Article published In: The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 18:2 (2023) ► pp.177–217
Behavioural evidence for implicative paradigmatic relations
Published online: 28 November 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.22020.cop
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.22020.cop
Abstract
Form predictability has long been known to influence speaker behaviour in language learning and use. However, this
observation has largely remained dissociated from the question of the most apt theoretical framing of the effects observed. We set
out to seek evidence that speakers’ relationship to form predictability is best characterised in paradigmatic terms: in an
experimental task comparable to prediction of one word form from a related one, speakers appear sensitive to the probabilistic,
implicative relations that make up a morphological paradigm. We find this effect to be omnidirectional, from any paradigm cell to
any paradigm cell. Form predictability does not impact speaker behaviour in a vacuum, but instead works together with aspects of
memory and learning to organise the mental lexicon and inform language use. In a corpus study, we map out the complex
relationships that exist between paradigmatic form predictability, lexeme frequency and cell frequency in the context of
naturalistic language use. Speakers appear to exploit all available probabilistic relationships between the word forms of a
language in a way that is predicted by Word and Paradigm theories of morphology, with memory and predictive processing playing a
mediating role in all aspects of language use.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background
- 2.1The implicative structure of paradigms
- 2.2Quantitatively tackling the PCFP
- 2.3Zipfian frequency distributions, discriminability and the PCFP
- 2.4Shifting the perspective: Form predictability as a paradigmatic phenomenon
- 2.5Predictions and outline
- 3.Acceptability judgement experiment
- 3.1Items
- 3.2Procedure
- 3.3Subjects
- 3.4Analysis
- Paradigmatic predictability
- Condition
- Paradigmatic predictability: Condition
- Phonological Well-formedness
- 3.5Results
- 3.6Discussion
- 4.Corpus Study
- 4.1Methodology
- 4.1.1Data selection
- 4.1.2Model structure
- Predicted variable
- Token frequency
- Predictor Variables
- Paradigmatic predictability
- Co-paradigmatic frequency
- Cell frequency
- Predicted variable
- 4.2Results
- 4.3Discussion
- 4.1Methodology
- 5.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (86)
Ackerman, F., Blevins, J. P., & Malouf, R. (2009). Parts
and wholes: Implicative patterns in inflectional paradigms. (Cit. on
pp. 3, 8).
Ackerman, F., & Malouf, R. (2013). Morphological
organization: the low conditional entropy
conjecture. Language, 891, 429–464 (cit.
on p. 7).
Albright, A.C. (2003). A
Quantitative Study of Spanish Paradigm Gaps. WCCFL 22: Proceedings of the 22nd West Coast
Conference on Formal Linguistics (cit. on pp. 7, 20,
26).
Albright, A. C. (2002). The
Identification of Bases in Morphological Paradigms (Doctoral
dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles. (Cit. on pp. 2, 8, 11, 24,
26).
Albright, A. C., & Hayes, B. P. (2003). Rules
vs. Analogy in English Past Tenses: A Computational/Experimental
Study. Cognition, 901, 119–161 (cit.
on pp. 3, 6, 26).
Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2010). More
than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and
Language, 621, 67–82 (cit.
on p. 11).
Baayen, R.H. (2011). Corpus
linguistics and naive discriminative learning. Revista Brasileira de Linguística
Aplicada, 111, 295–328 (cit.
on p. 7).
Baayen, R. H., Chuang, Y.-Y., Shafaei-Bajestan, E., & Blevins, J. P. (2019). The
discriminative lexicon: A unified computational model for the lexicon and lexical processing in comprehension and production
grounded not in (de) composition but in linear discriminative learning. Complexity,
2019 (cit. on p. 7).
Baayen, R. H., Feldman, L. B., & Schreuder, R. (2006). Morphological
influences on the recognition of monosyllabic monomorphemic words. Journal of Memory and
Language, 55(2), 290–313 (cit.
on p. 28).
Baayen, R.H., Hendrix, P., & Ramscar, M. (2013). Sidestepping
the combinatorial explosion: an explanation of n-gram frequency effects based on naive discriminative
learning. Language and
Speech, 56(Pt
3), 329–47 (cit. on
p. 11).
Bauer, L., Lieber, R., & Plag, I. (2013). Oxford
Reference Guide to English morphology. Oxford University Press. (Cit. on p. 3).
Beniamine, S. (2018). Typologie
quantitative des systèmes de classes flexionnelles (Doctoral
dissertation). Université Paris Diderot. (Cit. on
pp. 7, 13).
(2021). One
lexeme, many classes: Inflection class systems as lattices. In B. Crysmann & M. Sailer (Eds.), One-to-many
relations in morphology, syntax and
semantics (pp. 23–51). Language Science Press. (Cit. on p. 28).
Beniamine, S., Bonami, O., & Luís, A. R. (2021). The
fine implicative structure of European Portuguese
conjugation. Isogloss, 7 (1–35) (cit.
on pp. 7, 9).
Beniamine, S., Coavoux, M., & Bonami, O. (2022). French
verbal frequencies in the Open Subtitles corpus [ ]. (Cit. on p. 24).
Blevins, J. P., Milin, P., & Ramscar, M. (2017). The
Zipfian Paradigm Cell Filling Problem. Empirical Approaches to Linguistic
Theory (cit. on p. 21).
Bonami, O., & Beniamine, S. (2016). Joint
predictiveness in inflectional paradigms. Word
Structure, 9 (2), 156–182 (cit.
on pp. 7, 12).
Bonami, O., & Boyé, G. (2014). De
formes en thèmes. In F. Villoing, S. Leroy, & S. David (Eds.), Foisonnements
morphologiques. Etudes en hommage à Françoise
Kerleroux (pp. 17–45). Presses Universitaires de Paris Ouest. (Cit. on pp. 11,
12).
Bonami, O., Caron, G., & Plancq, C. (2014). Construction
d’un lexique flexionnel phonétisé libre du français. Quatrième Congrès mondial de linguistique
française (cit. on pp. 13, 14, 22).
Bonami, O., & Strnadová, J. (2019). Paradigm
structure and predictability in derivational
morphology. Morphology, 291 (cit.
on p. 3).
Boye, G., & Schalchli, G. (2016). The
status of paradigms. In A. Hippisley & G. Stump (Eds.), The
Cambridge Handbook of
Morphology (pp. 206–234). Cambridge University Press. (Cit. on p. 3).
Brooks, M. E., Kristensen, K., van Benthem, K. J., Magnusson, A., Berg, C. W., Nielsen, A., Skaug, H. J., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. M. (2017). glmmTMB
balances speed and flexibility among packages for zero-inflated generalized linear mixed
modeling. The R
Journal, 9 (2), 378–400. [URL] (cit. on
pp. 14, 23)
Bybee, J. L. (1991). Natural
morphology: the organization of paradigms and language acquisition (cit. on
pp. 20, 25).
(1985). Morphology:
A study of the relation between meaning and form (cit. on
p. 3).
del Prado Martín, F. M., Kostić, A., & Baayen, H. R. (2004). Putting
the bits together: an information theoretical perspective on morphological
processing. Cognition, 94(1), 1–18 (cit.
on pp. 26, 28, 29).
de Marneffe, M.-C., Manning, C. D., Nivre, J., & Zeman, D. (2021). Universal
Dependencies. Computational
Linguistics, 47 (2), 255–308 (cit.
on p. 24).
Filipović Durđević, D., & Milin, P. (2019). Information
and learning in processing adjective inflection [Structure in words: the present and future of morphologicalical processing in
a multidisciplinary
perspective]. Cortex, 1161, 209–227 (cit.
on p. 8).
Frank, S. L., Otten, L. J., Galli, G., & Vigliocco, G. (2015). The
ERP response to the amount of information conveyed by words in sentences. Brain and
Language, 1401, 1–11 (cit.
on p. 18).
Guzmán Naranjo, M. (2020). Analogy,
complexity and predictability in the Russian nominal inflection
system. Morphology, 30(3), 219–262 (cit.
on p. 7).
Hathout, N., Sajous, F., & Calderone, B. (2014). GLÀFF,
a large versatile French lexicon. Proceedings of LREC 2014 (cit. on
p. 22).
Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. K. (2002). The
Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge University Press. (Cit. on p. 3).
Jun, J., & Albright, A. (2016). Speakers’
Knowledge of Alternations Is Asymmetrical: Evidence from Seoul Korean Verb
Paradigms. Cambridge University Press. (Cit. on
pp. 9–11, 17, 19, 30).
Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Wuggy:
A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior research
methods, 421, 627–33 (cit.
on p. 13).
Kiefer, F. (2000). Regularity. In Morphologie:
Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/Morphology: An international Handbook on Inflection and
Word-Formation. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin. (Cit. on
pp. 20, 25).
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain
potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic
association. Nature, 3071, 161–163 (cit.
on p. 18).
Le, H., Vial, L., Frej, J., Segonne, V., Coavoux, M., Lecouteux, B., Allauzen, A., Crabbé, B., Besacier, L., & Schwab, D. (2020). FlauBERT:
Unsupervised language model pre-training for French. Proceedings of the Twelfth Language
Resources and Evaluation Conference, 2479–2490. [URL] (cit. on
p. 24)
Lévèque, D., & Pellard, T. (2023). The
implicative structure of Asama verb
paradigms. Morphology, 331 (cit.
on p. 7).
Lieberman, E., Michel, J.-B., Jackson, J., Tang, T., & Nowak, M. A. (2007). Quantifying
the evolutionary dynamics of
language. Nature, 449 (7163), 713–716 (cit.
on pp. 7, 20).
Lison, P., & Tiedemann, J. (2016). OpenSubtitles2016:
Extracting large parallel corpora from movie and TV subtitles. Proceedings of the Tenth
International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation
(LREC’16), 923–929. [URL] (cit. on
p. 24)
Lõo, K., Järvikivi, J., & Baayen, H. (2018). Whole-word
frequency and inflectional paradigm size facilitate Estonian case-inflected noun
processing. Cognition, 1751, 20–25 (cit.
on pp. 10, 28).
Lõo, K., Järvikivi, J., Tomaschek, F., Tucker, B., & Baayen, H. (2018). Production
of Estonian case-inflected nouns shows whole-word frequency and paradigmatic
effects. Morphology, 281 (cit.
on pp. 10, 28).
Lukatela, G., Gligorijević, B., Kostić, A., & Turvey, M. T. (1980). Representation
of inflected nouns in the internal lexicon. Memory &
Cognition, 81, 415–423 (cit.
on p. 8).
Maiden, M. (1995). A
Linguistic History of Italian. Longman. [URL]. (Cit. on
p. 20)
Malouf, R. (2017). Abstractive
morphological learning with a recurrent neural
network. Morphology, 271, 431–458 (cit.
on p. 7).
Mansfield, J. (2016). Intersecting
formatives and inflectional predictability: How do speakers and learners predict the correct form of Murrinhpatha
verbs? Word
Structure, 91, 183–214 (cit.
on p. 7).
Marcus, G. F. (2001). The
Algebraic Mind: Integrating Connectionism and Cognitive Science. The MIT Press. (Cit. on p. 8).
Marcus, G. F., Pinker, S., Ullman, M., Hollander, M., Rosen, T. J., Xu, F., & Clahsen, H. (1992). Overregularization
in Language Acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
Development, 57 (4), i–178. Retrieved September 23, 2022, from [URL] (cit. on
p. 21)
Marzi, C., Ferro, M., & Pirrelli, V. (2019). A
Processing-Oriented Investigation of Inflectional Complexity. Frontiers in
Communication, 41 (cit. on
p. 21).
Matthews, P. H. (1965). The
inflectional component of a word-and-paradigm grammar. Journal of
Linguistics, 11, 139–171 (cit.
on p. 3).
(1972). Inflectional
Morphology. A theoretical study based on aspects of Latin verb conjugation. Cambridge University Press. (Cit. on p. 4).
Milin, P., & Blevins, J. P. (2020). Paradigms
in morphology. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of
Linguistics. Oxford University Press. (Cit. on
p. 3).
Milin, P., Kuperman, V., Kostic, A., & Baayen, H. (2009). Paradigms
bit by bit: An information theoretic approach to the processing of paradigmatic structure in inflection and
derivation (cit. on pp. 10, 28).
Moscoso del Prado Martín, F., Kostić, A., & Baayen, R. H. (2004). Putting
the bits together: an information theoretical perspective on morphological
processing. Cognition, 941, 1–18 (cit.
on p. 10).
Pellegrini, M. (2021). Patterns
of interpredictability and principal parts in Latin verb paradigms: An entropy-based
approach. Journal of Latin
Linguistics, 20(1) (cit. on
p. 7).
Pinker, S. (1999). Words
and Rules: The Ingredients Of Language. Basic Books. [URL]. (Cit. on
p. 21)
Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1988). On
language and connectionism: Analysis ofa parallel distributed processing model of language
acquisition. Cognition, 28(1), 73193 (cit.
on p. 8).
Prasada, S., & Pinker, S. (1993). Generalisation
of regular and irregular morphological patterns. Language and Cognitive
Processes, 81, 1–56 (cit.
on p. 3).
Ramscar, M. (2021). A
discriminative account of the learning, representation and processing of inflection
systems. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience (cit. on
p. 7).
Rayner, K., Ashby, J., Pollatsek, A., & Reichle, E. (2004). The
Effects of Frequency and Predictability on Eye Fixations in Reading: Implications for the E-Z Reader
Model. Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and
performance, 301, 720–32 (cit.
on p. 18).
Robins, R. H. (1959). In
defense of WP. Transactions of the Philological
Society, 581, 116–144 (cit.
on p. 4).
Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). On
Learning the Past Tenses of English Verbs. In Parallel Distributed
Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Vol. 2: Psychological and Biological
Models (pp. 216–271). MIT Press. (Cit. on pp. 7, 8).
Schafer, R. (2015). Processing
and Querying Large Web Corpora with the COW14 architecture. Proceedings of Challenges in the
Management of Large Corpora, 28–34 (cit. on
pp. 23, 24).
Seyfarth, S., Ackerman, F., & Malouf, R. (2014). Implicative
organization facilitates morphological learning. Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the
Berkeley Linguistics Society, 480–494 (cit. on
p. 9).
Sims, A. D., & Parker, J. (2016). How
inflection class systems work: On the informativity of implicative structure. Word
Structure, 91, 215–239 (cit.
on p. 7).
Smith, N. J., & Levy, R. (2011). Cloze
but no cigar: The complex relationship between cloze, corpus, and subjective probabilities in language
processing. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science
Society, 331 (cit. on
p. 18).
(2013). The
effect of word predictability on reading time is
logarithmic. Cognition, 128(3), 302–319 (cit.
on p. 18).
Štekauer, P. (2014). Derivational
Paradigms. In R. Lieber & P. Štekauer (Eds.), The
Oxford Handbook of Derivational
Morphology (pp. 354–369). Oxford University Press. (Cit. on p. 3).
Stump, G. T. (2001). Inflectional
Morphology. A theory of paradigm structure. Cambridge University Press. (Cit. on p. 7).
Stump, G. T., & Finkel, R. (2013). Morphological
Typology: From Word to Paradigm. Cambridge University Press. (Cit. on pp. 3, 9).
Thymé, A., Ackerman, F., & Elman, J. (1994). Finnish
Nominal Inflection: Paradigmatic Patterns and Token Analogy. In S. D. Lima, R. Corrigan, & G. K. Iverson (Eds.), The
Reality of Linguistic Rules. John Benjamins. (Cit. on
pp. 7, 8).
Ullman, M. (2001). A
neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model. Nature reviews.
Neuroscience, 21, 717–26 (cit.
on p. 8).
Wilmoth, S., & Mansfield, J. (2021). Inflectional
predictability and prosodic morphology in Pitjantjatjara and
Yankunytjatjara. Morphology (cit. on
p. 7).
Wu, S., Cotterell, R., & O’Donnell, T. J. (2019). Morphological
Irregularity Correlates with Frequency. CoRR, abs/1906.11483. [URL] (cit. on
pp. 7, 11, 21, 22, 25)
Wunderlich, D., & Fabri, R. (1995). Minimalist
Morphology: An approach to inflection. Zeitschrift für
Sprachwissenschaft, 14(2), 236–294 (cit.
onp. 3).
Wurzel, W. U. (1984). Flexionsmorphologie
und NatÃŒdichkeit: Ein beitrag zur mor-phologischen theoriebildung. Akademie Verlag. (Cit. on p. 4).
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
