The learnability of constructed languages reflects typological patterns: Tily et al.
This paper is looking at the learnability of language word order using a Alien Language Learning paradigm. This study shows that the two most frequent orders, SOV and SVO are the most easily learned. While SVO is just as learnable as SOV, reasons for that may be due to the subject preceding the object, which is a common trait across languages.
Questions:
Overall question of looking towards Universal Grammar. Is this paper arguing against it since the other word orders can be learned, we are just exposed to the SOV/SVO much more.
For the VO vs OV order where respectively preposition and postposition determiners are found in those order, was this similar to what Masha was looking at? When you switch the order, the language is going to change to that as well. What causes this? Why is there a switch and why is it important for the word order on where the determiner will go?
Experiment 1: uses all of the word orders and takes the determiners and adjusts the frequency to each participant. One language has no determiners. They found that there was no effect on the determiner type only on the determiner frequency. They also found that gender conditions was more easily learned than an arbitrary condition.
Experiment 2: manipulated basic word order and looked to see if SO languages are easier to learn than OS. The results were explained that the participants may have a native-language bias but participants did have a high performance in SOV order, which can be explained by subjects preceding object in most languages.
For experiment 2, is the forced choice task just like a multiple choice question? Aren’t they then just using process of elimination? Is this how we approach language as well?
As always, the graphs are pretty cryptic to me…
Cultural transmission of grammatical structure: Using a web-based iterated learning paradigm to investigate the emergency of systematicity in syntax: Jacqueline Gutman
Can we discuss the language bottle neck in a little more detail?