pith. machine review for the scientific record.
sign in

arxiv: 1509.04393 · v1 · pith:5AJZQ6XBnew · submitted 2015-09-15 · 💻 cs.CL

Dependency length minimization: Puzzles and Promises

classification 💻 cs.CL
keywords dependencylanguagelengthlanguagesminimizationnaturalrandomaddition
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

In the recent issue of PNAS, Futrell et al. claims that their study of 37 languages gives the first large scale cross-language evidence for Dependency Length Minimization, which is an overstatement that ignores similar previous researches. In addition,this study seems to pay no attention to factors like the uniformity of genres,which weakens the validity of the argument that DLM is universal. Another problem is that this study sets the baseline random language as projective, which fails to truly uncover the difference between natural language and random language, since projectivity is an important feature of many natural languages. Finally, the paper contends an "apparent relationship between head finality and dependency length" despite the lack of an explicit statistical comparison, which renders this conclusion rather hasty and improper.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.