstrable influences on the
representation and processing of word-sized stimuli (Vitevitch et al. 1997,
among others). Far from being confined to the domain of general linguistics and
psycholinguistics, the debate also deals with controversial aspects of
computational processes exploited in language data processing, where phonotactic
and lexical knowledge have often been independently tested (e.g. Bailey and Hahn
2001). The workshop aims at exploring the most innovative approaches, mostly
devoted to combining behavioural experiments on human perception and production
(well-formedness judgments, word vs. non-word perception, etc.) and
computational investigation of the dynamics underlying lexical processing
(word-likeness and lexical neighborhood, phonotactic transition probabilities
etc.) (see e.g. Frisch, Large and Pisoni 2000; Coady and Aslin 2004; Albright
2002; Calderone, Celata and Herreros 2008). The workshop raises the fundamental
question of whether and to what extent a robust correlation can be set between
the behavioural patterns and the output of the computational simulations,
obtained in response to a comparable linguistic input.
Albright A. (2002) 'Islands of reliability for regular morphology: Evidence from
Italian'. Language 78: 684-709.
Bailey T.M. and U. Hahn (2001) 'Determinants of wordlikeness: Phonotactics or
lexical neighborhoods?'. Journal of Memory and Language 44, 568-591.
Burani C. and A. Laudanna (2003) 'Morpheme-based lexical reading: Evidence from
pseudo-word naming'. In E. Assink and D. Sandra (eds.), Reading complex words:
Cross-language studies, Dordrecht, Kluwer, 241-264.
Calderone B., C. Celata and I. Herreros (2008), 'Recovering morphology from
local phonotactic constraints'. Laboratory Phonology 11 Conference (LabPhon
11) - Phonetic details in the lexicon,Wellington, New Zealand 30 June - 2 July
Coady J.A. and R.N. Aslin (2004) 'Young children's sensitivity to probabilistic
phonotactics in the developing lexicon'. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology 89, 183-213.
Luce P.A. and D.B. Pisoni (1998) 'Recognizing spoken words: the neighborhood
activation model'. Ear and Hearing 19, 1-36.
Luce P.A., Pisoni D.B. and S.D. Goldinger (1990) 'Similarity neighborhoods of
spoken words. In G. Altmann (ed.), Cognitive Models of Speech Processing,
Cambridge, MIT Press, 122-147.
Marslen-Wilson W.D. (1989) 'Access and integration: Projecting sound onto
meaning'. In W.D. Marslen-Wilson (ed.), Lexical representation and process,
Cambridge, MIT Press, 3-24.
Vitevitch M.S., P.A. Luce, J. Charles-Luce and D. Kemmerer (1997), 'Phonotactics
and syllable stress: implications for the processing of spoken nonsense words'.
Language and Speech 40, 47-62.
Frisch S., N.R. Large and D.B. Pisoni (2000), 'Perception of wordlikeness:
Effects of segment probability and length on the processing of nonwords'.
Journal of Memory and Language 42, 481-496.
Saffran J.R., E.L. Newport and R.N. Aslin (1996) 'Word segmentation: The role of
distributional cues'. Journal of Memory and Language 35, 606-621.
Studies focusing on (but not necessarily limited to) the following topics are
Psycho-computational models of lexical representation and acquisition
Usage-based approaches to phono-morphological acquisition
Factors affecting spoken and read word/non-word recognition
Biologically inspired computing for lexical processing
Corpora exploitation and techniques for language modeling
Usage-based machine language learning
Papers should preferably be in English, but other languages will also be
considered. Presentations will be 20 minutes plus 10 minutes question time.
Interested colleagues are invited to send an e-mail to basilio.calderoneu-
paris10.fr and c.celatasns.it with their name, affiliation and the topic of
their paper (100-200 words) before November 13th. Information concerning the
submission of abstracts will follow, depending on acceptance of the workshop
proposal by SLE scientific committee (response expected by December 15th). The
participants of accepted workshop proposals are expected to register and send in
their abstract by January 2010. In March 2010 the convenors and participants
will receive the final evaluation. It may be that some abstract is rejected. In
that case, SLE scientific committee advises the participant to revise and
resubmit. The abstracts of the workshop presentations will be circulated among
all participants. An edited collection of the presentations will be submitted
for publication as a book to a major European publisher.
- Submission of name and topic: November 13th 2009
- Notification of acceptance for Workshop proposals: by December 15th 2009
- Submission of abstract (if workshop proposal accepted): January 1st 2010
- Notification of acceptance: by March 31st 2010
- Conference: 2-5 September 2010, Vilnius, Lithuania
We refer to the conference website for more information:
Basilio Calderone - Université Paris-Ouest Nanterre La Défense
Chiara Celata - Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Please report any bad links or misclassified data
LINGUIST Homepage | Read
LINGUIST | Contact us
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.