Cognitive Computation

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 217–229 | Cite as

First Words Learning: A Cortical Model

  • Alessio Plebe
  • Marco Mazzone
  • Vivian De la Cruz


Humans come to recognize an infinite variety of natural and man-made objects in their lifetime and make use of sounds to identify and categorize them. How does this lifelong learning process begin? Many hypotheses have been proposed to explain the learning of first words with some emerging from the particular characteristics observed in child development. One is the peculiar trend in the speed with which words are learned, which have been referred to in the literature as “fast mapping”. We present a neural network model trained in stages that parallel developmental ones and that simulates cortical processes of self-organization during an early crucial stage of first word learning. This is done by taking into account strictly visual and acoustic perceptions only. The results obtained show evidence of the emergence in the artificial maps used in the model, of cortical functions similar to those found in the biological correlates in the brain. Evidence of non-catastrophic fast mapping based on the quantity of objects and labels gradually learned by the model is also found. We interpret these results as meaning that early stages of first word learning may be explained by strictly perceptual learning processes, coupled with cortical processes of self-organization and of fast mapping. Specialized word-learning mechanisms thus need not be invoked, at least not at an early word-learning stage.


Cortical model Lexical categorization Self-organization Words learning 


  1. 1.
    Bednar JA. Learning to see: genetic and environmental influences on visual development. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin, tech Report AI-TR-02-294 2002.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Belin P, Zatorre RJ, Ahad P. Human temporal-lobe response to vocal sounds. Cogn Brain Res. 2002;13:17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biederman I. Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. Psychol Rev. 1987;94:115–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Black AW, Taylor PA. The festival speech synthesis system: System documentation. Tech Rep HCRC/TR-83, Human Communcation Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh 1997.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Booth AE, Waxman SR. Word learning is smart: evidence that conceptual information affects preschoolers’ extension of novel words. Cognition. 2002;84:B11–B22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brewer AA, Liu J, Wade AR, Wandell BA. Visual field maps and stimulus selectivity in human ventral occipital cortex. Nat Neurosci. 2005;8:1102–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carey S. The child as word learner. In: Halle M, Bresnan J, Miller G, editors. Linguistic theory and psychological reality. Cambridge: MIT Press;1978. pp. 264–93.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carey S, Spelke E. Science and core knowledge. J Philos Sci. 1996;63:515–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dannemiller JL. A test of color constancy in 9-and 20-weeks-old human infants following simulated illuminant changes. Dev Psychol. 1989;25:171–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dickinson DK. First impressions: children’s knowledge of words gained from a single exposure. Appl Psycholinguist. 1984;5:359–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Diesendruck G, Bloom P. How specific is the shape bias?. Child Dev. 2003;74:168–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eimas PD, Quinn PC. Studies on the formation of perceptually based basic-level categories in young infants. Child Dev. 1994;3:903–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Escabi MA, Read HL. Representation of spectrotemporal sound information in the ascending auditory pathway. Biol Cybern. 2003;89:350–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ganger J, Brent MR. Reexamining the vocabulary spurt. Dev Psychol. 2004;40:621–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gershkoff-Stowe L, Smith LB. Shape and the first hundred nouns. Child Dev. 2004;75:1098–114.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gopnik A, Nazzi T. Words, kinds, and causal powers: a theory theory perspective on early naming and categorization. In: Rakison DH, editors. Early category and concept development. Oxford: Oxford University Press;2003. pp. 303–29.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grill-Spector K, Kourtzi Z, Kanwisher N. The lateral occipital complex and its role in object recognition. Vision Res. 2001;41:1409–422.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hebb DO. The organization of behavior. New York: Wiley;1949. Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kanwisher N. The ventral visual object pathway in humans: evidence from fMRI. In: Chalupa L, Werner J, editors. The visual neurosciences. Cambridge: MIT Press;2003. Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kemler Nelson DG, Frankenfield A, Morris C, Blair E. Young children’s use of functional information to categorize artifacts: three factors that matter. Cognition. 2000;77:133–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kohonen T. Self-organizing formation of topologically correct feature maps. Biol Cybern. 1982;43:59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kohonen T. Self-organizing maps. Berlin: Springer;1995.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kripke SA. Naming and necessity. In: Davidson D, Harman GH, editors. Semantics of natural language. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company;1972. pp. 253–355.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Landau B, Smith LB, Jones S. The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cogn Dev. 1988;3:299–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Malach R, Reppas JB, Benson RR, Kwong KK, Jiang H, Kennedy WA, Ledden PJ, Brady TJ, Rosen BR, Tootell RB. Object-related activity revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging in human occipital cortex. Procee Nat Acad Sci USA. 1995;92:8135–139.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mandler JM. The foundations of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press;2004. Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Markson L, Bloom P. Evidence against a dedicated system for word learning in children. Nature. 1997;385:813–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mazzone M, De la Cruz V, Plebe A. Una simulazione biologicamente orientata dell’apprendimento di aggettivi: tra categorizzazione e concettualizzazione. Sist Intelligenti. 2008;20:293–305.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Michotte A. La Perception de la causalité. Editions de l’Institut supérieur de Philosophie, Louvain, english translation by TR Miles, E Miles, Methuen, London 1963;1946.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Murphy GL, Medin DL. The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychol Rev. 1985;92:289–316.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nayar S, Murase H. Visual learning and recognition of 3-d object by appearance. Int J Comput Vis. 1995;14:5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nazzi T, Bertoncini J. Before and after the vocabulary spurt: two modes of word acquisition?. Dev Sci. 2003;6:136–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Plebe A. Learning visual invariance. In: Verleysen M, editors. ESANN 2006—14th European Symposium on Artificial Neural Networks. Evere: d-side Publications;2003. pp. 71–6.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Plebe A. A model of angle selectivity development in visual area V2. Neurocomputing. 2007;70:2060–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Plebe A. The ventral visual path: moving beyond V1 with computational models. In: Portocello TA, Velloti RB (eds) Visual cortex: new research. New York: Nova Science;2008. pp. 97–160.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Plebe A, Domenella RG. Early development of visual recognition. BioSystems. 2006;86:63–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Plebe A, Domenella RG. Object recognition by artificial cortical maps. Neural Netw. 2007;20:763–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Plebe A, De la Cruz V, Mazzone M. Synthetic learners of objects and names. In: Demiris Y, Scassellati B, Mareschal D, editors. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Development and Learning, IEEE;2007. pp. 300–5.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Plebe A, De la Cruz V, Mazzone M. Modeling language emergence by way of working memory. In: Smith ADM, Smith K, Ferrer i Cancho R, editors. The Evolution of Language: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference (EVOLANG7). Singapore: World Scientific Press;1976. pp. 480–1.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pruden SM, Hirsh-Pasek K, Golinkoff RM, Hennon EA. The birth of words: ten-month-olds learn words through perceptual salience. Child Dev. 2006;77:266–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Putnam H. The meaning of “meaning”. In: Putnam H, editors. Mind, language and reality, vol 2. Cambridge: MIT Press;1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Regier T. The emergence of words: attentional learning in form and meaning. Cogn Sci. 2005;29:819–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rogers TT, McClelland JL. Semantic Cognition—a parallel distributed processing approach. Cambridge;MIT Press;2006.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Scholl BJ, Tremoulet PD. Perceptual causality and animacy. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000;4:299–309.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Searle JR. Intentionality: an essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;1983. Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sengpiel F, Kind PC. The role of activity in development of the visual system. Current Biol. 2002;12:818–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sirosh J, Miikkulainen R. Topographic receptive fields and patterned lateral interaction in a self-organizing model of the primary visual cortex. Neural Comput. 1997;9:577–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Smith LB. How domain-general processes may create domain-specific biases. In: Bowerman M, Levinson S, editors. Language acquisition and conceptual development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;2001.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Smith LB. Shape: A developmental product. In: Carlson L, VanderZee E, editors. Functional features in language and space. Oxford: Oxford University Press;2005.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Tomasello M. The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press;1999.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tomasello M. Constructing a language: a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press;2003.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Turrigiano GG, Nelson SB. Homeostatic plasticity in the developing nervous system. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004;391:892–6.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Vanduffel W, Tootell RB, Schoups AA, Orban GA. The organization of orientation selectivity throughout the macaque visual cortex. Cereb Cortex. 2002;12:647–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Verkindt C, Bertrand O, Echallier F, Pernier J. Tonotopic organization of the human auditory cortex: N100 topography and multiple dipole model analysis. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1995;96:143–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    von der Malsburg C. Self-organization of orientation sensitive cells in the striate cortex. Kibernetic. 1973;14:85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wallis G, Rolls E. Invariant face and object recognition in the visual system. Prog Neurobiol. 1997;51:167–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Willshaw DJ, von der Malsburg C. How patterned neural connections can be set up by self-organization. Procee Royal Soci London. 1976;B194:431–45.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessio Plebe
    • 1
  • Marco Mazzone
    • 2
  • Vivian De la Cruz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cognitive ScienceMessinaItaly
  2. 2.Laboratory of Cognitive ScienceCataniaItaly

Personalised recommendations