Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Sentence

A sentence is a grammatical unit of one or more words that expresses a complete thought, serving as the primary vehicle for conveying meaning in spoken and written language.^[1] In English, it minimally consists of a subject—typically a noun or pronoun identifying the actor or topic—and a predicate, which includes a verb expressing action, state, or occurrence, adhering to syntactic rules that ensure coherence and intonation suitable to native speakers.^[2]^[3] Sentences form the foundational building blocks of discourse, enabling statements, questions, commands, or exclamations, and are distinguished from smaller units like phrases or clauses by their independence and capacity to stand alone. They vary in complexity, from simple structures with one independent clause to compound, complex, or compound-complex forms incorporating coordination and subordination, which expand expressive capacity while maintaining grammatical integrity.^[1]

Definition and Core Properties

Grammatical Definition

In linguistics, a sentence constitutes the fundamental grammatical unit that expresses a complete proposition via a syntactically independent clause, typically structured around a subject and predicate to assert something about an entity or concept.^[4] This definition prioritizes observable syntactic and semantic properties over prescriptive ideals, identifying sentences as maximal clausal projections capable of standalone utterance, often delimited by prosodic intonation in speech or terminal punctuation in writing.^[5] Empirical criteria for sentences include syntactic autonomy, enabling the unit to function without subordination to larger structures; predication, whereby a predicate attributes properties, states, or relations to a referential subject, constructing a propositional core; and truth-conditional semantics for declarative forms, permitting evaluation of the expressed content as true or false relative to worldly conditions.^[6] These distinguish sentences from subordinate phrases or fragments lacking full predication—e.g., the English noun phrase "the sleeping cat" predicates internally but asserts nothing complete, whereas "The cat sleeps" predicates sleep of the subject "the cat," yielding an autonomous, truth-evaluable unit. Cross-linguistically, such criteria hold across morphological types, including Indo-European analytic structures like English and agglutinative systems where predicates fuse affixes to roots while preserving clausal independence.^[7]

Structural and Functional Characteristics

Sentences possess a hierarchical constituent structure, wherein words group into phrases (e.g., noun phrases, verb phrases) that nest recursively into larger clauses, forming the sentence as the maximal projection.^[8] This organization is empirically verifiable through constituency tests, such as substitution (replacing a phrase with a pro-form like "do so" or "one" while preserving grammaticality), movement (displacing the group to sentence periphery), and coordination (joining with "and" or "or" as a unit).^[9]^[10] Such tests reveal that linear word sequences alone do not suffice for syntactic parsing; instead, the layered embedding enables efficient processing by grouping semantically and syntactically cohesive elements, as linear adjacency often fails to predict behavior (e.g., in "the man who the dog chased ran," "who the dog chased" forms a unit despite non-adjacent words). Functionally, sentences enable core communicative acts through syntactic configurations that align with illocutionary intent: declaratives assert states or events via canonical subject-verb order, interrogatives probe information via auxiliary fronting or wh-movement, imperatives direct actions via base-form verbs and often null subjects, and exclamatories convey intensity via interjections or emphatic structures.^[11]^[12] These roles facilitate causal transmission of intent in discourse, with cross-linguistic evidence showing invariant mappings (e.g., rising intonation universally cues interrogatives despite syntactic divergence, as in yes/no questions in English versus tonal languages like Mandarin).^[13] Prosody in spoken language marks sentence boundaries via acoustic cues like final lengthening, pitch reset, and pauses, which disambiguate attachments and signal unit completion, mirroring punctuation's role in writing (e.g., periods correlating with low pitch and pause).^[14] Child acquisition data substantiates this: by 4-6 months, infants segment speech streams using prosodic edges to isolate sentence-like units, with 3-year-olds leveraging boundary tones for syntactic parsing in ambiguous contexts, indicating early causal reliance on these markers for structure-building prior to full lexical competence.^[15]^[16]^[17]

Historical Development

Ancient and Pre-Modern Conceptions

In ancient Greek thought, Aristotle defined the sentence (logos) as an apophantikos logos, a declarative expression combining a subject with a predicate to assert truth or falsity, distinguishing it from mere questions or commands.^[18] This formulation, developed around 384–322 BCE in De Interpretatione, treated predication as a causal linkage where the verb expresses an action or state attaching to the noun, enabling propositional judgment rather than isolated naming.^[18] Aristotle's analysis prioritized empirical assertion over poetic or connective discourse, grounding sentence structure in the logical necessity of affirming or denying attributes to enable dialectical reasoning.^[18] Independently in ancient India, the grammarian Pāṇini formalized sentence construction in the Aṣṭādhyāyī, a sutra-based system dated to approximately the 5th–4th century BCE, which algorithmically derived verbal forms through rules governing roots, affixes, and kāraka relations—semantic roles assigning agents, patients, and instruments to actions.^[19] These kāraka (e.g., kartā for agent, karma for object) reflected causal dependencies in events, with syntax emerging from verb-centered morphology that causally determines case endings and word order for unambiguous expression.^[20] Pāṇini's generative approach treated sentences as outputs of recursive rules prioritizing semantic causality over surface variation, influencing later Indian traditions like those of Patañjali in the 2nd century BCE.^[20] Medieval European scholastics, particularly the Modistae grammarians of the 13th–14th centuries such as Thomas of Erfurt, advanced a speculative grammar linking sentence properties to modi significandi (modes of signifying), which mirrored modi essendi (modes of being) and modi intelligendi (modes of understanding) in a causal hierarchy from reality to cognition to expression.^[21] In treatises like De Modis Significandi, they posited that nouns signify essence through modes like substantiality, while verbs convey causality via action or passion, constructing sentences as unified enuntiationes where concord and construction causally reflect mental composition of universals.^[21] This framework critiqued purely conventional views of language, insisting on ontological causality wherein grammatical structure derives from inherent properties of things known through intellect, as opposed to arbitrary signs.^[21]

Emergence in Modern Linguistics

In the early 20th century, linguistics transitioned from diachronic, historical-comparative methods dominant in the 19th century—such as those reconstructing proto-languages through sound correspondences—to synchronic analyses prioritizing language systems at a given time. This shift elevated syntax as a core domain, with the sentence conceptualized as a structured unit revealing systemic relations rather than mere historical artifacts. Ferdinand de Saussure's Course in General Linguistics, based on lectures from 1907 to 1911 and published posthumously in 1916, formalized this by distinguishing langue (the abstract, social system of signs and rules) from parole (individual speech acts). Sentences, as manifestations of parole, instantiate langue's combinatorial principles, such as syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations among signs, enabling empirical study of sentence formation independent of speaker psychology or evolutionary origins.^[22]^[23] American structuralism, influenced by Saussure but grounded in behaviorist empiricism, further refined sentence analysis through distributional methods. Leonard Bloomfield's Language (1933) advocated dissecting sentences into immediate constituents based on observable distributional patterns—such as positional slots and substitution classes in corpora—eschewing mentalistic notions like innate meaning or introspection. For instance, Bloomfield classified words into form-classes (e.g., nouns substituting in subject positions) and analyzed sentences as hierarchical junctures of these classes, providing a data-driven syntax verifiable via fieldwork on unwritten languages, though limited by its taxonomic focus on finite descriptions without generative power.^[24]^[25] Post-World War II developments critiqued structuralism's descriptivism for inadequately explaining linguistic creativity and competence. Noam Chomsky's Syntactic Structures (1957) inaugurated generative grammar, positing that sentences arise from finite recursive rules applied to a limited lexicon, yielding infinite grammatical outputs—a "finite means from infinite ends" mechanism via embedding and iteration. This first-principles approach, using phrase-structure rules and transformations, prioritized explanatory adequacy over mere enumeration, addressing structuralist shortcomings in handling center-embedding (e.g., "The man who the dog bit ran") and long-distance dependencies, while sparking debates on innateness versus empirical induction in syntax.^[26]^[27]

Classification of Sentences

By Illocutionary Function

Sentences are classified by illocutionary function within speech act theory, which analyzes utterances as performing specific acts beyond mere description, such as asserting facts, eliciting responses, issuing directives, or conveying emotions.^[28] This approach, originated by J.L. Austin in his 1962 lectures and systematized by John R. Searle in 1969, separates the illocutionary force—the intended performative role—from the locutionary content and perlocutionary effects.^[28] Empirical validation comes from discourse analysis and corpus linguistics, which map syntactic markers to functional roles across contexts, revealing consistent patterns in how speakers deploy these forces for communication.^[29] Declarative sentences carry assertive illocutionary force, committing the speaker to the truth of a proposition, as in "The earth orbits the sun."^[28] They predominate in corpora of written English, comprising the bulk of informational exchange in texts like scientific papers or narratives, where empirical studies show frequencies exceeding 70% in analyzed samples such as folklore corpora.^[30] Interrogative sentences perform the force of questioning, seeking confirmation or information via polar (yes/no) or content (wh-) forms, e.g., "Does the earth orbit the sun?" or "Why does the earth orbit the sun?" These are marked cross-linguistically by intonation rises, inversion, or particles, with corpus data indicating higher incidence in spoken dialogue for interactive purposes.^[31] Imperative sentences exert directive force, instructing or requesting action from the addressee, as in "Observe the earth's orbit." They often omit explicit subjects and rely on context or prosody for politeness levels, appearing frequently in instructional or conversational corpora to facilitate coordination.^[32] Exclamatory sentences express evaluative or emotional force, highlighting intensity or surprise, typically via structures like "What an orbit the earth has!" These are less common in neutral corpora but spike in expressive genres, with syntactic features such as wh-exclamatives distinguishing them from interrogatives.^[33] Across languages, declarative, interrogative, and imperative clause types represent universal categories, as evidenced by comparative syntactic studies showing dedicated mechanisms in diverse grammars, from morphological moods in Indo-European to particles in Sino-Tibetan.^[34] Exclamatives, while variable, often emerge via declarative or interrogative adaptations. These functions underpin causal mechanisms of language use, enabling group coordination through signaling intentions and responses, adaptations likely selected for in human evolution to manage cooperative behaviors beyond individual signaling.^[35] Corpus-based prosodic analyses further confirm force distinctions, with falling contours typical for declaratives and imperatives, versus variable rises for interrogatives.^[32]

By Syntactic Complexity

Sentences are classified by syntactic complexity according to the number and integration of clauses, focusing on whether clauses are independent (capable of standing alone) or dependent (requiring attachment to an independent clause). A simple sentence contains a single independent clause, comprising a subject and predicate without subordination or coordination to other clauses. Compound sentences join two or more independent clauses via coordinators such as "and," "but," or "or," maintaining syntactic parallelism without embedding.^[36] Complex sentences incorporate one independent clause with at least one dependent clause, typically introduced by subordinators like "because," "although," or relative pronouns, creating hierarchical dependency. Compound-complex sentences combine these, featuring at least two independent clauses and one or more dependent clauses.^[36] Empirical tests distinguish coordination from embedding through syntactic diagnostics: coordinated clauses resist asymmetric operations like extraction or substitution across the coordinator (e.g., "John ran and Mary jumped" blocks moving "jumped" to the front without coordination reduction), whereas embedded clauses permit such dependencies (e.g., wh-movement from a relative clause in "the book that John read").^[37] Embedding introduces depth in parse trees, measurable via nesting levels in dependency parsing, while coordination forms flat, symmetric structures.^[38] These hierarchies align with clause integration in English, where complexity correlates with processing load in comprehension models.^[39] Cross-linguistically, typological variations challenge strict application; for instance, serial verb constructions (SVCs) in African languages like Igbo or Òkó chain multiple verbs into a single clause without overt coordinators or subordinators, sharing arguments and tense-aspect marking to encode complex events as monoclausal predicates.^[40] In Kwa languages, SVCs exhibit single predicate behavior, resisting clause boundary tests like negation scope, thus blurring simple/complex boundaries. Despite such exceptions, dependency grammar frameworks posit core clause-hood as universal, centered on a head (typically verbal) with dependents forming predicate-argument structures, enabling cross-language parsing without assuming identical clause types.^[42] This universality holds in Universal Dependencies annotations across 200+ languages, where clausal relations (e.g., ccomp for clausal complements) capture embedding regardless of surface complexity.^[43] Limitations arise in polysynthetic or agglutinative languages, where clause-like embedding occurs morphologically rather than syntactically, but the predicate-head model persists.^[44]

Syntactic Analysis

Constituent Structure

Constituent structure refers to the hierarchical organization of words into phrases, such as noun phrases (NPs) and verb phrases (VPs), which function as cohesive syntactic units within a sentence.^[45] These constituents are identified through empirical tests, including substitution (replacing a string with a single word like "one" or "do so" while preserving grammaticality), coordination (joining strings with "and" or "or"), and movement operations that displace the string as a unit without altering core meaning.^[46] For instance, in "The linguist read the syntax textbook," "the syntax textbook" behaves as a constituent because it can be topicalized to "The syntax textbook, the linguist read" or substituted as "it."^[47] Such tests demonstrate that constituents are not mere linear sequences but psychologically real groupings processed as wholes.^[45] X-bar theory provides a formal framework for constituent structure, positing that all phrases (XPs) share a universal template: an XP consists of a head (X^0, the lexical category-determining element), an optional complement (sister to the head, providing arguments), and an optional specifier (sister to an intermediate X-bar level).^[48] Adjuncts, which modify the head, attach at the X-bar level, allowing recursive expansion.^[49] In an NP like "the destructive review of the paper," "review" is the N^0 head, "of the paper" the complement (providing thematic content), "destructive" an adjunct, and "the" the specifier.^[48] Similarly, VPs form around a verb head with object complements and subject specifiers in IP structures. This endocentric design—phrases projecting from heads—captures cross-categorial parallels, verifiable through ordering constraints and subcategorization frames in languages like English. Recursion in constituent structure permits embedding phrases within similar categories, generating unbounded complexity, as in center-embedding: "The malt the rat ate was poisoned," expandable to "The malt the rat the cat chased ate was poisoned."^[39] This hierarchical nesting, rather than flat linearity, is confirmed by parsing difficulties in deeply embedded strings, reflecting cognitive load on structure-building.^[50] Cross-linguistically, while head-complement orders vary (head-initial in English VPs, head-final in Japanese), the headed phrase template recurs, supporting phrase universals like binary branching tendencies and specifier-complement asymmetries in diverse languages. Movement tests, such as topicalization, further validate these structures universally by preserving constituency across displacements in languages permitting such operations.^[47]^[51]

Dependency Relations and Parsing

In dependency grammar, syntactic structure is represented as a directed tree where each word except the root has precisely one head, with arcs linking heads to their dependents to model asymmetric governance relations, such as a verb heading its subject or direct object.^[52] These head-dependent arcs capture the core causal dependencies driving sentence formation, emphasizing binary word-level interactions over multi-layered groupings.^[53] This approach contrasts with phrase-structure grammars by eschewing intermediate non-terminal nodes for phrases, instead deriving the entire hierarchy directly from lexical dependencies, which facilitates more direct modeling of subcategorization and valency effects without assuming constituency as primitive.^[54] Dependency trees can be projective, where arcs do not cross and subtrees form contiguous spans, or non-projective, permitting crossing dependencies to handle phenomena like long-distance extractions or flexible word orders in languages such as German or Dutch.^[55] Non-projectivity arises empirically in about 10-20% of parses for English but higher rates in freer-order languages, necessitating algorithms that relax projectivity assumptions for completeness.^[56] Parsing dependency structures relies on empirical algorithms evaluated against annotated treebanks, with transition-based shift-reduce methods building trees incrementally through stack manipulations—shifting words from a buffer, reducing by attaching dependents to heads, and labeling arcs via classifiers.^[57] Variants like arc-standard or arc-eager configurations achieve unlabeled attachment scores exceeding 90% on the Penn Treebank's dependency-converted sections (e.g., sections 22-24 for testing), outperforming early graph-based methods in speed while approximating exact inference.^[58] Graph-based parsers, such as Eisner's algorithm, complement these by optimizing global scores over spanning trees derived from bilexical affinities trained on the same corpus.^[59] A primary challenge in dependency parsing involves resolving attachment ambiguities, where a modifier like a preposition phrase could link to multiple potential heads (e.g., noun or verb), often addressed through data-driven probabilistic models rather than strict heuristics, though principles favoring minimal nodes or low-cost attachments inform baseline preferences in under-resourced settings.^[60] Evaluation metrics prioritize unlabeled attachment accuracy for arc correctness and labeled for relation types, with LAS scores on Penn Treebank typically ranging 85-95% for state-of-the-art systems as of 2020, highlighting persistent gaps in rare dependency types.^[61]

Semantic and Pragmatic Dimensions

Compositionality and Meaning Construction

The principle of compositionality holds that the meaning of a sentence is derived from the meanings of its constituent parts and the rules governing their syntactic combination, enabling systematic interpretation of novel expressions. This approach, traceable to Gottlob Frege's formulation that the sense of a complex expression is compounded from the senses of its components, contrasts with holistic views positing irreducible whole-meanings by emphasizing predictable, rule-based construction verifiable through linguistic data.^[62]^[63] In predicate-argument structures, compositionality operates via theta roles, which assign semantic relations such as agent (the initiator of an event) or patient (the entity undergoing change) to arguments of a predicate, ensuring that verbal meanings integrate with nominal contributions to yield propositional content. For instance, in "The cat chased the mouse," the verb "chased" predicates a relation where the subject receives the agent role and the object the patient role, composing a truth-evaluable proposition whose denotation depends on referent satisfaction of these roles. This mechanism adheres to the theta criterion, requiring each argument to receive exactly one unique role from the predicate, thereby constraining syntactic realizations to semantically coherent outputs.^[64] Quantificational elements introduce compositional challenges through scope ambiguities, as seen in donkey sentences like "Every farmer who owns a donkey beats it," where the indefinite "a donkey" can take narrow scope (existential, varying per farmer) or wide scope (via binding, universal across farmers), resolved by rules prioritizing syntactic hierarchy or dynamic semantics. Empirical support for such rules comes from truth-value judgment tasks, where participants' acceptability ratings under controlled scenarios—e.g., matching sentences to worlds with quantified entities—align with compositional predictions over non-compositional alternatives, demonstrating speakers' implicit adherence to part-whole meaning assembly.^[65]

Context-Dependent Interpretation

In pragmatics, the interpretation of a sentence's meaning extends beyond its literal semantic content to incorporate contextual factors, such as speaker intentions and discourse history, often modeled through Grice's cooperative principle, which posits that interlocutors adhere to maxims of quantity, quality, relation, and manner to facilitate efficient communication.^[66] Empirical studies validate this framework by demonstrating that violations or adherence to these maxims generate predictable inferences, as seen in scalar implicatures where uttering "some" in contexts like "John ate some of the cookies" typically conveys "not all," reflecting the maxim of quantity's avoidance of stronger alternatives like "all."^[67] This inference arises rapidly during comprehension, with psycholinguistic experiments showing no significant delay compared to semantic processing, supporting its status as a default pragmatic mechanism rather than a post-hoc rationalization.^[68] Presuppositions further illustrate context-dependency, as certain linguistic triggers embed assumptions that persist across embeddings like negation or questions, independent of the sentence's polarity. For instance, "Peter stopped smoking" presupposes that Peter previously smoked, a background commitment that holds even under negation as "Peter did not stop smoking," distinguishing it from asserted content.^[69] Experimental evidence from comprehension tasks confirms that such triggers, including factive verbs and change-of-state predicates like "stop," elicit consistent presupposition accommodation, with processing costs increasing when presuppositions conflict with prior discourse, as measured in eye-tracking and acceptability judgments.^[70] Speech act theory delineates how context determines illocutionary force—the intended action performed—beyond the locutionary act's literal utterance, as in the sentence "Can you pass the salt?" functioning as a request rather than a query about ability.^[28] Analyses of discourse corpora reveal that force assignment relies on contextual cues like prosody, prior turns, and social norms, with empirical validation from role-play and completion tasks showing high inter-rater agreement in classifying acts as assertions, directives, or commissives.^[71] Ambiguities in force or reference are resolved through probabilistic inference akin to Bayesian updating, where listeners weigh utterance likelihood against contextual priors and speaker rationality, as formalized in rational speech act models that predict interpretation patterns matching experimental data on referential ambiguity.^[72]^[73]

Cognitive and Psychological Aspects

Models of Sentence Comprehension

Models of sentence comprehension in cognitive psychology emphasize incremental, real-time processing of linguistic input, where the brain builds interpretations word by word while integrating syntactic, semantic, and contextual cues.^[74] Empirical methods such as eye-tracking during reading and event-related potentials (ERPs) provide key evidence, revealing processing costs through metrics like fixation durations and brain wave amplitudes rather than relying on retrospective reports.^[75] These models distinguish between serial parsing, which commits to a single structural hypothesis before revision, and parallel parsing, which maintains multiple alternatives simultaneously to minimize overall computational load.^[76] Garden-path sentences illustrate serial parsing challenges, as in "The horse raced past the barn fell," where "raced" is initially parsed as the main verb, leading to reanalysis upon encountering "fell" as the actual main verb modifying a reduced relative clause.^[77] Eye-tracking studies show increased regressions and rereading times at disambiguating regions in such sentences, with recovery modulated by plausibility and lexical cues, supporting the idea of costly syntactic revisions in serial models.^[78] Parallel models predict lower disruption by weighting competing parses probabilistically from the outset, with evidence from distributed reading time patterns favoring hybrid approaches over strict seriality.^[79] Incremental processing frameworks posit that comprehension proceeds via predictive coding, where upcoming words are anticipated based on prior context, and integration occurs as new input resolves uncertainty.^[80] Surprisal, computed as the negative logarithm of a word's conditional probability given preceding context, quantifies prediction errors and correlates with reading times across languages, indicating that processing difficulty scales with informational unexpectedness.^[81] This metric integrates syntactic and semantic factors, as higher surprisal at ambiguous points delays fixation resolutions, evidenced in naturalistic reading corpora.^[82] ERP data further delineate stages: the N400 component, peaking around 400 ms post-word onset, reflects semantic integration costs, while the P600, emerging later (600 ms), signals syntactic reanalysis or repair, as seen in violations of phrase structure or agreement.^[83] In garden-path scenarios, a biphasic N400-P600 pattern emerges, with N400 indexing initial mismatch detection and P600 tracking structural reconfiguration, dissociating from purely semantic anomalies.^[84] Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) reveals the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) as a hub for handling syntactic complexity, showing heightened activation during parsing of embedded clauses or ambiguities compared to simpler structures.^[85] This region's recruitment scales with working memory demands and integration efforts, as LIFG lesions impair resolution of long-distance dependencies, underscoring its causal role in unifying hierarchical representations.^[86] Across modalities like reading and listening, LIFG connectivity with temporal areas supports predictive unification, aligning behavioral metrics with neural substrates.^[87]

Language Acquisition Mechanisms

Children typically enter the telegraphic speech stage of language acquisition between 24 and 30 months, producing two- to three-word utterances that omit function words and inflections, such as "Mommy juice" or "want cookie," while conveying core propositional meaning through content words.^[88]^[89] Longitudinal studies tracking child speech samples show mean length of utterance (MLU), calculated as the average number of morphemes per utterance, rising from approximately 1.0-2.0 words at 18-24 months to 3.0-4.0 by 36 months, serving as a key metric for syntactic complexity growth.^[90] Empirical assessments of causal factors distinguish input-driven statistical learning from innate mechanisms like parameter setting. Saffran, Aslin, and Newport's 1996 experiments demonstrated that 8-month-old infants can segment fluent speech into word-like units by tracking transitional probabilities between syllables, with exposure to artificial streams yielding above-chance recognition of statistically defined "words" after only 2 minutes, suggesting domain-general pattern detection contributes to early vocabulary foundations.^[91]^[92] Conversely, evidence for innate parameter setting emerges from children's rapid convergence on language-specific options despite impoverished input; for instance, longitudinal data indicate children exposed to limited negative evidence still master subtle grammatical constraints, aligning with Chomsky's proposal that learners "set" binary parameters (e.g., head-initial vs. head-final order) to instantiate universal principles.^[93] Cross-linguistic longitudinal studies highlight universals in sentence structure acquisition, such as early mastery of subject drop in pro-drop languages. In languages like Spanish and Italian, where rich verbal morphology licenses null subjects, children produce target-like omissions (e.g., "mangia" for "he/she eats") from the two-word stage onward, with error rates below 10% by 24-30 months, contrasting slower acquisition in non-pro-drop languages like English and implying innate sensitivity to morphological cues over rote input frequency.^[94]^[95] These patterns, observed in corpora from diverse language environments, underscore how causal interplay of input quality and biological predispositions drives syntactic milestones, with MLU trajectories correlating more strongly with utterance diversity than sheer quantity of caregiver speech in predictive models.^[96]

Theoretical Debates and Controversies

Innate Universal Grammar vs. Usage-Based Learning

Noam Chomsky's theory of Universal Grammar (UG) posits that humans possess an innate, species-specific faculty for language acquisition, enabling children to rapidly master complex syntactic structures despite impoverished and inconsistent input from caregivers, as articulated in the poverty-of-the-stimulus (PoS) argument.^[97] The PoS claims that learners converge on grammatical rules, such as auxiliary fronting in English questions (e.g., "Is the man who is tall happy?"), which are rarely or never directly evidenced in child-directed speech, yet are productively applied by age 3-4.^[98] Proponents cite the universality of recursion—the embedding of phrases within similar phrases to generate infinite expressions—as evidence of innate constraints, observable across most documented languages and acquired swiftly even in low-exposure environments.^[99] In contrast, usage-based theories, advanced by Michael Tomasello, argue that grammar emerges incrementally from exposure to concrete, item-based constructions in communicative contexts, without requiring domain-specific innate rules.^[100] Children initially form "island-like" schemas tied to specific verbs or nouns (e.g., "want X" before generalizing to transitive patterns), driven by statistical patterns in input and social intention-reading, as evidenced by longitudinal studies showing staggered acquisition of syntactic dependencies mirroring input frequencies.^[101] Joan Bybee's exemplar model further supports this by proposing that grammatical categories form as probabilistic "clouds" of stored utterances, where frequent exemplars cluster to yield generalizations via analogy and frequency effects, accounting for gradience and variability without abstract innate parameters.^[102] Critics of UG, including Tomasello and colleagues, contend that PoS arguments lack robust empirical validation, as computational models demonstrate learning of complex rules from realistic input distributions without innate biases, rendering UG potentially unfalsifiable by shifting definitions post hoc.^[103] Challenges to recursion's universality, such as Daniel Everett's documentation of Pirahã lacking embedded clauses, undermine claims of strict innateness, suggesting recursion arises from general cognitive sequencing rather than language-specific endowment.^[104] Twin studies provide genetic evidence tempering pure usage-based accounts: a 2014 analysis of 473 twin pairs found 47% heritability for language delay at 24 months, rising to 60-70% for grammatical proficiency by school age, indicating biological factors influence acquisition speed and variance.^[105] ^[106] However, environmental modulation persists, with shared input explaining residual variance, supporting hybrid models where innate learning mechanisms (e.g., statistical sensitivity) interact with usage to yield grammar, prioritizing causal biological priors over input-alone emergence for explanatory parsimony.^[107]

Challenges to Sentence Universals Across Languages

While ergative-absolutive alignment in languages such as Basque or Australian Aboriginal languages patterns the subject of intransitive verbs with the object of transitives—contrasting nominative-accusative systems where intransitive subjects align with transitive subjects—this variation pertains primarily to case marking and agreement, preserving a universal core of predicate-argument structure in clauses.^[108] Implicational universals, such as the tendency for ergative systems to co-occur with accusative patterns in certain contexts (e.g., nominal vs. pronominal marking), further indicate that alignment diversity does not dismantle the predicate-centered clause but modulates its expression.^[108] Polysynthetic languages like Inuktitut incorporate extensive nominal and adverbial material into verb complexes, often rendering a single word functionally equivalent to an entire sentence in analytic languages by encoding subject, object, and modifiers via affixation.^[109] This challenges the discreteness of word-sentence boundaries observed in Indo-European languages, yet the resulting structures maintain propositional completeness—conveying tense, aspect, and argument roles in a unified predicate frame—suggesting functional universality despite morphological divergence.^[110] Typological databases like the World Atlas of Language Structures (WALS) document clause-level patterns across over 2,600 languages, revealing statistical universals such as the dominance of subject-initial or verb-final orders in declarative clauses, with only rare exceptions like object-verb-subject configurations.^[111] For instance, among sampled languages, subject-object-verb order appears in approximately 45%, underscoring non-random tendencies that underpin sentence comprehension.^[111] Claims of radical relativism, as in Evans and Levinson's 2009 argument against strong universals by emphasizing exceptions like flexible word order in Warlpiri, have been critiqued for methodological selectivity—overlooking implicational hierarchies and probabilistic distributions that affirm underlying clause architectures.^[112] Such data affirm that while surface forms vary, the encoding of event structure via core clausal units persists empirically.

Computational Modeling and Recent Advances

Natural Language Processing Techniques

Natural language processing techniques for sentences primarily involve syntactic parsing to derive hierarchical or dependency structures from tokenized input. Early approaches relied on context-free grammars (CFGs), formalized in the 1950s but applied to NLP parsing in rule-based systems from the 1960s onward, where hand-crafted rules generated phrase-structure trees for sentences.^[113] These deterministic parsers, such as chart parsers, handled ambiguity through exhaustive search but struggled with coverage and sparsity in natural language data.^[114] By the 1990s, probabilistic context-free grammars (PCFGs) augmented CFGs with rule probabilities estimated from treebanks, enabling statistical parsing via algorithms like the Cocke-Kasami-Younger (CKY) dynamic programming method to find the maximum-likelihood parse tree.^[114] PCFG parsers were benchmarked on the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) section of the Penn Treebank, a corpus of over 1 million words annotated with phrase structures, revealing empirical bounds on parsing efficiency for sentences up to moderate lengths.^[115]^[116] Dependency parsing shifted focus to binary head-dependent relations, bypassing phrase labels for more direct syntactic analysis, with data-driven models trained on annotated corpora. Tools like MaltParser, released in 2006, employ transition-based algorithms such as arc-standard parsing, using machine learning classifiers to predict attachments incrementally.^[117] Prior to parsing, sentence segmentation identifies boundaries in running text, complicated by abbreviations (e.g., "Dr.") and embedded quotes that mimic terminators, often addressed via heuristic rules or supervised models to achieve over 95% accuracy on standard datasets.^[118] Empirical evaluation of dependency parsers uses metrics like the Labeled Attachment Score (LAS), which computes the percentage of tokens assigned both the correct head and dependency label, excluding punctuation; state-of-the-art systems on WSJ-derived benchmarks exceed 90% LAS.^[119]^[61] These techniques underpin downstream NLP tasks but remain challenged by long-range dependencies and domain shifts outside news corpora like WSJ.^[115]

AI and Neuroscientific Insights into Processing

Recent studies demonstrate that surprisal estimates from Transformer-based language models, such as those derived from models trained on approximately two billion tokens, provide the strongest predictions of human reading times during sentence processing, outperforming estimates from smaller or larger models.^[120] This alignment suggests that Transformers capture aspects of human-like predictive coding in language comprehension, where unexpected words elicit longer processing times akin to empirical psycholinguistic data.^[121] However, larger models with lower perplexity often yield poorer fits to reading times, indicating diminishing returns beyond optimal training scales and highlighting limitations in scaling as a proxy for cognitive fidelity.^[122] Mechanistic interpretability research on Transformers has revealed circuit-level mechanisms underlying sentence processing, such as attention patterns that integrate memory-based predictions with surprisal to model human-like comprehension.^[123] For instance, Transformer attention entropies combined with word surprisals account for variance in reading times, supporting a predictive theory where models simulate episodic memory retrieval during parsing.^[123] These findings emphasize reverse-engineering internal representations over opaque performance metrics, exposing how attention heads implement hierarchical structure building without innate linguistic modules.^[124] Neuroscientific advances, including 2025 brain-computer interfaces, enable decoding of intended sentence-level speech from neural activity in paralyzed individuals, reconstructing fluent sentences with intonation from motor cortex signals.^[125] Devices implanted in speech areas have achieved near-real-time translation of imagined inner monologue into audible output, with accuracies extending to novel sentences, providing causal evidence for localized neural representations of syntactic intent.^[126] Lesion studies further corroborate these by linking targeted brain damage to specific comprehension deficits, mirroring AI ablation experiments that disrupt analogous processing circuits.^[127] Despite predictive alignments, large language models exhibit systematic failures in compositionality, struggling to systematically combine lexical meanings into novel sentences, as evidenced by benchmarks where models falter on unseen recombinations even after extensive pretraining.^[128] This gap underscores that statistical pattern matching does not equate to genuine semantic understanding, favoring hybrid models that incorporate biological constraints over purely computational scaling.^[129] A 2025 MIT study integrating neuroimaging and computational semantics found that sentence memorability correlates with semantic distinctiveness, where vectors in embedding space that deviate from contextual norms enhance retention, aligning Transformer representations with fMRI patterns of hippocampal engagement.^[130] Such bio-AI convergences reveal shared mechanisms for salience detection but affirm human processing's reliance on causal, embodied grounding absent in current models.^[131]

References

[1]
1 SENTENCE PATTERNS A sentence is the smallest grammatical ...
SENTENCE PATTERNS. A sentence is the smallest grammatical unit consisting of words that express a complete statement or question. A sentence always contains ...
[2]
Basic Sentence Structure - TIP Sheets - Butte College
The basic parts of a sentence are discussed here. The two most basic parts of a sentence are the subject and predicate.
[3]
The English Sentence | SpringerLink
A sentence is a linguistic unit consisting of sound and meaning symbols that follow the structural pattern NV and produce an intonation pattern satisfactory to ...
[4]
Introduction to PS rules
For all languages we can define a sentence as an expression that does two things: first, it points at some thing or concept or entity in the world, and second, ...
[5]
a configurational derivation of the defining property of clause structure
Dec 16, 2019 · Predication is the fundamental grammatical relation defining clausal structures in all (and only) human languages.
[6]
[PDF] 1 Truth-Conditional Semantics
One goal of formal semantics is to develop a finite semantic system that computes the truth- conditions of all grammatical declarative sentences in a given ...
[7]
Adding word endings (agglutination) - Turkish Textbook
Turkish is an agglutinative language, meaning that it tends to rely on suffixes (word endings) to convey grammatical meaning rather than using separate words.
[8]
[PDF] The basic units of sentence structure - Jean Mark Gawron
Constituency Tests: Stand Alone. (sentence fragment). Can the group of words ... Constituents are hierarchically organized. TP. NP. VP. D. N. V. PP. The man eats.
[9]
[PDF] Constituency Grammars - Stanford University
Harris's test was the beginning of the intuition that a constituent is a kind of equivalence class. The first formalization of this idea of hierarchical ...
[10]
[PDF] 3. Syntax
The constituency test for noun phrases is the pronoun test, where you replace a group of words that you think might be a noun phrase with a pronoun; if the ...
[11]
The 4 English Sentence Types
English sentences can be 1) declarative. statement. 2) interrogative? question? 3) imperative. command! 4) exclamative! exclamation!
[12]
Sentence Types - (Intro to Linguistics) - Vocab, Definition ... - Fiveable
There are four primary types of sentences: declarative, interrogative, imperative, and exclamatory, each serving a unique purpose in communication.
[13]
Sentence Types by Grammatical Classification and Function
Rating 4.0 (32) Jun 12, 2025 · Pragmatically, sentences are also classified based on their function: Declarative; Interrogative; Imperative; Exclamatory. Why Understanding the ...
[14]
A Review of Prosody, Punctuation, and Dyslexia - Qeios
Jun 3, 2022 · There is widely discussed parallel between prosody and punctuation, as both contribute to the process of syntactic disambiguation, i.e. the ...Punctuation And Prosody · Prosodic Processing In... · Prosodic Training In...
[15]
[PDF] Prosody in First Language Acquisition – Acquiring Intonation as a ...
If children could use prosodic cues to understand the sentences, they should have used their hands to tap the frog holding a flower when the prosodic boundary ...Missing: punctuation | Show results with:punctuation
[16]
Prosodic Markers of Syntactic Boundaries in the Speech of 4-Year ...
This study focuses on the potential role of prosodic "boundary features" in developmental disorders of morphosyntax. As exemplified melodically by the final ...Missing: punctuation | Show results with:punctuation
[17]
[PDF] Prosody and the development of comprehension*
Children at this stage can produce sentence prosody, particularly sentence accent patterns, which sound to adults as if they are entirely appropriate to the ...Missing: punctuation | Show results with:punctuation<|control11|><|separator|>
[18]
Aristotle's Logic - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Mar 18, 2000 · Thus, every assertion is either the affirmation kataphasis or the denial (apophasis) of a single predicate of a single subject.Missing: apophantic prediction
[19]
Panini's Formulation, the Earliest Known Work on Descriptive ...
Aug 22, 2014 · Birch bark manuscript, written in 1663, from Kashmir of the Rupavatara, a grammatical textbook based on the Sanskrit grammar of Panini.
[20]
Panini's contribution to Sanskrit language - sreenivasarao's blogs
May 29, 2020 · All these go to support the view that Panini's date cannot possibly be later than 519 BCE. ... Panini's Ashtadhyayi is composed in Sutra ...
[21]
Thomas of Erfurt - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
May 6, 2002 · What the Modistae did was to posit the origins of the modi significandi in terms of parallel theories of modi intelligendi (modes of ...
[22]
Course in General Linguistics by Ferdinand de Saussure - EBSCO
Delivered through lectures between 1907 and 1911, Saussure's ideas emphasize the distinction between two crucial concepts: 'langue' and 'parole.' Langue refers ...
[23]
[PDF] Course in general linguistics
We have often heard Ferdinand de Saussure lament the dearth of principles and methods that marked linguistics during his develop- mental period. Throughout ...
[24]
Language - Leonard Bloomfield - Google Books
Through twelve detailed chapters, Bloomfield explores topics such as the sounds of language, the structure of words, and the organization of sentences.Missing: distributional | Show results with:distributional
[25]
Language, Bloomfield, Hackett - The University of Chicago Press
$$53.00Leonard Bloomfield's Language is both a masterpiece of textbook writing and a classic of scholarship. Intended as an introduction to the field of linguistics.
[26]
Syntactic structures. By NOAM CHOMSKY. Pp. 116. 's-Gravenhage
corpus indefinitely. Clearly, some kind of recursive rules will be required in order that a finite gram- mar generate an infinite set of sentences ...Missing: generative | Show results with:generative
[27]
[PDF] Chomsky-1957.pdf - Stanford University
One can identify three phases in work on generative grammar. The first phase, initiated by Syntactic Structures and continuing through. Aspects of the theory of ...Missing: recursion | Show results with:recursion
[28]
Speech Acts - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Jul 3, 2007 · Nevertheless Searle does contend that speech acts are characteristically performed by invoking constitutive rules.Introduction · Content, Force, and How... · Aspects of Illocutionary Force
[29]
[PDF] Speech acts 1 Overview 2 Locutionary act 3 Illocutionary act
4 Sentence types and illocutionary force. Sentence types are syntactic characterizations of certain clusters of clause-level properties. There is ...
[30]
(PDF) Analysis of Types of English Sentences in English Folklore ...
Or in percentage form, as many as 73% of the sentences in the folkore “Jack and The Beanstalk” were declarative sentences, as many as 21% were exclamatory ...
[31]
The role of prosody for the expression of illocutionary types. The ...
Apr 16, 2023 · This article presents a corpus-based study of the correlations between prosodic contours and question speech acts in Italian and French
[32]
[PDF] Prosodic encoding of declarative, interrogative and imperative ...
Results show that declaratives and imperatives receive a falling contour; interrogatives, either polar or wh questions, can have one of three contours: falling,.
[33]
[PDF] Exclamative Clauses: a Corpus-based Account
Introduction. This paper reports the findings of an empirical study of exclamative clauses in English, which is intended to complement the accounts ...
[34]
[PDF] The Semantics of Imperatives within a Theory of Clause Types*
Though individual clause types - especially declaratives, interrogatives, and imperatives - have been studied extensively, there is less work on clause type.
[35]
The evolutionary psychology of syntax - Wiley Online Library
May 16, 2025 · In terms of communicative functions, there are universals of speech act intention: All humans are motivated to direct others' actions ...
[36]
Sentence Structure (Simple, Compound, Complex, & Compound ...
Simple sentences contain just one independent clause. · Compound sentences contain two or more independent clauses. · Complex sentences contain one independent ...
[37]
Identifying Embedded and Conjoined Complex Sentences
A complex sentence flowchart was developed by the author to aid in identifying 12 types of embedded and conjoined sentences (e.g., relative clauses, infinitive ...
[38]
Schema for embedded and coordinated sentence structure. A
Schema for embedded and coordinated sentence structure. A: An embedded structure is essentially asymmetric and accepts distance dependency as in the example ...
[39]
Syntactic Comprehension of Relative Clauses and Center ... - NIH
Mar 31, 2020 · Our study provides a valuable insight into how the purely syntactic processing of RC and CE assists comprehension of complex sentences.
[40]
on complex event-formation in Igbo serial verb constructions
Apr 11, 2025 · This paper presents the first formal event semantic analysis of two prominent types of serial verb construction (SVC) in Igbo (Benue-Congo), namely multi-event ...
[41]
(PDF) Serial verb constructions in Òkó - ResearchGate
Aug 7, 2025 · The article explores the ways Òkó speakers construe experience as a flow of events through the verbal group in a clause.
[42]
Universal Dependency Relations
Universal Dependency Relations. The following table lists the 37 universal syntactic relations used in UD v2. It is a revised version of the relations ...
[43]
Universal Dependencies | Computational Linguistics | MIT Press
Jul 13, 2021 · The head of a clause, commonly referred to as the predicate, is most commonly a verb but may also be an adjective or adverb, or even a nominal.
[44]
Universal Dependencies
The idea of universal dependencies is to propose a set of universal grammatical relations which can be used with relative fidelity to capture any dependency ...
[45]
8.3 Constituents – Essentials of Linguistics
The more generic term for a group of words that act together to form a unit is a constituent. So what's our evidence that constituents exist in our minds?
[46]
[PDF] How Do We Identify Constituents?
Some syntactic tests for constituent structure. – Sentence fragment test. • A string of words that can be a sentence fragment must be a constituent.
[47]
Course:LING300/Constituency - UBC Wiki
Jul 21, 2020 · Movement tests (also called displacement tests) include topicalization, clefting, pseudoclefting, and wh-movement. (9) a. Lucy will write her ...
[48]
8.2 X-bar Phrase Structure – Essentials of Linguistics
X-bar theory states every phrase has a head, a bar level, and optionally a complement and specifier. The head determines the phrase category.
[49]
6. X-bar syntax - KU Libraries Open Textbooks
The X-bar schema defines four positions: head, complement, specifier, adjunct. Complements and adjuncts can be empirically distinguished through three tests.Deconstructing Vp · Positions In X'-Syntax · Complements Vs. Adjuncts
[50]
[PDF] Center-Embedded Sentences: An Online Problem or Deeper?
¹ Another common variant in the literature is "The rat the cat the dog chased ate died.", as found in Hudson (1996).<|separator|>
[51]
Constituency – The Science of Syntax - Pressbooks.pub
The final movement/displacement test we'll use is topicalization. This is, in some ways, the easiest movement test, because all you're doing is (potentially) ...
[52]
[PDF] Dependency Parsing - Stanford University
The head-dependent rela- tionship is made explicit by directly linking heads to the words that are immediately dependent on them. In addition to specifying the ...
[53]
[PDF] Dependency Grammar
▻ These relations are generally things like subject, object/complement, (pre-/post-)adjunct, etc. ▻ Subject/Agent: John fished.Missing: fundamentals | Show results with:fundamentals
[54]
Dependency Grammar
Dependency grammar emphasizes words, assuming sentence structure derives from dependency relationships between words, unlike phrase structure grammars.
[55]
[PDF] Dependency Parsing - cs.Princeton
Non-projectivity arises due to long distance dependencies or in languages with flexible word order. This class: focuses on projective parsing. Page 17 ...
[56]
[PDF] Corrective Dependency Parsing - Google Research
We consider two approaches to creating projective trees from dependency trees ex- hibiting non-projectivities. The first is based on word-reordering and is the ...
[57]
Dependency parsing & associated algorithms in NLP - Medium
May 10, 2020 · Grammar Functions and Arcs: Tags between each Head-Dependent pair is a grammar function determining the relation between the Head & Dependent.<|separator|>
[58]
[PDF] Parsing to Stanford Dependencies: Trade-offs between speed and ...
When used with a linear classifier to make local parsing decisions, these methods can parse the entire Penn Treebank development set (section 22) in less than ...<|separator|>
[59]
[PDF] Dependency Parsing - Stanford University
Dependency parsing describes sentence structure using words and directed relations between them, linking heads to dependents, without phrasal constituents.
[60]
[PDF] Evaluating Dependency Parsing: Robust and Heuristics-Free Cross ...
We use the proposed procedure to compare de- pendency parsing results trained on Penn Treebank trees converted into dependency trees according to five ...
[61]
Dependency parsing - NLP-progress
As with supervised parsing, models are evaluated against the Penn Treebank. The most common evaluation setup is to use gold POS-tags as input and to evaluate ...
[62]
[PDF] Computing Frege's Principle of Compositionality - Carleton University
Frege's Principle of Compositionality (sometimes simply referred to as Frege's Principle) states that “the sense if a complex is compounded out of the senses ...
[63]
[PDF] The Principle of Semantic Compositionality
The Principle is often said to trace back to Frege, and indeed many textbooks call The Principle of Semantic. Compositionality "Frege's Principle". However ...
[64]
[PDF] Predicate-argument structure and thematic roles
a. Each NP argument is assigned exactly one thematic role. b. The same thematic role is not assigned to two NP arguments of the same predicate.
[65]
Critical Typicality: Truth Judgements and Compositionality with ...
Sep 20, 2017 · It is proposed that typicality effects play a systematic role in compositional interpretation and the determination of truth-values . For ...Missing: judgments | Show results with:judgments
[66]
[PDF] GRICE'S COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE - Language at Leeds
Abstract. Grice's Cooperative Principle is an assumed basic concept in pragmatics, yet its interpretation is often problematic.Missing: validation | Show results with:validation
[67]
Scalar Implicatures: The Psychological Reality of Scales - PMC
In other terms, the pragmatic interpretation of scalar items is encoded as a (defeasible) part of its meaning (i.e., “some” also means “not all”), while the ...
[68]
“Some,” and possibly all, scalar inferences are not delayed
Scalar inferences are commonly generated when a speaker uses a weaker expression rather than a stronger alternative, e.g., John ate some of the apples ...
[69]
View of New data on the 'triggering problem' for presuppositions
(1)Peter stopped smoking.a.Peter smoked in the past.PRESUPPOSITIONb.Peter stopped smoking.ASSERTIONc.Peter does not smoke now.ASSERTIONWhereas (1a) has been ...Missing: linguistics | Show results with:linguistics
[70]
Presupposition processing declines with age - PMC - PubMed Central
Presupposition is background information that is taken for granted (Stalnaker 1974). For example, the utterances. John has stopped smoking. The painting was ...
[71]
[PDF] Lecture (5) Speech Acts
▻ Field is divided into diary, philological, conversation analytic and corpus;. ▻ Laboratory is divided into discourse completion task and role play. Page 48.
[72]
[PDF] Pragmatic language interpretation as probabilistic inference
Aug 8, 2016 · Pragmatic language interpretation uses the Rational Speech Act (RSA) framework, which uses probability to model inferences about meaning in ...Missing: resolution | Show results with:resolution
[73]
[PDF] Probabilistic pragmatics, or why Bayes' rule is probably important for ...
Pragmatics is about language use in context. This involves theorizing about speakers' choices of words and listeners' ways of interpreting.
[74]
[PDF] Distinguishing Serial and Parallel Parsing - TedLab
Another potential method for distinguishing serial and parallel models of sentence comprehension is to examine the distribution of reading times at the ...
[75]
[PDF] What eye movements can tell us about sentence comprehension
Eyetracking has the potential to inform us about when an event occurs in the parser (timing); what the parser does when it encounters difficulty (parsing events); ...
[76]
Distinguishing Serial and Parallel Parsing
This paper discusses ways of determining whether the human parser is serial maintaining at most, one structural interpretation at each parse state, or whet.
[77]
Retracing the garden-path: Nonselective rereading and no reanalysis
The current study consists of two large-scale eye-tracking experiments designed specifically to examine where and how much people reread garden-path sentences, ...
[78]
Plausibility and recovery from garden paths: An eye-tracking study.
Three eye-tracking experiments investigated plausibility effects on recovery from misanalysis in sentence comprehension.
[79]
Parallel processing and sentence comprehension difficulty
By contrast, retrieval does not model any measure in serial processing. As more candidate analyses are considered in parallel at each word, retrieval can ...
[80]
[PDF] Testing the Predictions of Surprisal Theory in 11 Languages
Language processing is incremental and dynamic: When a reader encounters a word, they allocate a certain amount of time to process it before moving on to the ...<|separator|>
[81]
Lexical Predictability during Natural Reading: Effects of Surprisal ...
The most common of these metrics is surprisal, defined as the negative log probability of a word, given its preceding context: surprisal(wi) = −log P(wi|w1…wi−1) ...
[82]
Computational Sentence‐Level Metrics of Reading Speed and Its ...
Jul 22, 2025 · This study introduces two novel computational approaches for quantifying sentence-level processing: sentence surprisal and sentence relevance.
[83]
Functional Role of the N400 and P600 in Language-Related ERP ...
Jan 27, 2021 · The N400 and P600 have been the most important language-related ERP components. The N400 has been mostly elicited as a result of processing sentences with ...
[84]
A Neurocomputational Model of the N400 and the P600 in ... - NIH
This neurocomputational model is the first to successfully simulate the N400 and P600 amplitude in language comprehension.
[85]
Effects of syntactic complexity in L1 and L2; an fMRI study of Korean ...
It was found that the major areas involved in sentence processing such as the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), bilateral inferior parietal gyrus, and ...
[86]
Left inferior frontal cortex and syntax: function, structure and ...
Jan 27, 2011 · The left inferior frontal gyrus may not itself be specialized for syntactic processing, but plays an essential role in the neural network that carries out ...
[87]
Supramodal Sentence Processing in the Human Brain: fMRI ...
Sep 29, 2022 · In addition, the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) and the left posterior middle temporal gyrus (LpMTG) were most clearly associated with left- ...
[88]
12.4: Stages of Language Acquisition - Social Sci LibreTexts
Jun 26, 2025 · The four stages are: pre-language (3-10 months), holophrastic (12-18 months), two-word (18-20 months), and telegraphic speech (before 3 years ...
[89]
Linguistics 001 -- Lecture 20 -- First Language Acquisition
Stages of language acquisition in children ; Telegraphic stage or early multiword stage (better multi-morpheme), 24-30 months, "Telegraphic" sentence structures ...
[90]
Longitudinal Analyses of Expressive Language Development ... - NIH
MLU is a measure of the child's sentence complexity, which was calculated by dividing the total number of morphemes by the number of utterances in each speech ...
[91]
Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants - PubMed - NIH
The present study shows that a fundamental task of language acquisition, segmentation of words from fluent speech, can be accomplished by 8-month-old infants.
[92]
[PDF] Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants
274 • 13 DECEMBER 1996 resented compared to the child's eventual linguistic abilities (4). Thus, most theories of language acquisition have emphasized the ...
[93]
A multiple process solution to the logical problem of language ...
Chomsky (1980) argued that the child's acquisition of grammar is 'hopelessly underdetermined by the fragmentary evidence available.' He attributed this ...
[94]
Reversing the Approach to Null Subjects: A Perspective ... - Frontiers
For instance, in pro-drop languages, children start producing inflected verbal forms (with virtually no errors in person-agreement) and target-like subject ...
[95]
Reversing the Approach to Null Subjects: A Perspective from ...
Feb 14, 2017 · This paper proposes a new model for null subjects, and focuses on its implications for language development. The literature on pro-drop ...
[96]
A new view of language acquisition - PMC - NIH
On Skinner's view, no innate information was necessary, developmental change was brought about through reward contingencies, and language input did not cause ...
[97]
[PDF] Argument from the Poverty of the Stimulus - Oxford Handbooks
Feb 14, 2017 · This article explores what Noam Chomsky called 'the argument from poverty of the stimulus': the argument that our experience far ...
[98]
[PDF] Poverty of the Stimulus? A Rational Approach
The Poverty of the Stimulus (PoS) argument holds that children do not receive enough evidence to infer the exis- tence of core aspects of language, ...
[99]
The universality and uniqueness of recursion-in-language
The role of recursion in language is universal and unique. It is universal because the (Specifier)-Head-Complement(s) geometry is the type of structuring ...
[100]
[PDF] First steps toward a usage-based theory of language acquisition*
In this paper I employ a usage-based model of language to argue for five fundamental facts about child language acquisition: (1) the primary psycholinguistic ...
[101]
The item-based nature of children's early syntactic development
The vast majority of young children's early language is organized around concrete, item-based linguistic schemas.
[102]
[PDF] USAGE-BASED THEORY AND EXEMPLAR REPRESENTATIONS ...
Nov 15, 2012 · The basic premise of Usage-based Theory is that experience with language creates and impacts the cognitive representations for language ...
[103]
[PDF] Universal grammar is dead
The claims of Universal Grammar, we argue here, are either empirically false, unfalsifiable, or misleading in that they refer to tendencies rather than strict.
[104]
Evidence Rebuts Chomsky's Theory of Language Learning
Sep 7, 2016 · Cognitive scientists and linguists have abandoned Chomsky's “universal grammar” theory in droves because of new research examining many different languages.
[105]
Twin study suggests language delay due more to nature than nurture
Jul 21, 2014 · A study of 473 sets of twins followed since birth found that compared with single-born children, 47 percent of 24-month-old identical twins had language delay.
[106]
Causal Pathways for Specific Language Impairment - ASHA Journals
Oct 16, 2020 · A consistent finding from previous twin studies (reviewed above) is that heritability for language increases with age, although this effect has ...
[107]
Longitudinal Study of Language and Speech of Twins at 4 and 6 Years
This study investigates the heritability of language, speech, and nonverbal cognitive development of twins at 4 and 6 years of age.
[108]
Universal 3: ergative alignment ⇒ also accusative alignment
May 1, 2020 · IF alignment is ergative for some rule(s), THEN alignment tends to be accusative for other rules, or also for the same rule(s) in other contexts ...Missing: sentence structure
[109]
10.3. Packaging words and morphemes
Polysynthetic languages have many morphemes in a single word, often the equivalent of a sentence in other languages. There may be multiple roots in a single ...
[110]
The Lexicon in Polysynthetic Languages - Oxford Academic
This chapter shows Eastern Canadian Arctic Inuktitut words are formed and used in the context of polysynthesis. It starts with a very basic classification ...Missing: boundaries | Show results with:boundaries
[111]
Chapter Order of Subject, Object and Verb - WALS Online
This map shows the ordering of subject, object, and verb in a transitive clause, more specifically declarative clauses in which both the subject and object ...
[112]
Commentary on Evans and Levinson, the myth of language universals
Here we argue that Evans and Levinson (2009) overstate the dependence of current psycholinguistic research on the Chomskyan idea of Universal Grammar.Missing: critiques | Show results with:critiques
[113]
[PDF] 9/30/18 1 - CS 6120/CS4120: Natural Language Processing
Sep 30, 2018 · A Brief Parsing History. Pre 1990 (“Classical”) NLP Parsing. • Wrote symbolic grammar (CFG or often richer) and lexicon. S → NP VP. NN ...
[114]
[PDF] Probabilistic Context-Free Grammars (PCFGs) - Columbia CS
A context-free grammar (CFG) is a 4-tuple (N,Σ, R, S) where N is non-terminals, Σ is terminals, R is rules, and S is a start symbol.
[115]
[PDF] Parsing with Treebank Grammars: Empirical Bounds, Theoretical ...
This paper presents empirical studies and closely corresponding theoretical models of the performance of a chart parser exhaus- tively parsing the Penn ...
[116]
Building a large annotated corpus of English: the Penn Treebank
In this paper, we review our experience with constructing one such large annotated corpus---the Penn Treebank, a corpus consisting of over 4.5 million words of ...
[117]
MaltParser: A Data-Driven Parser-Generator for Dependency Parsing
We introduce MaltParser, a data-driven parser generator for dependency parsing. Given a treebank in dependency format, MaltParser can be used to induce a ...
[118]
[PDF] A unified approach to sentence segmentation of punctuated text in ...
Aug 1, 2021 · Despite its importance and early position in the NLP pipeline, sentence segmentation is the subject of relatively little research. Widely ...<|separator|>
[119]
CoNLL 2018 Shared Task - Universal Dependencies
Labeled Attachment Score (LAS) is a standard evaluation metric in dependency parsing: the percentage of words that are assigned both the correct syntactic head ...
[120]
Transformer-Based Language Model Surprisal Predicts Human ...
Apr 22, 2023 · The study found that language model surprisal estimates best predict human reading times with about two billion training tokens, and a certain ...Missing: matching | Show results with:matching
[121]
Transformer-Based Language Model Surprisal Predicts Human ...
Surprisal estimates from language models best predict human reading times with about two billion training tokens, and a certain model capacity is needed.
[122]
Why Does Surprisal From Larger Transformer-Based Language ...
Mar 27, 2023 · This work presents a linguistic analysis into why larger Transformer-based pre-trained language models with more parameters and lower perplexity nonetheless ...
[123]
Memory for prediction: A Transformer-based theory of sentence ...
The lossy context surprisal theory of Futrell et al. (2020) adds noise to contextual memory when computing surprisal, and the surprisal values computed with ...
[124]
A Practical Review of Mechanistic Interpretability for Transformer ...
Jul 2, 2024 · Mechanistic interpretability (MI) is an emerging sub-field of interpretability that seeks to understand a neural network model by reverse- ...Missing: sentence processing
[125]
Brain-computer interface restores natural speech after paralysis - NIH
Apr 29, 2025 · It could make out novel words and decode new sentences to produce fluent speech. The device could also produce speech indefinitely without ...
[126]
Scientists develop interface that 'reads' thoughts from speech ...
Aug 14, 2025 · A new device could help decode inner speech in paralysis patients, potentially restoring rapid communication.
[127]
Inner speech in motor cortex and implications for ... - Cell Press
Aug 21, 2025 · Speech brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) show promise in restoring communication to people with paralysis but have also prompted discussions ...
[128]
[PDF] Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language ...
Dec 6, 2023 · In summary, we systematically reveal that al- though LMs can sometimes compose two facts they observed separately during pretraining, they fail ...<|separator|>
[129]
Exploring the Compositional Deficiency of Large Language Models ...
May 5, 2024 · Since problems with logical flaws are quite rare in the real world ... Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI).
[130]
MIT cognitive scientists reveal why some sentences stand out from ...
Oct 1, 2025 · MIT neuroscientists find sentences that stick in your mind longer are those that have distinctive meanings, making them stand out from ...
[131]
A distinctive meaning makes a sentence memorable - ScienceOpen
A distinctive meaning makes a sentence memorable. Author(s): Thomas Hikaru Clark , Greta Tuckute , Bryan Medina , Evelina Fedorenko.