Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 534

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Generalisation of regular and irregular morphological patterns

Prasada, Sandeep, Pinker, Steven·1993·Language and Cognitive Processes

Abstract

Both regular inflectional patterns (walk-walked) and irregular ones (swing-swung) can be applied productively to novel words (e.g. wug-wugged; spling -splung). Theories of generative phonology attribute both generalisations to rules; connectionist theories attribute both to analogies in a pattern associator network; hybrid theories attribute regular (fully predictable default) generalisations to a rule and irregular generalisations to a rote memory with pattern-associator properties. In three experiments and three simulations, we observe the process of generalising morphological patterns in humans and two-layer connectionist networks. Replicating Bybee and Moder (1983), we find that people's willingness to generalise from existing irregular verbs to novel ones depends on the global similarity between them (e.g. spling is readily inflectable as splung, but nist is not inflectable as nust). In contrast, generalisability of the regular suffix does not appear to depend on similarity to existing regular verbs Regularly suffixed versions of both common-sounding plip and odd-sounding ploamph were reliably produced and highly rated, and the odd-sounding verbs were not rated as having worse past-tense forms, relative to the naturalness of their stems, than common-sounding ones. In contrast, Rumelhart and McClelland's connectionist past-tense model was found to vary strongly in its tendency to supply both irregular and regular inflections to these novel items as a function of their similarity to forms it was trained on, and for the dissimilar forms, successful regular inflection rarely occurred. We suggest that rule-only theories have trouble explaining patterns of irregular generalisations, whereas single-network theories have trouble explaining regular ones; the computational demands of the two kinds of verbs are different, so a modular system is optimal for handling both simultaneously. Evidence from linguistics and psycholinguistics independently calls for such a hybrid, where irregular pain are stored in a memory system that superimposes phonological forms, fostering generalisation by analogy, and regulars are generated by a default suffix concatenation process capable of operating on any verb, regardless of its sound.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01690969308406948

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 534

Metadata

Authors
Prasada, S., & Pinker, S.
Venue
Language and Cognitive Processes
Published
1993-02
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
1-56
ISSN
  • 0169-0965 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0732
OpenAlex
W1993657100
Cited by
534
References
1
FWCI
132.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Generalisation of regular and irregular morphological patterns. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01690969308406948
The paper
Prasada, S., & Pinker, S. (1993). Generalisation of regular and irregular morphological patterns. Language and Cognitive Processes. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969308406948

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.