- Oxford Handbooks in Linguistics
- List of Abbreviations
- The Contributors
- Compositionality: Its Historic Context
- Composition A Lity In Montague Grammar
- The case for compositionality
- Compositionality Problems and how to Solve Them
- Direct Compositionality
- Semantic Monadicity with Conceptual Polyadicity
- Holism And Compositionality.
- Composition Ality, Flexibility, And Context Dependence
- Compositionality in Kaplan Style Semantics
- Formalizing the relationship between meaning and syntax
- Compositionality and The Context Principle
- Compositionality In Discourse From A Logical Perspective
- Lexical Decomposition In Grammar
- Lexical Decomposition in Modern Syntactic Theory
- Syntax in the Atom
- Co-composition Ality in Grammar
- Typicality and Composition a Lity: the Logic of Combining Vague Concepts
- Emergency!!!! Challenges to a Compositional Understanding of Noun–noun Combinations
- Can Prototype Representations Support Composition And Decomposition?
- Regaining Composure: A Defence Of Prototype Compositionality.
- Simple Heuristics For Concept Combination
- Compositionality and Beyond: Embodied Meaning in Language and Protolanguage
- Compositionality and Linguistic Evolution
- Communication And The complexity of semantics
- Prototypes and their Composition from an Evolutionary Point of View
- Connectionism, Dynamical Cognition, and Non-Classical Compositional Representation
- The Dual-Mechanism Debate
- Compositionality and Biologically Plausible Models
- Neuronal Assembly Models of Compositionality
- Non-Symbolic Compositional Representation and Its Neuronal Foundation: To wards An Emulative Semantics
- The Processing Consequences of Compositionality
Abstract and Keywords
The symbolic view of cognitive processing assumes that complex word forms are structurally composed out of component parts by application of a mental rule that combines components displaying the right abstract features. An anti-symbolic view is, in contrast, expressed in connectionism, a branch of the cognitive sciences where human behavior is simulated in artificial network models. Based on modeling data, such connectionist approaches deny that regular inflection is based on a compositional mental operation which combines a verbal stem and an affix. Instead, regular and irregular inflected forms are stored just as simple words in an associative network structure. Hence, in representation and processing, inflected forms are structurally non-compositional. The potential interfering factors are controlled for, since regular and irregular inflected forms share important properties: they comprise only a word, have the same categorical status in grammar, and realize the same morphosyntactic features.
Martina Penke is Professor of Psycholinguistics at the University of Cologne. She obtained her doctoral degree in linguistics at the University of Düsseldorf and has held positions at the Universities of Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Konstanz, and Ghent. Her research focuses on phonology, morphology, and syntax in normal/impaired language acquisition, language disorders, and language processing as well as on issues regarding the mental/neural representation of language. She has coordinated and is involved in several research projects.
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.