(function(doc, html, url) { var widget = doc.createElement("div"); widget.innerHTML = html; var script = doc.currentScript; // e = a.currentScript; if (!script) { var scripts = doc.scripts; for (var i = 0; i < scripts.length; ++i) { script = scripts[i]; if (script.src && script.src.indexOf(url) != -1) break; } } script.parentElement.replaceChild(widget, script); }(document, '

Are specific generative and emergentist approaches to language attrition necessarily incompatible?

What is it about?

When we look at the detailed learning and processing mechanisms proposed by specific generative and emergentist approaches to language attrition, we see that they are not fundamentally incompatible. In particular, an explanation based on the concepts of the Competition Model along with details provided by the theory of item-based construction learning provides an account that is more comprehensive then current feature assembly models, although these two accounts are not really incompatible.

Why is it important?

It is important to consider whether certain generative accounts can be better expressed in terms of dynamic learning and processing models such as the Competition Model.

Read more on Kudos…
The following have contributed to this page:
Brian MacWhinney
' ,"url"));