Statistical Structure of Human Speech Sounds Predicts Musical Universals.pdf
Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY...
Transcript of Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY...
![Page 1: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universals
Michael Hahn Richard FutrellStanford UC Irvine
1
![Page 2: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
(Greenberg 1963)2
![Page 3: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
U3: ‘Languages with dominant VSO order are alwaysprepositional.’
3
![Page 4: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
U3: ‘Languages with dominant VSO order are alwaysprepositional.’
U4: ‘With overwhelmingly greater than chancefrequency, languages with normal SOV order arepostpositional.’ 4
![Page 5: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
U3: ‘Languages with dominant VSO order are alwaysprepositional.’
U4: ‘With overwhelmingly greater than chancefrequency, languages with normal SOV order arepostpositional.’
`Relative position of adposition & noun ~relative position ofverb & object’
5
![Page 6: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
OV languages with postpositions
VO languages with prepositions
6Source: https://wals.info/feature/95A
![Page 7: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
![Page 8: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Why do these universals hold?
Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’? (Chomsky 1981)
Facilitation of language processing? (Dryer 1992, Hawkins 1994)
Make languages learnable? (Culbertson 2017)
8
![Page 9: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Why do these universals hold?
Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’? (Chomsky 1981)
Facilitation of language processing? (Dryer 1992, Hawkins 1994)
Approach: Test functional explanations by implementing efficiency measures, optimizing grammars, and checking whether universals hold in optimized grammars.
Make languages learnable? (Culbertson 2017)
9
![Page 10: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Three Efficiency Measures
Dependency Length Minimization (Rijkhoff, 1986; Hawkins, 1994, 2003; Gibson 1998)
Surprisal (Gildea and Jaeger, 2015; Ferrer-i Cancho, 2017)
Parsability (Hawkins, 1994, 2003)
10
![Page 11: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Three Efficiency Measures
Dependency Length Minimization (Rijkhoff, 1986; Hawkins, 1994, 2003; Gibson 1998)
11
![Page 12: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Dependency Length Minimization: Dependencies are shorter than expected at random
(Futrell et al., 2015)Sentence Length
Dep
ende
ncy
Leng
thRandom orderings
Real English
Theoretical Optimum
Idea: In certain models, short dependencies reduce memory load (Gibson 1998)
![Page 13: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
(Futrell et al., 2015)
Dependency Length Minimization: Dependencies are shorter than expected at random
Idea: In certain models, short dependencies reduce memory load (Gibson 1998)
![Page 14: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Argued to explain several of the Greenberg correlations (Rijkhoff, 1986; Hawkins, 1994, 2003)
Three Efficiency Measures
Dependency Length Minimization (Rijkhoff, 1986; Hawkins, 1994, 2003; Gibson 1998)
14
![Page 15: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Three Efficiency Measures
Dependency Length Minimization (Rijkhoff, 1986; Hawkins, 1994, 2003; Gibson 1998)
21 1
15
![Page 16: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Three Efficiency Measures
Dependency Length Minimization (Rijkhoff, 1986; Hawkins, 1994, 2003; Gibson 1998)
21 1+ + = 4
16
![Page 17: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Three Efficiency MeasuresSurprisal
Surprisal(w1...wi-1) = -Σi log P(wi|w1...wi-1)
17
![Page 18: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Three Efficiency MeasuresSurprisal
Surprisal(w1...wi-1) = -Σi log P(wi|w1...wi-1)
18
![Page 19: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Rea
ding
Tim
e
Surprisal (Smith and Levy 2013)19
![Page 20: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Three Efficiency MeasuresSurprisal
Surprisal(w1...wi-1) = -Σi log P(wi|w1...wi-1)
Estimated using recurrent neural networks, the strongest existing methods for estimating surprisal and predicting reading times (Frank 2011; Goodkind & Bicknell
2018).
20
![Page 21: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Three Efficiency MeasuresParsability
Mary has two green books.
21
![Page 22: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Three Efficiency MeasuresParsability
Mary has two green books.
Parsability(utterance) := log P(tree | utterance)
22
![Page 23: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Three Efficiency MeasuresParsability
Mary has two green books.
Parsability(utterance) := log P(tree | utterance)
Estimated using a neural network model (Dozat and Manning 2017)
with extremely generic architecture.23
![Page 24: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Utility Informativity Cost-=
Amount of Meaning that can be extracted from utterance
Cost of processing utterance
λ
Combining Parsability + Surprisal
24
Formalizes Zipf’s (1949) Forces of Diversification & Unification
![Page 25: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Utility Informativity Cost-= λ
Combining Parsability + Surprisal
25
Formalizes Zipf’s (1949) Forces of Diversification & Unification
Amount of Meaning that can be extracted from utterance ~ Parsability
Cost of processing utterance
~ Surprisal
![Page 26: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Utility Informativity Cost-= λ
Combining Parsability + Surprisal
26
Formalizes Zipf’s (1949) Forces of Diversification & Unification
λ can take values in (0,1)
Amount of Meaning that can be extracted from utterance ~ Parsability
Cost of processing utterance
~ Surprisal
![Page 27: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Utility Informativity Cost-= λ
Combining Parsability + Surprisal
27
Formalizes Zipf’s (1949) Forces of Diversification & Unification
λ can take values in (0,1)
We will give similar weight to both factors (λ=0.9).
Amount of Meaning that can be extracted from utterance ~ Parsability
Cost of processing utterance
~ Surprisal
![Page 28: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Utility Informativity Cost-=
Long tradition as an explanation of language (Gabelentz 1903, Zipf 1949, Horn 1984, …)
λ
Combining Parsability + Surprisal
28
Amount of Meaning that can be extracted from utterance ~ Parsability
Cost of processing utterance
~ Surprisal
![Page 29: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Utility Informativity Cost-=Amount of Meaning that can be extracted from utterance ~ Parsability
Cost of processing utterance
~ Surprisal
Long tradition as an explanation of language (Gabelentz 1903, Zipf 1949, Horn 1984, …)
Formalized in Rational-Speech Acts models (Frank and Goodman 2012)
λ
Combining Parsability + Surprisal
29
![Page 30: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Utility Informativity Cost-=
Long tradition as an explanation of language (Gabelentz 1903, Zipf 1949, Horn 1984, …)
Formalized in Rational-Speech Acts models (Frank and Goodman 2012)
Related to Signal Processing (Rate-Distortion Theory, Information Bottleneck)
λ
Combining Parsability + Surprisal
Amount of Meaning that can be extracted from utterance ~ Parsability
Cost of processing utterance
~ Surprisal
30
![Page 31: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Why do the universals hold?
Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’? (Chomsky 1981)
Facilitation of human communication? (Dryer 1992, Hawkins 1994)
Approach: Test processing explanations by implementing efficiency measures, optimizing grammars, and checking whether universals hold in optimized grammars.
Make languages learnable? (Culbertson 2017)
31
![Page 32: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Testing Functional Explanations
Approach: Optimize the word orders of languages for the three objectives, keeping syntactic structures unchanged
32
![Page 33: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Testing Functional Explanations
Approach: Optimize the word orders of languages for the three objectives, keeping syntactic structures unchanged
Languages have word order regularities ⇒ Not sufficient to optimize the word orders of individual sentences
33
![Page 34: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Testing Functional Explanations
Approach: Optimize the word orders of languages for the three objectives, keeping syntactic structures unchanged
Languages have word order regularities ⇒ Not sufficient to optimize the word orders of individual sentences
Instead: optimize word order rules of entire languages
34
![Page 35: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Testing Functional Explanations
Approach: Optimize the word orders of languages for the three objectives, keeping syntactic structures unchanged
Languages have word order regularities ⇒ Not sufficient to optimize the word orders of individual sentences
Instead: optimize word order rules of entire languages
That is: optimized languages have optimized but internally consistent grammatical regularities in word order, and agree with an actual natural language in all other respects.
35
![Page 36: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Dependency Corpus
36
![Page 37: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Dependency Corpus
37
![Page 38: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Dependency Corpus Ordering GrammarNOUN ADJamod
0.3
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
-0.2
0.8
38
![Page 39: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Dependency Corpus Ordering GrammarNOUN ADJamod
0.3
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
-0.2
0.8
“Object follows verb”
39
![Page 40: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Dependency Corpus Ordering GrammarNOUN ADJamod
0.3
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
-0.2
0.8
“Adjective precedes noun”
“Object follows verb”
40
![Page 41: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Dependency Corpus Ordering GrammarNOUN ADJamod
0.3
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
-0.2
0.8
“Adjective precedes noun”
“Object follows verb”
“Numerals follow adjectives & precede nouns”
41
![Page 42: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Maryhastwogreenbooks
Counterfactual Corpus
Dependency Corpus Ordering GrammarNOUN ADJamod
0.3
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
-0.2
0.8
42
![Page 43: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Maryhastwogreenbooks
Counterfactual Corpus
Dependency Corpus Ordering GrammarNOUN ADJamod
0.3
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
-0.2
0.8
Each parameter setting generates a different counterfactual corpus.
43
![Page 44: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Maryhastwogreen books
Counterfactual Corpus
Dependency Corpus Ordering GrammarNOUN ADJamod
0.9
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.1
0.5
0.2
Each parameter setting generates a different counterfactual corpus.
44
![Page 45: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Mary has two green books
nsubj
obj
nummod
amod
Mary
hastwo
greenbooks
Tree Topologies
Maryhas twogreenbooks
Counterfactual Corpus
Dependency Corpus Ordering GrammarNOUN ADJamod
0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.95
04.2
0.82
Each parameter setting generates a different counterfactual corpus.
45
![Page 46: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Dependency Length Surprisal
Parsability
2.35.81.8
We compute processing measures on counterfactual corpora.
46
![Page 47: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Dependency Length Surprisal
Parsability
2.35.81.8
Each parameter setting results in different values for the processing measures.
47
![Page 48: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Dependency Length Surprisal
Parsability
2.94.52.9
Each parameter setting results in different values for the processing measures.
48
![Page 49: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Dependency Length Surprisal
Parsability
3.47.81.2
Each parameter setting results in different values for the processing measures.
49
![Page 50: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Dependency Length Surprisal
Parsability
3.47.81.2
Each parameter setting results in different values for the processing measures.
Which settings optimise the measures?
50
![Page 51: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Dependency Length Surprisal
Parsability
3.47.81.2
Each parameter setting results in different values for the processing measures.
Which settings optimise the measures?
Do the optimised settings replicate the Greenberg correlations?
51
![Page 52: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
For each objective, find parameters that optimise it.
NOUN ADJamod0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.95
04.2
0.82
NOUN ADJamod0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.85
0.1
0.22
Minimize Dep. Length Minimize Surprisal
NOUN ADJamod0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
0.5
0.8
NOUN ADJamod0.21
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.45
0.4
0.32
Maximize Parsability Optimize Pars.+Surp.
52
![Page 53: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
For each objective, find parameters that optimise it.
Repeat this for corpora from 51 real languages from Universal Dependencies Project.
NOUN ADJamod0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.95
04.2
0.82
NOUN ADJamod0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.85
0.1
0.22
Minimize Dep. Length Minimize Surprisal
NOUN ADJamod0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
0.5
0.8
NOUN ADJamod0.21
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.45
0.4
0.32
Maximize Parsability Optimize Pars.+Surp.
53
![Page 54: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
For each objective, find parameters that optimise it.
Repeat this for corpora from 51 real languages from Universal Dependencies Project.
0.1
0.95
04.2
0.82
0.1
0.85
0.1
0.22
Minimize Dep. Length Minimize Surprisal
NOUN ADJamod0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
NOUN ADJ 0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
0.5
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.8
0.21
0.45
NOUN ADJ 0.1
NOUN
NOUN ADJ 0.1
NOUN NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
0.5
0.8
NUMnummod
VERB NOUNnsubj
VERB NOUNobj
...
0.7
0.5
0.8
0.4
0.32
Maximize Parsability Optimize Pars.+Surp.
1. How do the objectives compare?2. Which universals are predicted?
Minimize Dep. Length Minimize Surprisal
54
![Page 55: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Surprisal and Parsability minimize Dependency Length
55
![Page 56: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Surprisal and Parsability minimize Dependency Length
56
![Page 57: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Surprisal and Parsability minimize Dependency Length
Functional Utility predicts Dependency Length Minimization.
57
![Page 58: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Better Parsability
Lower Surprisal
z-transformed on the level of languages
Language optimizes Surprisal and Parsability
58
![Page 59: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Better Parsability
Lower Surprisal
Random Grammars
Language optimizes Surprisal and Parsability
59
![Page 60: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Better Parsability
Lower Surprisal
Random Grammars
Grammars fit to Real Orderings
Language optimizes Surprisal and Parsability
Better Parsability 60
![Page 61: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Better Parsability
Lower Surprisal
Random Grammars
Optimized for Surprisal
Optimized for Parsability
Optimized for Parsability+Surprisal
Grammars fit to Real Orderings
Language optimizes Surprisal and Parsability
61
![Page 62: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
62
![Page 63: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
(Dryer 1992 in Language) 63
![Page 64: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
(Dryer 1992 in Language)
`Relative position of adposition & noun ~relative position ofverb & object’
64
![Page 65: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
We formalize the correlations in the Universal Dependencies format.
65
![Page 66: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
(Dryer 1992 in Language) 66
![Page 67: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
X
XX
67
![Page 68: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
We formalize the correlations in the Universal Dependencies format.
For any word order grammar, we can then check which correlations it satisfies.
68
![Page 69: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
69
`Relative position of adposition & noun ~relative position ofverb & object’
![Page 70: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
We formalize the correlations in the Universal Dependencies format.
For any word order grammar, we can then check which correlations it satisfies.
70
![Page 71: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
Are the universals satisfied by models fit to the actual orderings for our 51 languages?
%
71
![Page 72: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
%
72
`Relative position of adposition & noun ~relative position ofverb & object’
![Page 73: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
Are the universals satisfied by models fit to the actual orderings for our 51 languages?
%
73
![Page 74: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
Are the universals satisfied by models fit to the actual orderings for our 51 languages?
Prevalence of SVO (Dryer 1992)
Limitation of formalisation
%
74
![Page 75: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
75
![Page 76: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
Percentage of grammars optimized for each objective satisfying the universal
76
![Page 77: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
77
![Page 78: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
Percentage of grammars optimized for each objective satisfying the universal
Assessing Significance:X = “Object precedes verb”Y = “Object-patterner precedes verb-patterner”
Logistic model:Y ~ X + (1+X|family) + (1+X|language)
78
![Page 79: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
79
![Page 80: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
80
![Page 81: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
81
![Page 82: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
82
Predictions largely complementary
![Page 83: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
83
![Page 84: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
Predictions mostly agree
84
![Page 85: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
Predictions mostly agree
Functional Utility replicates predictions of Dependency Length Minimization.
85
![Page 86: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
Predictions mostly agree
Functional Utility replicates predictions of Dependency Length Minimization.Both measures predict most of the correlation universals.
86
![Page 87: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
Two ObjectivesUtility
21 1+ + = 4
Dependency Length Minimization
![Page 88: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
Two Objectives
Broad description of functional efficiency in general
21 1+ + = 4
Dependency Length Minimization
Particular component of complexity
Utility
![Page 89: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
Two Objectives
Broad description of functional efficiency in general
Utility2
1 1+ + = 4
Dependency Length Minimization
Particular component of complexity
Our results support the idea that Dependency Length Minimization emerges from optimizing for Parsability and Predictability (Futrell et al. 2017).
![Page 90: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
Why do these universals hold?
Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’? (Chomsky 1981)
Facilitation of language processing? (Dryer 1992, Hawkins 1994)
Make languages learnable? (Culbertson 2017)
90
![Page 91: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
Why do these universals hold?
Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’? (Chomsky 1981)
Facilitation of language processing? (Dryer 1992, Hawkins 1994)
Make languages learnable? (Culbertson 2017)
91
![Page 92: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
Why do these universals hold?
Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’? (Chomsky 1981)
Facilitation of language processing? (Dryer 1992, Hawkins 1994)
Make languages learnable? (Culbertson 2017)
92
● These ideas need not be mutually exclusive
![Page 93: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
Why do these universals hold?
Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’? (Chomsky 1981)
Facilitation of language processing? (Dryer 1992, Hawkins 1994)
Make languages learnable? (Culbertson 2017)
93
● These ideas need not be mutually exclusive
● If UG or learnability are relevant, our results suggest they may be tilted towards efficiency.
![Page 94: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
Conclusion
● Tested explanations of Greenberg correlation universals in terms of efficiency of human language processing
● Using corpora from 51 languages, constructed counterfactual optimized languages
● Most of the correlations can be derived from pressure to shorten dependencies, decrease surprisal, or increase parsability
● Clear evidence for functional explanations of word order universals
94
![Page 95: Testing Functional Explanations of Word Order Universalsstanford.edu/~mhahn2/cgi-bin/files/osf-CUNY 2019-Universals.pdf · Innate constraints on language, ‘Universal Grammar’?](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022070720/5ee0e337ad6a402d666bf6b9/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
95