1 / 51

Orthographic regularization of morphology in English, and the advantages of N-gram research

Orthographic regularization of morphology in English, and the advantages of N-gram research. Maxwell J. Sowell Marissa C. Huston- Carico Eric D. Warburg (UC Davis). Researching morphological change. Researching morphological change. N-grams. Researching morphological change.

robbin
Télécharger la présentation

Orthographic regularization of morphology in English, and the advantages of N-gram research

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Orthographic regularization of morphology in English, and the advantages of N-gram research Maxwell J. Sowell Marissa C. Huston-Carico Eric D. Warburg (UC Davis)

  2. Researching morphological change

  3. Researching morphological change • N-grams

  4. Researching morphological change • What is an N-gram?

  5. Researching morphological change • What is an N-gram? • 1-gram: “morphology” • 2-gram: “morphological process” • 3-gram: “morphological process research” • etc.

  6. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research?

  7. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research?

  8. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research? • When did “yuppie” come into use?

  9. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research? • What about “yuppiedom”?

  10. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research? • “yuppie”  “yuppiedom”

  11. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research? • Advantages over theoretical process research:

  12. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research? • Advantages over theoretical process research: • “Theoretical”

  13. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research? • Advantages over theoretical process research: • “Theoretical” • Hard evidence that one word was used first

  14. Researching morphological change • How does this help with research? • Advantages over theoretical process research: • “Theoretical” • Hard evidence that one word was used first • Specific dates can be implemented in sociolinguistic research

  15. Morphological regularization

  16. Morphological regularization • General morphological rules and processes make parsing more efficient

  17. Morphological regularization • General morphological rules and processes make parsing more efficient • /write + -groblaxt/ - past tense • /read + -pfeffets/ - past tense

  18. Morphological regularization • General morphological rules and processes make parsing more efficient • Still some irregular morphology: • ox  oxen • eat  ate

  19. Morphological regularization • General morphological rules and processes make parsing more efficient • What would the plural of /boug/ be?

  20. Morphological regularization • General morphological rules and processes make parsing more efficient • What would the plural of /boug/ be? • The past tense of /teev/?

  21. Morphological regularization • General morphological rules and processes make parsing more efficient • What would the plural of /boug/ be? • The past tense of /teev/? • Speakers tend to use regularized forms when irregular forms are unknown or not drawn from the lexicon quickly enough

  22. Morphological regularization • General morphological rules and processes make parsing more efficient • Speakers tend to use regularized forms when irregular forms are unknown or not drawn from the lexicon quickly enough • If morphology does not reflect close relations between words, regularization is a risk

  23. “pedlar”  “peddler”

  24. “pedlar”  “peddler” • Why is the change significant?

  25. “pedlar”  “peddler” • Why is the change significant? • More generally, why is spelling significant?

  26. “pedlar”  “peddler” • Why is the change significant? • More generally, why is spelling significant? • speakers retain visual spellings by symbolizing sounds (c.f. Ehri & Wilce 1980)

  27. “pedlar”  “peddler” • Why is the change significant? • More generally, why is spelling significant? • speakers retain visual spellings by symbolizing sounds (c.f. Ehri & Wilce 1980) • visualized representations of words, rather than their sequences of sounds, are used to cognitively parse them into meaningful parts (c.f. Olson 1996)

  28. “pedlar”  “peddler” • So what happened?

  29. “pedlar”  “peddler” • So what happened? • No new semantic niche for “peddler” to fill “seller” not shown – also in relatively constant use

  30. “pedlar”  “peddler” • “peddle” comes in near when “peddler” did

  31. “pedlar”  “peddler” • closely relate the two lexemes’ roots with morphological reanalysis after all in use

  32. “pedlar”  “peddler” • closely relate the two lexemes’ roots with morphological reanalysis after all in use • /peddle + -er/ cognitively closer to /peddle/

  33. “pedlar”  “peddler” • What about “peddler” being reanalyzed in order to create “peddle” via back-formation?

  34. “pedlar”  “peddler” • What about “peddler” being reanalyzed in order to create “peddle” via back-formation? • “peddling” already existed; more feasible to remove an inflectional affix than a derivational one to yield “peddle”

  35. “pedlar”  “peddler” • What about “peddler” being reanalyzed in order to create “peddle” via back-formation? • “peddling” already existed; more feasible to remove an inflectional affix than a derivational one to yield “peddle” • seemingly no reason for a spelling change if ‘peddle’ is not causing the change

  36. “burglar” and “*burgler” • Why is “*burgler” not attested? “*burgler” insignificant and so not shown

  37. “burglar” and “*burgler” • Why is “*burgler” not attested? • differences in relative usage of related lexemes

  38. “burglar” and “*burgler” • Why is “*burgler” not attested? • differences in relative usage of related lexemes • “burgle” is a humorous back-formation

  39. “burglar” and “*burgler” • Speakers are equally likely to use “burglarize”

  40. “pedlar” vs. “burglar” • Spelling not changed in order to back-form

  41. “pedlar” vs. “burglar” • Spelling not changed in order to back-form • “Peddle” (and “burgle”, too) semantically unnecessary; in use for other [social] reasons

  42. “pedlar” vs. “burglar” • Spelling not changed in order to back-form • “Peddle” (and “burgle”, too) semantically unnecessary; in use for other [social] reasons • Rising usage caused speakers to relate “pedlar” and “peddle”

  43. “pedlar” vs. “burglar” • Spelling not changed in order to back-form • “Peddle” (and “burgle”, too) semantically unnecessary; in use for other [social] reasons • Rising usage caused speakers to relate “pedlar” and “peddle” • Regularized with /-er/ ending instead of recalling separately memorized form “pedlar”

  44. “pedlar” vs. “burglar” • Spelling not changed in order to back-form • “Peddle” (and “burgle”, too) semantically unnecessary; in use for other [social] reasons • Rising usage caused speakers to relate “pedlar” and “peddle” • Regularized with /-er/ ending instead of recalling separately memorized form “pedlar” • “pedlar” fell out of use in American English; efficiency taking priority is a noted trend

  45. Further study • Using raw chronology for derivational research

  46. Further study • Using raw chronology for derivational research • For English /-er/ regularization • Without many English words ending in [-ar] that semantically correlate with the deverbalnominalizer /-er/, research is limited

  47. Further study • Using raw chronology for derivational research • For English /-er/ regularization • Without many English words ending in [-ar] that semantically correlate with the deverbalnominalizer /-er/, research is limited • Etymological research

  48. Further study • Using raw chronology for derivational research • For English /-er/ regularization • Without many English words ending in [-ar] that semantically correlate with the deverbalnominalizer /-er/, research is limited • Etymological research • e.g. “pedlar” is derived from Latin, while “burglar” is derived from French

  49. Further study • Using raw chronology for derivational research • For English /-er/ regularization • Without many English words ending in [-ar] that semantically correlate with the deverbalnominalizer /-er/, research is limited • Etymological research • e.g. “pedlar” is derived from Latin, while “burglar” is derived from French • Other sociolinguistic applications

  50. Further study • Using raw chronology for derivational research • For English /-er/ regularization • Without many English words ending in [-ar] that semantically correlate with the deverbalnominalizer /-er/, research is limited • Etymological research • e.g. “pedlar” is derived from Latin, while “burglar” is derived from French • Other sociolinguistic applications • Why words like “peddle” come into use/peak in use

More Related