SYMBOLIC AND SUBSYMBOLIC COGNITIVE SCIENCE
Reply to Dror & Young on Language-Network

Abstract

Symbolic and subsymbolic cognitive science can be seen as not competing but complementary approaches, serving different roles. Even though they are perhaps based on incompatible foundations, symbolic research can serve as a guideline for developing subsymbolic models, pointing out ways in which a large cognitive process could be broken apart and made tractable with current techniques.

Keywords

References

• Dror, I.E. and Young, M. (1994) The Role of Neural Networks in Cognitive Science: Evolution of Revolution? PSYCOLOQUY 5(79) language-network.6.dror.
• Miikkulainen, R. (1993) Subsymbolic Natural Language Processing: An Integrated Model of Scripts, Lexicon, and Memory. Cambridge MA: MIT.
• Miikkulainen, R. (1994) Precis of: Subsymbolic Natural Language Processing: An Integrated Model of Scripts, Lexicon and Memory. PSYCOLOQUY 5(46) language-network.1.miikkulainen.
• Rumelhart, D.E. and McClelland, J.L. (1986) On learning past tenses of English verbs. In D.E. Rumelhart and J.L. McClelland, editors, Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Volume 2: Psychological and Biological Models, 216-271. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Schank, R.C. and Abelson, R.P. (1977) Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Sejnowski, T.J. and Rosenberg, C.R. (1987) Parallel networks that learn to pronounce English text. Complex Systems, 1:145--168.
• Smolensky, P. (1988) On the Proper Treatment of Connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11:1-74.
• van Gelder, T. (1990) Compositionality: A Connectionist Variation on a Classical Theme. Cognitive Science, 14:355--384.
• Touretzky, D.S., and Hinton, G.E. (1988) A distributed connectionist production system. Cognitive Science, 12:423--466.