The Experts below are selected from a list of 1677 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Eduardo Alves Vasconcelos - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Investigating the South-Cayapó-Panará hypothesis
2017Co-Authors: Eduardo Alves VasconcelosAbstract:Resumo: As análises comparativas existentes entre os registros das línguas Cayapó do sul e Panará (família Jê) foram realizadas por Heelas (1979), Schwartzman (1988), Rodrigues & Dourado (1993), Giraldin (1997, 2000) e Dourado (2004), com o intuito de avaliar a hipótese levantada por Heelas (1979) de que os Cayapó do Sul, povo indígena brasileiro que manteve contato intermitente e conflituoso com as frentes de colonização do Brasil Central entre os séculos XVIII e XIX, considerados extintos nas primeiras décadas do século XX, são os antepassados dos Panará, povo indígena contatado na década de 1960, no norte do Mato Grosso, divisa com o Pará. Em comum, estas comparações não tratam de forma sistemática os itens Cayapó do Sul, julgando a priori a semelhança com os registros do Panará, delegando as discrepâncias encontradas à qualidade dos registros disponíveis. Uma das consequências dessa atribuição de identidade a priori entre os registros do Cayapó do Sul e o Panará é a ausência de comparações com outras línguas da família Jê. Assim, a proposta desta análise é refazer a comparação entre os registros do Cayapó do Sul e registros recentes do Panará, seguindo a seguinte metodologia: análise e sistematização das listas e vocabulários Cayapó do Sul e subsequente interpretação fonológica; revisão da análise fonêmica de Dourado (1990, 2001) feita para o Panará; comparação tanto do Cayapó do Sul quanto do Panará com línguas da família Jê; e, finalmente, propor uma análise comparativa entre os registros Cayapó do Sul e Panará. Sobre a língua falada pelos Cayapó do Sul há somente sete registros: Registro de Batismo de Vila Boa (1782); as listas de palavras coligidas por Emmanuel Pohl (1832) e Auguste de Saint-Hilaire (1848), em 1819, no aldeamento de São José de Mossâmedes; as listas de Dr. Kupfer (1870), Capitão Joaquim Lemos da Silva (1882) e Carl Nehring (1894), coligidas entre os Cayapó do Sul da aldeia próxima à Vila de Santana do Paranaíba (atual município de Paranaíba, no nordeste do Mato Grosso do Sul); e mais uma lista do Triângulo Mineiro, produzida por Alexandre de Souza Barbosa, em 1911, entre um núcleo familiar dos Cayapó do Sul da aldeia da Água Vermelha, às margens do rio Grande. Os registros do Panará são aqueles apresentados por Dourado em sua dissertação de mestrado (1990) e tese de doutorado (2001), mais o corpus obtido em Trabalho de Campo realizado em 2012. Para a análise dos registros Cayapó do Sul, foram utilizados os procedimentos listados por Grannier Rodrigues (1990) em sua análise do Guaraní Antigo e, quando necessário, procedimentos do Método Restitutivo (UMAÑA, 2000). As análises fonológicas seguem os pressupostos do Círculo Linguístico de Praga e, principalmente, seus desenvolvimentos posteriores, como a teoria de traços distintivos defendida por Jakobson, Fant & Halle (1952); também foram utilizados os traços distintivos da Fonologia Gerativa Padrão (CHOMSKY; HALLE, 1968) e, ainda, quando foi identificado ganho explicativo, a proposta de Geometria de Traços de D'Angelis (1998) Absctract: The comparative analysis between the records of the South Cayapó and Panará languages (Jê languages) were performed by Heelas (1979), Schwartzman (1988), Rodrigues & Dourado (1993), Giraldin (1997, 2000), and Dourado (2004), aiming to evaluate the hypothesis raised by Heelas (1979) that Brazilian South Cayapó indigenous people, who maintained intermittent and conflictuous contact with the colonization fronts of central Brazil between the 18th and 19th centuries, and who were considered extinct in the early decades of the 20th century, are the ancestors of the Panará indigenous people contacted in the 1960s, in Northern Mato Grosso, near the border with the state of Pará. In common, these comparisons do not address systematically the South Cayapó items, judging a priori its similarity with the records of Panará, delegating the found discrepancies due to the quality available data. One consequence of this a priori assignment of identity between South Cayapó records and Panará is the absence of comparisons with other languages of the Ge family. Thus, the purpose of this analysis is to re-assess the comparison between South Cayapó records and Panará recent records by adopting the following methodology: analysis and systematization of South Cayapó lists and vocabularies, and subsequent phonological interpretation; revision of Dourado's (1990, 2001) phonemic analysis of Panará, comparing both South Cayapó and Panará with other languages of Ge family; and finally, the proposition of a comparative analysis between South Cayapó and Panará records. There are only seven records of the language spoken by the South Cayapós: the Baptismal Records of the town of Vila Boa (1782); the word lists compiled by Emmanuel Pohl (1832) and Auguste de Saint-Hilaire (1848), in 1819, in the village of São José de Mossâmedes; the word lists compiled by Dr. Kupfer (1870), by Captain Joaquim Lemos da Silva (1882), and by Carl Nehring (1894), collected among the South Cayapó village, near the town of Santana do Paranaíba (current Paranaíba, in Northeastern Mato Grosso do Sul); and another list from the Triângulo Mineiro, produced by Alexandre de Souza Barbosa, in 1911, among a group of South Cayapó families from the village of Água Vermelha, on the banks of the Rio Grande. The Panará records are those presented by Dourado in her MSc. dissertation (1990), and PhD thesis (2001), along with the corpus gathered during fieldwork conducted in 2012. The analysis of the records were performed in accordance with the procedures listed by Grannier Rodrigues (1990) during her Guarani Antigo analysis and, where appropriate, with the procedures of the Restitution Method (UMAÑA, 2000). The phonological analysis followed the assumptions of the Linguistic Circle of Prague, mainly its later developments, such as the theory of distinctive features advocated by Jakobson, Fant & Halle (1952). The distinctive features of Standard Generative Phonology (Chomsky & Halle, 1968) were also used, as well as the geometry of features proposed by D'Angelis (1998) when an explanatory benefit was identified
Eduardo Alves - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Investigating the South-Cayapó-Panará hypothesis
[s.n.], 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo AlvesAbstract:Orientador: Wilmar da Rocha D'AngelisTese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Estudos da LinguagemResumo: As análises comparativas existentes entre os registros das línguas Cayapó do sul e Panará (família Jê) foram realizadas por Heelas (1979), Schwartzman (1988), Rodrigues & Dourado (1993), Giraldin (1997, 2000) e Dourado (2004), com o intuito de avaliar a hipótese levantada por Heelas (1979) de que os Cayapó do Sul, povo indígena brasileiro que manteve contato intermitente e conflituoso com as frentes de colonização do Brasil Central entre os séculos XVIII e XIX, considerados extintos nas primeiras décadas do século XX, são os antepassados dos Panará, povo indígena contatado na década de 1960, no norte do Mato Grosso, divisa com o Pará. Em comum, estas comparações não tratam de forma sistemática os itens Cayapó do Sul, julgando a priori a semelhança com os registros do Panará, delegando as discrepâncias encontradas à qualidade dos registros disponíveis. Uma das consequências dessa atribuição de identidade a priori entre os registros do Cayapó do Sul e o Panará é a ausência de comparações com outras línguas da família Jê. Assim, a proposta desta análise é refazer a comparação entre os registros do Cayapó do Sul e registros recentes do Panará, seguindo a seguinte metodologia: análise e sistematização das listas e vocabulários Cayapó do Sul e subsequente interpretação fonológica; revisão da análise fonêmica de Dourado (1990, 2001) feita para o Panará; comparação tanto do Cayapó do Sul quanto do Panará com línguas da família Jê; e, finalmente, propor uma análise comparativa entre os registros Cayapó do Sul e Panará. Sobre a língua falada pelos Cayapó do Sul há somente sete registros: Registro de Batismo de Vila Boa (1782); as listas de palavras coligidas por Emmanuel Pohl (1832) e Auguste de Saint-Hilaire (1848), em 1819, no aldeamento de São José de Mossâmedes; as listas de Dr. Kupfer (1870), Capitão Joaquim Lemos da Silva (1882) e Carl Nehring (1894), coligidas entre os Cayapó do Sul da aldeia próxima à Vila de Santana do Paranaíba (atual município de Paranaíba, no nordeste do Mato Grosso do Sul); e mais uma lista do Triângulo Mineiro, produzida por Alexandre de Souza Barbosa, em 1911, entre um núcleo familiar dos Cayapó do Sul da aldeia da Água Vermelha, às margens do rio Grande. Os registros do Panará são aqueles apresentados por Dourado em sua dissertação de mestrado (1990) e tese de doutorado (2001), mais o corpus obtido em Trabalho de Campo realizado em 2012. Para a análise dos registros Cayapó do Sul, foram utilizados os procedimentos listados por Grannier Rodrigues (1990) em sua análise do Guaraní Antigo e, quando necessário, procedimentos do Método Restitutivo (UMAÑA, 2000). As análises fonológicas seguem os pressupostos do Círculo Linguístico de Praga e, principalmente, seus desenvolvimentos posteriores, como a teoria de traços distintivos defendida por Jakobson, Fant & Halle (1952); também foram utilizados os traços distintivos da Fonologia Gerativa Padrão (CHOMSKY; HALLE, 1968) e, ainda, quando foi identificado ganho explicativo, a proposta de Geometria de Traços de D'Angelis (1998)Absctract: The comparative analysis between the records of the South Cayapó and Panará languages (Jê languages) were performed by Heelas (1979), Schwartzman (1988), Rodrigues & Dourado (1993), Giraldin (1997, 2000), and Dourado (2004), aiming to evaluate the hypothesis raised by Heelas (1979) that Brazilian South Cayapó indigenous people, who maintained intermittent and conflictuous contact with the colonization fronts of central Brazil between the 18th and 19th centuries, and who were considered extinct in the early decades of the 20th century, are the ancestors of the Panará indigenous people contacted in the 1960s, in Northern Mato Grosso, near the border with the state of Pará. In common, these comparisons do not address systematically the South Cayapó items, judging a priori its similarity with the records of Panará, delegating the found discrepancies due to the quality available data. One consequence of this a priori assignment of identity between South Cayapó records and Panará is the absence of comparisons with other languages of the Ge family. Thus, the purpose of this analysis is to re-assess the comparison between South Cayapó records and Panará recent records by adopting the following methodology: analysis and systematization of South Cayapó lists and vocabularies, and subsequent phonological interpretation; revision of Dourado¿s (1990, 2001) phonemic analysis of Panará, comparing both South Cayapó and Panará with other languages of Ge family; and finally, the proposition of a comparative analysis between South Cayapó and Panará records. There are only seven records of the language spoken by the South Cayapós: the Baptismal Records of the town of Vila Boa (1782); the word lists compiled by Emmanuel Pohl (1832) and Auguste de Saint-Hilaire (1848), in 1819, in the village of São José de Mossâmedes; the word lists compiled by Dr. Kupfer (1870), by Captain Joaquim Lemos da Silva (1882), and by Carl Nehring (1894), collected among the South Cayapó village, near the town of Santana do Paranaíba (current Paranaíba, in Northeastern Mato Grosso do Sul); and another list from the Triângulo Mineiro, produced by Alexandre de Souza Barbosa, in 1911, among a group of South Cayapó families from the village of Água Vermelha, on the banks of the Rio Grande. The Panará records are those presented by Dourado in her MSc. dissertation (1990), and PhD thesis (2001), along with the corpus gathered during fieldwork conducted in 2012. The analysis of the records were performed in accordance with the procedures listed by Grannier Rodrigues (1990) during her Guarani Antigo analysis and, where appropriate, with the procedures of the Restitution Method (UMAÑA, 2000). The phonological analysis followed the assumptions of the Linguistic Circle of Prague, mainly its later developments, such as the theory of distinctive features advocated by Jakobson, Fant & Halle (1952). The distinctive features of Standard Generative Phonology (Chomsky & Halle, 1968) were also used, as well as the geometry of features proposed by D'Angelis (1998) when an explanatory benefit was identifiedDoutoradoLinguisticaDoutor em Linguístic
Rushen Shi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Another Look at the Syllable Structure in First Language Acquisition
2016Co-Authors: Rushen ShiAbstract:Phonological theory on universals can be dated back to Jacobson a few decades ago. In his book Child Language, Aphasia and Phonological Universals, Jacobson (1968) claimed that children learn contrasts, not just individual sounds in acquiring the Phonology of their native languages. He also attempted to predict the order in which sounds are acquired by saying that the first sounds that children acquire are those of maximal contrast. His hypothesis that there is a universal order of acquisition was made through surveying various diary data. With respect to syllable structure acquisition, he believed that children have a universal tendency of CV or CVCV syllables at the early stages of phonological acquisition. Later a new theory developed out of Generative Phonology--Stampe's (1969) "Natural Phonology". In addition to supporting Jacobson's idea of universals, Stampe hypothesized that childre
Yli-jyrä, Anssi Mikael - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Forgotten Islands of Regularity in Phonology
MTA Research Institute for Linguistics, 2019Co-Authors: Yli-jyrä, Anssi MikaelAbstract:Giving birth to Finite State Phonology is classically attributed to Johnson (1972), and Kaplan and Kay (1994). However, there is an ear- lier discovery that was very close to this achievement. In 1965, Hennie presented a very general sufficient condition for regularity of Turing machines. Although this discovery happened chronologically before Generative Phonology (Chomsky and Halle, 1968), it is a mystery why its relevance has not been realized until recently (Yli-Jyrä, 2017). The antique work of Hennie provides enough generality to advance even today’s frontier of finite-state Phonology. First, it lets us construct a finite-state transducer from any grammar implemented by a tightly bounded one- tape Turing machine. If the machine runs in o(n log n), the construction is possible, and this case is reasonably decidable. Second, it can be used to model the regularity in context-sensitive derivations. For example, the suffixation in hunspell dictionaries (Németh et al., 2004) corresponds to time-bounded two-way computations performed by a Hennie machine. Thirdly, it challenges us to look for new forgotten islands of regularity where Hennie’s condition does not necessarily hold
-
The Power of Constraint Grammars Revisited
'Linkoping University Electronic Press', 2017Co-Authors: Yli-jyrä, Anssi MikaelAbstract:Sequential Constraint Grammar (SCG) (Karlsson, 1990) and its extensions have lacked clear connections to formal language theory. The purpose of this article is to lay a foundation for these connections by simplifying the definition of strings processed by the grammar and by showing that Nonmonotonic SCG is undecidable and that derivations similar to the Generative Phonology exist. The current investigations propose resource bounds that restrict the Generative power of SCG to a subset of context sensitive languages and present a strong finite-state condition for grammars as wholes. We show that a grammar is equivalent to a finite-state transducer if it is implemented with a Turing machine that runs in o(n log n) time. This condition opens new finite-state hypotheses and avenues for deeper analysis of SCG instances in the way inspired by Finite-State Phonology
Stephan A L Frisch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
phonological constraint induction in a connectionist network learning ocp place constraints from data
Language Sciences, 2013Co-Authors: John Alderete, Paul F Tupper, Stephan A L FrischAbstract:Abstract A significant problem in computational language learning is that of inferring the content of well-formedness constraints from input data. In this article, we approach the constraint induction problem as the gradual adjustment of subsymbolic constraints in a connectionist network. In particular, we develop a multi-layer feed-forward network that learns the constraints that underlie restrictions against homorganic consonants, or ‘OCP-Place constraints’, in Arabic roots. The network is trained using standard learning procedures in connection science with a representative sample of Arabic roots. The trained network is shown to classify actual and novel Arabic roots in ways that are qualitatively parallel to a psycholinguistic study of Arabic. Statistical analysis of network behavior also shows that activations of nodes in the hidden layer correspond well with violations of symbolic well-formedness constraints familiar from Generative Phonology. In sum, it is shown that at least some constraints operative in phonotactic grammar can be learned from data and do not have to be stipulated in advance of learning.