This site has been permanently archived. This is a static copy provided by the University of Southampton.
--- abstract: |+2 In this paper I attempt to lay the groundwork for an algorithm that measures sentence competency. Heretofore, competency of sentences was determined by interviewing speakers of the language. The data compiled forms the basis for grammatical rules that establish the generative grammar of a language. However, the generative grammar, once established, does not filter out all incompetent sentences. Chomsky has noted that there are many sentences that are grammatical but do not satisfy the notion of competency and, similarly, many non-grammatical constructions that do. I propose that generative grammar constructions as well as formal theory frameworks such as Transformational Grammar, Minimalist Theory, and Government and Binding do not represent the most irreducible component of a language that determines sentence competency. I propose a Mathematical Theory governing word order typology that explains not only the established generative grammar rules of a language but, also, lays the groundwork for understanding sentence competency in terms of irreducible components that has not been accounted for in previous formal theories. I have done so by relying on a mathematical analysis of word frequency relationships based upon large, representative corpuses that represents a more basic component of sentence construction overlooked by current text processing and artificial intelligence parsing systems and unaccounted for by the generative grammar rules of a language. altloc: [] chapter: ~ commentary: ~ commref: ~ confdates: ~ conference: ~ confloc: ~ contact_email: ~ creators_id: [] creators_name: - family: Stepak given: Asa honourific: '' lineage: '' date: 2003 date_type: published datestamp: 2003-04-15 department: ~ dir: disk0/00/00/28/74 edit_lock_since: ~ edit_lock_until: ~ edit_lock_user: ~ editors_id: [] editors_name: [] eprint_status: archive eprintid: 2874 fileinfo: /style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png;/2874/1/Paper2WordOrderTypology.pdf full_text_status: public importid: ~ institution: ~ isbn: ~ ispublished: unpub issn: ~ item_issues_comment: [] item_issues_count: 0 item_issues_description: [] item_issues_id: [] item_issues_reported_by: [] item_issues_resolved_by: [] item_issues_status: [] item_issues_timestamp: [] item_issues_type: [] keywords: 'Information Theory, Word Order, Corpus, Iconic, Cognitive Linguistics, Cognitive Psychology, Coding, Neural Lingistics ' lastmod: 2011-03-11 08:55:15 latitude: ~ longitude: ~ metadata_visibility: show note: ~ number: ~ pagerange: ~ pubdom: FALSE publication: ~ publisher: ~ refereed: FALSE referencetext: |+ 1. Nowak M 2002 Computational and Evolutionary Aspects of Language. Nature Vol 417:611-617 2. Harris Z, 1988 Language and Information. New York, Columbia University Press 3. Roberts A. Hood 1965 A Statistical Linguistic Analysis of American English. Netherlands, Mouton and Co. 4. Stepak, A. 2002 Rationalism versus Empiricism: A New Perspective. A work in progress. (filed in the copyright office, Washington D.C.) 5. Stepak, A 2002 Oral Metaphor Construct. In Proceedings SSGRR Summer 2002, http://cogprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/00002294/ 6. Stepak, A 2003 Oral Metaphor Construct: An Information Theory and Cognitive Perspective. A work in progress. (filed in the copyright office, Washington D.C.) 7. Johansson S, Hofland K 1989 Frequency Analysis of English Vocabulary and Grammar Based Upon the LOB corpus, Vol.1&2, Oxford, Clarendon Press 8. Langacker R, 2002 The Cognitive Basis of Grammar, pp 14-15. Berlin, New York, Mouton de Gruyter relation_type: [] relation_uri: [] reportno: ~ rev_number: 12 series: ~ source: ~ status_changed: 2007-09-12 16:47:16 subjects: - neuro-ling - ling-comput - cog-psy succeeds: ~ suggestions: ~ sword_depositor: ~ sword_slug: ~ thesistype: ~ title: A Proposed Mathematical Theory Explaining Word Order Typology type: other userid: 3212 volume: ~