1. Simulating the Shift Towards Semantic Gender in
Dutch
A Multi-agent Language Game approach
Roxana R˘adulescu
Promotor: Prof. Dr. Katrien Beuls
Advisor: Dr. Remi van Trijp

2. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Outline
Studying Language
Grammatical Gender in Dutch
Anaphoric Reference Language Game
Experiments
Conclusion
2 / 29

3. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Language
Language – a complex adaptive system
Phylogeny
Glossogeny
Ontogeny
❈✔ ❉❋ ❊❍ ● ■❑ ❏✶ ▲ ❊❑ ▼✪ ◆❑ ❖✞ ❊❑ ❉ ▲ ◗❑ ❘❍ ❙❄ ◆❍ ❖✞ ▲ ❊❑ ❖
● ❘❍ ❚❑ ❖✞ ▼❑ ▲ ▼❑ ❯✥ ❱❍ ▲ ❚❑ ❙
❲❑ ❘❑ ❚❍ ❖✞ ▼❑ ▲ ▼❍ ❯✥ ▲ ▼❍ ❳❨ ● ■❑ ❘❍ ▼❑ ❩ ❘❑ ❙
● ❚❑ ▼❍ ❯❑ ■❑ ❚❍ ❯❑ ❘✥ ❩ ❬❑ ❚❑ ▼❍ ❯❑ ❘
❈✔ ❭✥ ❘❑ ❖✞ ❯❍ ❘❑ ▼❑ ❏❍ ■❑ ▼❑ ▲ ❉❋ ❘❑ ❖✞ ❙ ❚❑ ● ❙
❘❍ ❳❨ ❳❨ ❘❑ ❩ ❏❑ ❙ ❘❑ ● ❘❍ ❩❋ ❏❨ ▲ ❊❑ ▼
Evolution provides prior
learning bias
Learning influences
language change
Emergent universals
effect selection
Figure: Shaping language evolution and change (Kirby and Hurford,
2002)
3 / 29

4. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Evolutionary Linguistics
“The goal of evolutionary linguistics is not to build systems that
can parse or produce English, but to understand the generic forces
and mechanisms that give rise to these capabilities.”
– Steels (2003)
4 / 29

5. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Language Games
sensorimotor
systems
meaning
situation
model
goal
conceptualization
production
situation
utterance
reference
sensorimotor
systems
meaning
action
situation
model
interpretation
parsing
reference
speaker listener
Figure: The semiotic cycle (Beuls et al., 2012)
5 / 29

6. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Grammatical Gender in Dutch
Nominal gender
common (‘de’)
neuter (‘het’)
Pronominal gender
masculine (‘hij’)
feminine (‘zij’)
neuter (‘het’)
(1) De
The-SG.C
hond
dog-SG.C
achtervolgde
chased
de
the-SG.C
kat,
cat-SG.C,
maar
but
hij
he-SG.M
kon
could
haar
her-SG.F
niet
not
vangen.
catch.
‘The dog chased the cat, but he could not catch her.’
6 / 29

7. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Resemanticization
Figure: Individuation Hierarchy (Audring, 2006)
7 / 29

8. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Flemish Dialects
Figure: Map of the main Flemish Dialects (Taeldeman, 2001)
8 / 29

9. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Sneeuw (‘snow’)
Hij is aan het smelten.
Zij is aan het smelten.
Het is aan het smelten.
‘He/she/it is melting.’
9 / 29

10. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Gender competition in Flemish Dialects
Figure: Geographical distribution of pronominal gender referencing ‘snow’
in Southern Dutch (De Vogelaer, 2009).
10 / 29

11. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Anaphoric Reference Language Game
(2) A:
‘A:
Waar
Where
is
is
de
the
tafel?
table?’
B:
‘B:
Ik
I
bracht
took
haar
her
naar buiten.
outside.’
(3) A:
‘A:
Waar
Where
is
is
de
the
tafel?
table?’
B:
‘B:
Ik
I
bracht
took
het
it
naar buiten.
outside.’
A:
‘A:
Haar,
Her,
bedoel
you
je.
mean.’
11 / 29

12. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Anaphoric Reference Language Game
Gender
mapping
Figure: Anaphoric Reference Language Game Script and Mechanisms
12 / 29

13. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Agents’ vocabulary
Semantic space: tangibility – countability – animacy –
ontological category
tag ?meaning-1541
meaning
root
(== (dog ?ref-1464))
tag ?form-tag-1464
form
args
sem-cat
footprints
?word-hond-10
→ ?meaning-1541
(?ref-1464)
((sem-class identifier)
(obj-type concrete)
(ontological-cat animal)
(animacy +) (countability +))
(==1 dog-lex lex)
syn-cat
footprints
dog-lex (lex hond m 1 0)
((:label . lex) (:cxn-string . "hond") (:gender . m) (:match . 1)
(:mismatch . 0))
root
(==
(string ?word-hond-10
"hond"))
?word-hond-10
→ ?form-tag-1464
((lex-class noun)
(gender m))
(==1 dog-lex lex)
sem syn
Figure: Lexical construction in FCG for ‘hond’
13 / 29

14. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Language Game Parameter Description
Population turnover: turnover fraction, transmission rate
Gender mapping strategies: random, best representative,
history
Construction similarity:
similarity score =
X · Y
||X|| · ||Y ||
=
n
i=1
Xi × Yi
n
i=1
(Xi )2 ×
n
i=1
(Yi )2
14 / 29

15. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Language Game Description
Competitor selection
random
highest score
probability (τ)
Softmax function:
P(Ck ) =
exp(score(Ck )
τ
)
n
i=1
exp(score(Ci )
τ
)
Scoring strategies: lateral inhibition, success rate, frequency
15 / 29

16. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 1 - Scoring Strategies
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Alignmentsuccess
Games/agent
lateral inhibition
frequency
success-rate
Figure: Setting: best representative, highest score, turnover fraction 0.5,
transmission rate 0.5
16 / 29

17. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 2 - Solving Competition
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Alignmentsuccess
Games/agent
Highest score
Probability (0.1)
Probability (0.3)
Probability (0.5)
Probability (1.0)
Random
Figure: Setting: best representative, lateral inhibition, turnover fraction
0.5, transmission rate 0.5
17 / 29

18. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 3 - Turnover Fraction
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Alignmentsuccess
Games/agent
Turnover 0.2
Turnover 0.5
Turnover 0.8
Turnover 1.0
Figure: Setting: best representative, highest score, lateral inhibition,
transmission rate 0.0
18 / 29

19. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 4 - Transmission Rate
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Alignmentsuccess
Games/agent
Transmission 0.0
Transmission 0.2
Transmission 0.5
Transmission 0.8
Figure: Setting: best representative, highest score, lateral inhibition,
turnover fraction 1.0
19 / 29

20. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 5 - Mapping Gender onto Semantic Space
0
20
40
60
80
100
Best representativeHistory 5 History 50 History 100 Random
Compositionpercentage
Lexicon division by gender
masculine feminine neuter
Figure: Setting: highest score, lateral inhibition, turnover fraction 1.0,
transmission rate 0.0
20 / 29

21. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 5 - Best Representative
0
5
10
15
20
C-C-I C-U-I A-C-I A-U-I C-C-A-A A-C-I-C
Compositionpercentage
Semantic space division by gender - best representative
Tangibility (C/A) - Countability (C/U) - Animacy (A/I) - Ontological category (-/A/C)
masculine feminine neuter
Figure: Setting: highest score, lateral inhibition, turnover fraction 1.0,
transmission rate 0.0
21 / 29

22. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 5 - History
0
5
10
15
20
C-C-I C-U-I A-C-I A-U-I C-C-A-A A-C-I-C
Compositionpercentage
Semantic space division by gender - history (50)
Tangibility (C/A) - Countability (C/U) - Animacy (A/I) - Ontological category (-/A/C)
masculine feminine neuter
Figure: Setting: highest score, lateral inhibition, turnover fraction 1.0,
transmission rate 0.0
22 / 29

23. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 6 - Stochasticity and Word Level Gender Competition
0
20
40
60
80
100
Highest score Probability 0.1
Compositionpercentage
Lexicon division by gender
masculine feminine neuter
Figure: Setting: best representative, lateral inhibition, turnover fraction
1.0, transmission rate 0.0
23 / 29

24. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 6 - Highest Score
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
C-C-I C-U-I A-C-I A-U-I C-C-A-A A-C-I-C
Compositionpercentage
Semantic space division by gender - highest score
Tangibility (C/A) - Countability (C/U) - Animacy (A/I) - Ontological category (-/A/C)
masculine feminine neuter
Figure: Setting: best representative, lateral inhibition, turnover fraction
1.0, transmission rate 0.0
24 / 29

25. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 6 - Probability (τ 0.1)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
C-C-I C-U-I A-C-I A-U-I C-C-A-A A-C-I-C
Compositionpercentage
Semantic space division by gender - probability (0.1)
Tangibility (C/A) - Countability (C/U) - Animacy (A/I) - Ontological category (-/A/C)
masculine feminine neuter
Figure: Setting: best representative, lateral inhibition, turnover fraction
1.0, transmission rate 0.0
25 / 29

26. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 6 - Word Level
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Usagepercentage
Games/agent
brief
masculine feminine neuter unknown
Figure: Highest score
26 / 29

27. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Experiment 6 - Word Level
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Usagepercentage
Games/agent
brief
masculine feminine neuter unknown
Figure: Probability (τ 0.1)
27 / 29

28. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
Conclusion
Evolutionary language game to simulate the shift from a
syntactic gender agreement system to a semantic one
Equip agents with the necessary cognitive abilities for dealing
with gender knowledge loss and mapping the system to the
semantic space
Mapping does not correspond to real world observed results
Extensions: extend semantic space, introduce salient semantic
dimensions, individuation hierarchy, impose constraints to
improve local clustering for each agent
28 / 29

29. Studying Language Grammatical Gender in Dutch Gender Language Game Experiments Conclusion References
References
Audring, J. (2006). Pronominal gender in spoken Dutch. Journal of Germanic Linguistics,
18(02):85–116.
Beuls, K., Van Trijp, R., and Wellens, P. (2012). Diagnostics and repairs in Fluid
Construction Grammar. In Steels, L., editor, Language Grounding in Robots, pages
215–234. Springer, Berlin.
De Vogelaer, G. (2009). Changing pronominal gender in Dutch. In Tsiplakou, S.,
Karyolemou, M., and Pavlou, P., editors, Language Variation–European Perspectives II:
Selected Papers from the 4th International Conference on Language Variation in Europe
(ICLaVE 4), Nicosia, June 2007, volume 2. John Benjamins Publishing.
Kirby, S. and Hurford, J. (2002). The emergence of linguistic structure: An overview of the
iterated learning model. In Cangelosi, A. and Parisi, D., editors, Simulating the Evolution
of Language, pages 121–147. Springer London.
Steels, L. (2003). Evolving grounded communication for robots. Trends in cognitive
sciences, 7(7):308–312.
Taeldeman, J. (2001). De regenboog van de vlaamse dialecten. In De Caluwe, J., Devos,
M., and Taeldeman, J., editors, Het taallandschap in Vlaanderen, pages 49–58. Academia
Press.
29 / 29