Language Acquisition as Rational Contingency Learning

By Nick C. Ellis. 2006

479 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Neuroscience

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5244d8e369ead3507ad062ce01dd5d14c834f92e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Cognitive Neuroscience

Citations in the corpus

Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics - Introduction to the special issue (2006, methodology): “…being tuned by their native language experience) play a large role in explaining the limited success typical of naturalistic L2 acquisition (Ellis 2006a, 2006b, 2006c), the 'Basic Variety' (Klein 1998) of interlanguage, which, although sufficient for everyday communicative purposes,…”
Essentials of a Theory of Language Cognition (2019, background): “(N. Ellis, 2006b) De Bot, Lowie, and Verspoor (DBL&V) present a persuasive case for language as a complex dynamic system where cognitive, social, and environmental factors continuously interact, where creative communicative behaviors emerge from socially co-regulated interactions, where there is…”
Usage‐Based Language: Investigating the Latent Structures That Underpin Acquisition (2013, methodology): “It explores the emergence of structure from experience using methods from cognitive linguistics, corpus linguistics, learning theory, complex systems, and network science.”
Language Is a Complex Adaptive System: Position Paper (2009, background): “…Zipfian profiles of construction token and type frequencies (Ellis, 2002; Larsen-Freeman, 1976), cue reliabilities (MacWhinney, 1997), and the salience of the cue and the importance of its outcome in the interpretation of the utterance as a whole (Ellis, 2006; Goldschneider & DeKeyser, 2001).”
Formulaic Language in Native and Second Language Speakers: Psycholinguistics, Corpus Linguistics, and TESOL (2008, background): “It has to be tuned and made appropriately accessible (Ellis, 2006).”
Exploring the relationship between productive vocabulary knowledge and second language oral ability (2019, methodology): “As suggested by the usage-based account of second language acquisition (SLA) (e.g. Ellis 2006), when L2 learners frequently encounter certain vocabulary items in meaningful input, the connections between related words become strong and comprise formulaic units, allowing for more automatic, refined…”
Constructing a second language: Analyses and computational simulations of the emergence of linguistic constructions from usage. (2009, background): “…or their value in discourse construction (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 1999; Larsen-Freeman, 2002a, 2003); factors relating to the contingency of form and meaning and use; and factors relating to learner attention, such as automaticity, transfer, and blocking (Ellis, 2002, 2003, 2006b, 2008b).”
Motivation, Emotion, Learning Experience, and Second Language Comprehensibility Development in Classroom Settings: A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Study (2018, background): “…potential of foreign language learning can be maximized by how students optimize their most immediate L2 experience beyond the regular syllabus, bringing to light the importance of the quantity, quality and timing of experience—three key factors in the usage-based account of SLA (Ellis, 2006).”
Statistical Measures for Usage‐Based Linguistics (2015, unknown): “” These factors are central to the Competition Model (MacWhinney, 1987, 1997, 2001) and to other models of construction learning as the rational learning of form-function contingencies (Ellis, 2006; Xu & Tennenbaum, 2007).”
Selective Attention and Transfer Phenomena in L2 Acquisition: Contingency, Cue Competition, Salience, Interference, Overshadowing, Blocking, and Perceptual Learning (2006, background): “Learning theory N. C. Ellis (2006) summarized the associative learning research demonstrating that selective attention, salience, expectation, and surprise are key elements in the analysis of all learning, animal and human alike.”
Assessing the role of current and cumulative exposure in simultaneous bilingual acquisition: The case of Dutch gender* (2012, background): “…i.e., in terms of quality as well as quantity. i.e., quantifying the “critical mass” such that specific predictions can be made, a challenge which as yet has not been met (Gathercole & Thomas, 2009, p. 215, fn. 1; see also Ellis, 2006, for relevant discussion concerning the power law of learning).”
Attention to the second language (2007, background): “…investigators have noted how “non-salient” features of a second language, such as an unvoiced consonant, or a sound at the end of a phrase, are insufficiently noticed, and hence not incorporated into the vocal expression of that language (see Ellis 2006a, 2006b; Robinson 1995; Schmidt 2001).”
Formulaic Sequences: Are They Processed More Quickly than Nonformulaic Language by Native and Nonnative Speakers? (2008, background): “(See Hopper 1998; MacWhinney 1999; and Ellis 2003, 2006a, 2006b for more on this approach to language acquisition.)”
An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. (2011, background): “However, there are other relevant psycholinguistic studies which made use of RescorlaWagner model, for example, Hsu, Chater, and Vitányi (2010) and Clair, Monaghan, and Ramscar (2009) on language acquisition, and Ellis (2006), who studied second language learning.”
The acquisition of tense-aspect: Converging evidence from corpora and telicity ratings (2009, methodology): “…not only sensitive to raw cooccurrence frequencies but that they also use contingency statistics to quantify the reliability of form–function mappings and the degree to which a form is distinctive of a particular function (Ellis, 2006a, 2006b; Gries & Stefanowitsch, 2004; MacWhinney, 1987).”