ArticlePDF Available

Do morphological features affect the cognitive processing of deverbal nominals in Serbian?

Authors:

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine whether different morphological characteristics of Serbian deverbal nominals affect their lexical processing. According to morphological differences, there are three subtypes of the process and result deverbal nominals in Serbian: (i) result nominals end with the zero suffix, while process nominals end with the deverbal suffix-nje (e.g., žubor/žuborenje [eng. burble]); (ii) result nominals differ from process nominals in the presence of the-va infix (e.g., rešenje/rešavanje [eng. so-lution]); (iii) process nominals end with the deverbal suffix-nje, while result nominals end with other derivational suffixes (e.g., rotiranje/rotacija [eng. rotation]). The final results of three self-paced reading experiments suggest that different morphological features do not affect the processing of deverbal nominals, which strongly supports amorphous approach to the morpho-lexical processing, as well as the distributed morphology perspective in the field of theoretical linguistics.
139
UDK: 81’23:[165.194:811.163.41’367.622
Originalni naučni rad
doi: 10.19090/pp.2019.2.139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT
THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF
DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?2
The aim of this study was to examine whether different morpho-
logical characteristics of Serbian deverbal nominals affect their
lexical processing. According to morphological differences, there
are three subtypes of the process and result deverbal nominals in
Serbian: (i) result nominals end with the zero sufx, while process
nominals end with the deverbal sufx –nje (e.g., žubor/žuborenje
[eng. burble]); (ii) result nominals differ from process nominals in
the presence of the –va inx (e.g., rešenje/rešavanje [eng. so-
lution]); (iii) process nominals end with the deverbal sufx –nje,
while result nominals end with other derivational sufxes (e.g.,
rotiranje/rotacija [eng. rotation]). The nal results of three self–
paced reading experiments suggest that different morphological
features do not affect the processing of deverbal nominals, which
strongly supports a–morphous approach to the morpho–lexical
processing, as well as the distributed morphology perspective in
the eld of theoretical linguistics.
Key words: a–morphous morphology, derived nouns, deverbal
nominalization, distributed morphology, morpho–lexical process-
ing
       th   
th International Morphology Meeting
   th International Morphological Processing

Isidora Gatarić1
Social Sciences and
Computing, University
of Belgrade
Sanja Srdanović
Anja Šarić
Department of
Linguistics, Goethe
University in Frankfurt
 Corresponding author e–mail:
gataric.isidora@gmail.com
PRIMENJENA PSIHOLOGIJA, 2019, Vol.
12
(2), STR. 139-156
Primljeno: 30. 03. 2019.
Primljena korekcija:
06. 06. 2019.
Prihvaćeno za štampu:
13. 06. 2019.
primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
140
Introduction

-
     

-

 examination in the example
The instructor’s examination of the student
-
verbal nominal exam in the example The instructor’s exam-

examination in the example The instructor’s exami-
nation


-


simple event nominal category is considered to behave identically as process de-


distinctive categories of deverbal nominals are relevant for the Serbian language:
drhtaj in the example 
drhtaj je nagoveštavao dolazak zime [eng.     -
al of winter    
drhtanje in the example [eng.
     

of deverbal nominals is that the process deverbal nominals take obligatory argu-




         

on the richness of morphology of the language in question.
Morphological Distinction between Deverbal Nominals in Serbian

them perfect candidates for research of morphological effects in morpho–lexical
primenjena psihologija, str. 139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?
141
processing. Previous studies interested in the theoretical explanation of deverbal
nominalization in Serbian suggest that this phenomenon is morphologically very
          
   
      
–nje–ba, –ija, –aj, –nja, –ak-
–va
three subtypes of process and result deverbal nominals can be distinguished in
-
–njelet/letenje [eng. 
and process deverbal nominals differ in the presence of the –varešenje/
rešavanje [eng. solving–nje
rotiranje/rotacija
[eng. rotation
no previous empirical studies interested in the examination of deverbal nominals
processing with respect to these morphological differences.
Cognitive Processing of Deverbal Nominals
Having in mind the fact that this phenomenon has been intriguing to re-

a minimal interest has been devoted to deverbal nominalization in the domain of
     
of syntactic complexity of deverbal nominals on the processing of entire sentenc-
 
results of this study suggested that sentences with the deverbal nominals with
simpler linguistics structure were processed faster than those with the complex

results suggesting that the more complex the syntactic structure of deverbal nom-

         
and syntactic complexities played the dominant roles in the cognitive process-
 
the syntactic and semantic differences of process and result deverbal nominals
-

-
       -
mantically and syntactically more complex deverbal nominals (process deverbal
nominals) were processed slower than those with the simpler linguistic structure
        
-

primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
142

with the more complex linguistic structure were rated as less acceptable accord-

conclude that participants perhaps would need more time to process deverbal



 -
-

them control (and vary) only for the syntactic and semantic features of deverbal
-


cognitive processing of process and result deverbal nominals.
Different Perspectives in the Processing of Morphologically Complex
Words
The morphological complexity of words has intrigued and inspired re-

the cognitive processing of morphologically complex words in any language. On


 
-
ing to the authors of these models morphemes are represented as independent



-


of authors who propose an a–morphous perspective in the morpho–lexical pro-
cessing. They suggest that morphemes do not play an important independent

            
   
proposed a few models for the interpretation of results observed in the empiri-
  -
      
-
      
primenjena psihologija, str. 139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?
143
successfully explains various morpho–lexical phenomena in different languag-
 -


-
logically complex words many years before previously mentioned a–morphous

-

  
-
tion that a–morphous perspective in the lexical processing is very similar to dis-

    
existence of the single morpheme characteristics effects in the lexical process-

The Present Study
Guided by the fact that there are no previous similar studies dealing with this
-
logical features of Serbian deverbal nominals affected their processing. The mor-
     

–nje
differ in the presence of the –va
–nje
      

the second aim of this study was to answer which of the two perspectives in the
-

Experiment 1
-
phological features of Serbian deverbal nominals affected their processing. In the

-
–nje

  
primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
144
were more complex in nature than the result deverbal nominals. The stimuli were
presented in the sentence context in the self–paced reading task in all three ex-

studies about the importance of sentences context in the examination of morpho–

Method
Participants. Participants in this experiment were undergraduate students
 N  
-
-
versity of Novi Sad)3
or corrected–to–normal vision.
Stimuli. The stimuli in this experiment were 48 sentences with the Serbian

-

the experiment had its pair: 24 result nominals ended with the zero morpheme
[eng. burble-
–nje [eng. burble]).4 The pairs of deverbal nominals were used
in order to control the effects that could arise from the characteristics of a stem

 / [eng.
burble

Jovana je [eng.
is[eng. heard
   [eng. burble   -
  vode [e.g. water]) as il-
lustrated in (1).
1a vode.
1b vode.
[eng. Jovana heard the burble of water.]
 

identical sentences (for one pair of deverbal nominals) were selected as stimuli in


Committee of that institution.
 

primenjena psihologija, str. 139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?
145


conducted research in Serbian.
Design. The factor that was manipulated in this experiment was the type
of deverbal nominals (process or result) that differed in some morphological
  –nje    
lemma frequency were included as the control variables. The lemma frequencies
were retrieved from srWac 
length was calculated according to the number of letters. The dependent variable
in this experiment was the reading time of deverbal nominals (measured in mil-
liseconds).
Procedure. The stimuli were presented in a self–paced reading task created
in the software OpenSesame
    
         
-
-
ticipants were verbally instructed to read the words presented at the screen as
ENTER (on the keyboard) when they read
 

-
tions (about the previous sentence) were given on the screen on several occa-

  
-

presentation was randomized for each participant.
Results
-

in free statistical software R   mgcv
itsadug-



word length were standardized by centring to zero and dividing by the stand-
-
 
-
 
primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
146
-


effect of stimuli and the random effect of participants. The random effect of par-
ticipants was included with by–participant factorial smooths over trials from the

result from the trials characteristics in the case of different participants from the
-
    
model criticism was applied to the model following the procedure proposed by

Table 1.
Table 1
         -
sponse latencies from Experiment 1
   t Pr(>|t|)
Intercept 6.23 .04  .00***
Type of deverbal nominals = result –.04 .02 –1.62 .10
Trial order –.00 .00 –.63 
 .01 .01 1.31 .18
 –.01 .00  .02
Smooth terms edf Ref.df F p
s(Stimuli) 4.18 44 .10 
s   7.33 .00***
Notes. s – thin plate regression spline smooth.
*** p < .0001.
           
which means that longer deverbal nominals are processed slower than shorter
-



certain morphological differences between Serbian process and result nominals

primenjena psihologija, str. 139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?
147
Experiment 2
   -
    
        

–va

Method
Participants.       


speakers with normal or corrected–to–normal vision. None of the participants

Stimuli.     
  -

–vanje) were collected: result
deverbal nominals (N –va[eng. cut
while the process deverbal nominals (N–va
[eng. cut]). The stimuli sentences were created with the identical syntactic regula-

1a struje.
1b struje.
[eng. The Electric Distribution Company announced power cuts.]



Design and Procedure. The two–level factor was a type of deverbal nomi-

–va. The same control variables and dependent


Results
 
 -

primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
148
the whole process of the preparation of the data for the statistical analysis was the
-
 
 
    


Table 2.
Table 2
         -
sponse latencies from the Experiment 2
   t Pr(>|t|)
Intercept   124.10 .00***
Trial order (order of presentation) –.00 .00 –.61 
Type of deverbal nominals = result –.04 .02  .07
 .01 .00 1.37 .16
Smooth terms edf Ref.df F p
s  1.00  .13
s   2.43 .12
s(Stimuli)   .00 .61
s    .00***
Notes.s – thin plate regression spline
smooth.
*** p < .0001.
           
     
explanations for the lack of this effect can be that the stimuli in this experiment
-
-


    

primenjena psihologija, str. 139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?
149
Experiment 3


-
–nje
–ba, –ija, –aj, –nja, –ak, –idba).
Method
Participants. Sixty–eight undergraduate students (mostly female) from the
-
 

normal vision. None of the participants participated in the previous two experi-
ments.
Stimuli. The sentences (N = 48) with the pairs of process and result deverbal

  

–aj in deverbal noun premeštaj [eng. relocation-
–njepremeštanje [eng. reloca-
tion
 
created with the identical syntactic regulations
1a premeštaj kancelarije.
1b premeštanje kancelarije.
[eng. ]
Design and Procedure. 


Results
  
    
-
-
tical analysis was the same as in the previous experiments. The same statistical

model is presented in the Table 3.
primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
150
Table 3
         -
sponse latencies from the Experiment 3
   t Pr(>|t|)
Intercept 6.26   .00***
Trial order (order of presentation) .00 .00 .17 
Type of deverbal nominals = result .00 .01 .18 
Smooth terms edf Ref.df F p
  2.88 6.27 .00**
 1.14 1.22 .68 
s(Stimuli)  44  .01*
   7.07 .00***
Notes. s – thin plate regression spline smooth.
* p < .01. ** p < .001. *** p < .0001.

which means that longer deverbal nominals are being processed slower. The ef-

as well as the main effect of the type of deverbal nominals. This suggests that
certain morphological features that vary in this experiment do not contribute to
the appearance of a difference in the processing of process and result deverbal
nominals.
Discussion
The current research was primarily aimed at examining whether different
morphological characteristics of deverbal nominals affected their lexical process-
ing in Serbian. Three experiments with the self–paced reading tasks were carried
out in order to get an answer to this research question. Morphological differences

-
periment 1 were sentences with the following type of deverbal nominals: result

–nje[eng. burble
stimuli were result and process deverbal nominals that differed in the presence
of the –va  rešenje/rešavanje [eng. solution  

primenjena psihologija, str. 139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?
151
–nje-
rotiranje/rotacija [eng. rotation]). Another aim of this research was to
answer which of the two perspectives in the morpho–lexical processing would be
the most appropriate for the explanation of this phenomenon. The data analysis
of all three experiments suggests that there is no effect of morphological charac-
teristics in the cognitive processing of deverbal nominals in the Serbian language.
   
well as the distributed morphology perspective from the theoretical linguistics.
Semantic and syntactic complexity of deverbal nominals drew attention of a
number of language scientists who dealt with both theoretical and empirical re-


-


empirical studies were interested only in the syntactic and semantic effects on
cognitive processing of deverbal nominals. Almost all of these studies suggested
identical results that the syntactic and semantic complexity of deverbal nominals
         


-
acteristics of deverbal nominals on their processing. Although theoretical studies
in Serbian show that there was a certain morphological complexity of deverbal
-
ogy itself was not the subject of empirical research interested in the processing

a discussion that has been going on for years in the morphological research cir-
cle is whether morphemes themselves affect processing time of the whole word

-



-

    -
ences in the processing of two types of deverbal nominals that differ because the

–nje

-

primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
152
single morphemes characteristics in the processing of deverbal nominals. One of

that there are no differences in the processing time of derived nouns with zero–
–nje). This could
be one of the most prominent pieces of evidence that a–morphous perspective
 

processing of deverbal nominals (the one that is highly controlled in this study).

-
ferences in the processing of process and result nominals that differ in the pres-
 –va. Those results also support the a–morphous perspective in

      




-
 -
-

-


Bybee
Conclusion

processing of deverbal nominals in Serbian is not affected by the morphological

previous studies that highlight the importance of semantic and syntactic differ-

the morphological features of deverbal nominals are not of crucial importance for
the appearance of differences in the processing time of process and result dever-



therefore provoking the traditional view in the morpho–lexical processing.
primenjena psihologija, str. 139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?
153
Acknowledgements
      th  
  th International Morphology Meeting (Buda-
th
-
per.
References

(Part I: The Nominalization Puzzle). Language and Linguistics Compass, 4

A–morphous morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. 
Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statis-
tics Using R. United States: Cambridge University Press.
Analyzing Reaction Times. International Journal
of Psychological Research, 3
    Bra-
zilian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11,  

  Regression Diagnostics. Identifying
-
ability and Mathematical Statistics.
The
Mental Lexicon, 6
    Morphology: A Study of the Relation Between Meaning and
Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 
The cognitive pro-
cessing od process and result deverbal nominals in English and Serbian. Paper
th
-
     Primenjena psihologija, 12

      Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hi-
erarchical Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/

Argument Structure. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Proceedings of NELS 20 (pp. 
primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
154
-
MITWPL 30: Papers at the Interface (pp.

    
Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 17,
Kognitivna psihologija [Cognitive psychology]. 

         -
     Linguistic Inquiry, 30, 

      The Serbian web corpus srWaC 
     

          
graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Meth-
ods, 
      
Slavic and Romance languages. Linguistik Online, 77

 On the processing of thematic features in deverbal nomi-
nals  

Memory and Cog-
nition, 5
-
tion in lexical decision. PLoS ONE, 12doi:10.1371/journal.

-
sible data science in language research. Cognitive Linguistics, 27

Cross–linguistic Investigations of Nominalization Patterns. Amster-
dam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    
 Word knowledge and word usage: A cross–disciplinary guide to the
mental lexicon
R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing.
        http://
www.R–project.org/
Cognitive processing of result and process nominals in English
and Serbian -
versity of Novi Sad.
primenjena psihologija, str. 139-156
DO MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECT THE COGNITIVE PROCESSING OF DEVERBAL NOMINALS IN SERBIAN?
155

of Research. Psychological Bulletin, 124  doi:10.1037//0033–

        
CogSci,
Theoretical and empirical vi-
dimus of the simple event nominals (non) existence in Serbian. Paper presented
 th    

         -
cy effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A 

        
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 638–647. doi:10.1016/

itsadug: Interpreting Time
Series and Autocorrelated Data Using GAMMs. R package version 1.0.1.
   Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R. United
States: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
-
hood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. Journal of the
Royal Statistical Society, 73
The structure of the Serbian noun phrase (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). United States: University of Texas at Austin.
primenjena psihologija 2019/2
Isidora Gatarić, Sanja Srdanović, and Anja Šarić
156
DA LI MORFOLOŠKE ODLIKE UTIČU NA
KOGNITIVNU OBRADU DEVERBALNIH
IMENICA U SRPSKOM JEZIKU?
Cilj ove studije bio je da se ispita da li različite morfološke ka-
rakteristike srpskih deverbalnih imenica utiču na njihovu leksi-
čku obradu. Prema morfološkim razlikama, postoje tri podvrste
procesnih i rezultativnih deverbalnih imenica u srpskom jeziku:
(i) rezultativne imenice koje se završavaju nultim suksom, dok
se procesne imenice završavaju deverbalnim suksom –nje (npr.
žubor/žuborenje [eng. burble]); (ii) rezultativne imenice se razli-
kuju od procesnih u prisustvu inksa –va (npr. rešenje/rešavanje
[eng. solution]); (iii) procesne imenice se završavaju deverbalnim
suksom –nje, dok se rezultativne završavaju nekim drugim deri-
vacionim suksima (npr. rotiranje/rotacija [eng. rotation]). Finalni
rezultati tri eksperimenta sa zadatkom čitanja slobodnim tempom
pokazuju da različite morfološke odlike ne utiču na obradu de-
verbalnih imenica, što podržava a–morfni pristup morfo–leksičkoj
obradi, kao i distributivno–morfološku perspektivu iz oblasti teo-
rijske lingvistike.
Ključne reči: a–morfna morfologija, derivirane imenice, dever-
balna nominalizacija, distributivna morfologija, morfo–leksička
obrada
Isidora Gatarić
Računarstvo u
društvenim naukama,
Univerzitet u
Beogradu
Sanja Srdanović
Anja Šarić
Odsek za lingvistiku,
Goethe Univerzitet u
Frankfurtu
... However, the presented division of deverbal nominals seems to hold for English only. Previous empirical and theoretical studies dealing with deverbal nominals in Serbian suggest that only a two-way distinction can be made with respect to their behavior in this language: (Gatarić et al., 2019;Radman, 2015;Srdanović et al., 2018). In other words, simple event nominals do not form a separate category in Serbian, as they do not satisfy any conditions for a category or sub-category formation in this language. ...
... An empirical study that followed Radman's (2015) was designed to look into the role of morphology in Serbian. The aim of that study was to examine the morphological effects on the cognitive processing of process and result deverbal nominals (Gatarić et al., 2019). The results of this study suggested that when syntactic effects were strictly controlled, there were no differences in the cognitive processing of deverbal nominals that differ in certain morphological characteristics. ...
... Having proved that in Serbian (Experiment 1) there are only two different types of deverbal nominals -process and result (Srdanović et al., 2018), a comparable study in English was needed (Experiment 2), where stimuli would consist of the same two types of deverbal nominalsprocess and result. Finally, as all previous studies in Serbian were conducted on small sets of stimuli, and without controlling for syntactic effects (Radman, 2015;Gatarić et al., 2019), a new study was needed in order to obtain more reliable results. ...
Article
Full-text available
Process and result deverbal nominals are two types of nouns derived from related verbs. These two types of deverbal nominals exhibit different behavior in a number of aspects. The aim of this study was to test the differences of process and result deverbal nominals, in both Serbian and English, with respect to their cognitive processing. Two self-paced reading experiments were conducted. Experiment 1 was conducted in Serbian, with target constructions, process and result deverbal nominals (e.g., drhtaj/drhtanje [EN trembling]), embedded in the sentence contexts, whereas Experiment 2 dealt with the equivalent constructions in English. Data were analyzed with the Generalized Additive Mixed Models-GAMMs (Wood, 2006, 2011) measuring reading times (RTs) at the word level (deverbal nouns) and the sentence level (the whole sentence, including the deverbal nominal) in both languages. The final results in general suggested that result deverbal nominals were processed faster than process deverbal nominals. It was assumed that these differences were obtained because process deverbal nominals are syntactically more complex than result deverbal nominals.
Article
Full-text available
The primary aim of this research has been to investigate whether the suffix ambiguity affects the lexical processing of derived nouns in Serbian. Consequently, in the Experiment 1, the derived nouns were presented isolated to participants in the visual lexical decision task. Bearing in mind that the sentence context was important for the lexical processing, the Experiment 2 was designed as an eye-movement study with the sentences (with derived nouns from the Experiment 1) as stimuli. To the best of our knowledge, the similar experimental study was not performed before in the Serbian language, and therefore this study represents the first attempt to investigate this phenomenon in Serbian. An identical statistical analysis was used to analyze the data collected in both experiments, the Generalized Additive Mixed Models (GAMMs). The final results of all GAMMs analyses suggested that the suffixal ambiguity did not affect the lexical processing of derived nouns in Serbian, regardless of whether they were displayed isolated or in the sentence context. The observed results supported the a-morphous perspective in the morpho-lexical processing, as well as the distributed morphology insights from the theoretical linguistics.
Article
Full-text available
In this study we present a novel set of discrimination-based indicators of language processing derived from Naive Discriminative Learning (ndl) theory. We compare the effectiveness of these new measures with classical lexical-distributional measures—in particular, frequency counts and form similarity measures—to predict lexical decision latencies when a complete morphological segmentation of masked primes is or is not possible. Data derive from a re-analysis of a large subset of decision latencies from the English Lexicon Project, as well as from the results of two new masked priming studies. Results demonstrate the superiority of discrimination-based predictors over lexical-distributional predictors alone, across both the simple and primed lexical decision tasks. Comparable priming after masked corner and cornea type primes, across two experiments, fails to support early obligatory segmentation into morphemes as predicted by the morpho-orthographic account of reading. Results fit well with ndl theory, which, in conformity with Word and Paradigm theory, rejects the morpheme as a relevant unit of analysis. Furthermore, results indicate that readers with greater spelling proficiency and larger vocabularies make better use of orthographic priors and handle lexical competition more efficiently.
Article
Full-text available
The paper investigates how speakers understand constructions with deverbal nominals, i.e. nominals such as destruction that are morphologically related to verbs. Specifically, given the expression the enemy's destruction, how do the speakers decide whether the possessive argument is the entity that initiates the action (agent) or the entity that is causally affected by the event (patient)? The results of an experimental study show that this choice is dependent on the lexical semantics of the nominal. The theoretical implication is that deverbal nominals are similar to verbs in that they have argument structure. By studying comprehension of deverbal nominals the current study extends the scope of previous experimental work on lexical semantics that has been primarily concerned with verbs.
Article
In this paper we will investigate the nature of deverbal nominals across languages. Deverbal nouns are typically classified according to their word-formation model: affixation and conver-sion. Our study will compare the word formation of deverbal nominals in Slavic (Croatian, Slovenian and Polish) and Romance languages (Italian, French and Spanish) in order to show (i) that affixation corresponds to a specific mode of morphological operations and (ii) that the differences and similarities between deverbal nominals of these two language families follow from the properties of the base verbs. Furthermore, our analysis will try to shed some light on the distinction between nouns and verbs. The paper comprises three major thematic parts. The first part briefly reviews the basic notions and theoretical assumptions of Generative Grammar regarding word formation. We have especially tried to explain those notions that we draw from Distributed Morphology. This part further exposes the theoretical framework that is used in this paper. In the second part, deverbal nominals in Slavic languages are analysed and de-scribed. We primarily investigate the Slavic languages, since in these languages morphology plays a larger role in the construction of deverbal nouns. The third part contains an investiga-tion of the phrasal structure of nominalizations across the Romance languages. We close the work with a general conclusion about the behaviour of deverbal nouns in these two groups of languages. We concentrate mainly on the differences between the phrasal architecture of nom-inalizations and correspondent verbal constructions.
Article
Over the past 10 years, Cognitive Linguistics has taken a Quantitative Turn. Yet, concerns have been raised that this preoccupation with quantification and modelling may not bring us any closer to understanding how language works. We show that this objection is unfounded, especially if we rely on modelling techniques based on biologically and psychologically plausible learning algorithms. These make it possible to take a quantitative approach, while generating and testing specific hypotheses that will advance our understanding of how knowledge of language emerges from exposure to usage.
Article
Summary. Recent work by Reiss and Ogden provides a theoretical basis for sometimes preferring restricted maximum likelihood (REML) to generalized cross-validation (GCV) for smoothing parameter selection in semiparametric regression. However, existing REML or marginal likelihood (ML) based methods for semiparametric generalized linear models (GLMs) use iterative REML or ML estimation of the smoothing parameters of working linear approximations to the GLM. Such indirect schemes need not converge and fail to do so in a non-negligible proportion of practical analyses. By contrast, very reliable prediction error criteria smoothing parameter selection methods are available, based on direct optimization of GCV, or related criteria, for the GLM itself. Since such methods directly optimize properly defined functions of the smoothing parameters, they have much more reliable convergence properties. The paper develops the first such method for REML or ML estimation of smoothing parameters. A Laplace approximation is used to obtain an approximate REML or ML for any GLM, which is suitable for efficient direct optimization. This REML or ML criterion requires that Newton–Raphson iteration, rather than Fisher scoring, be used for GLM fitting, and a computationally stable approach to this is proposed. The REML or ML criterion itself is optimized by a Newton method, with the derivatives required obtained by a mixture of implicit differentiation and direct methods. The method will cope with numerical rank deficiency in the fitted model and in fact provides a slight improvement in numerical robustness on the earlier method of Wood for prediction error criteria based smoothness selection. Simulation results suggest that the new REML and ML methods offer some improvement in mean-square error performance relative to GCV or Akaike's information criterion in most cases, without the small number of severe undersmoothing failures to which Akaike's information criterion and GCV are prone. This is achieved at the same computational cost as GCV or Akaike's information criterion. The new approach also eliminates the convergence failures of previous REML- or ML-based approaches for penalized GLMs and usually has lower computational cost than these alternatives. Example applications are presented in adaptive smoothing, scalar on function regression and generalized additive model selection.
Book
The first edition of this book has established itself as one of the leading references on generalized additive models (GAMs), and the only book on the topic to be introductory in nature with a wealth of practical examples and software implementation. It is self-contained, providing the necessary background in linear models, linear mixed models, and generalized linear models (GLMs), before presenting a balanced treatment of the theory and applications of GAMs and related models. The author bases his approach on a framework of penalized regression splines, and while firmly focused on the practical aspects of GAMs, discussions include fairly full explanations of the theory underlying the methods. Use of R software helps explain the theory and illustrates the practical application of the methodology. Each chapter contains an extensive set of exercises, with solutions in an appendix or in the book’s R data package gamair, to enable use as a course text or for self-study.