What Syntactic Structures block Dependencies in RNN Language Models?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) trained on a language modeling task have been shown to acquire a number of non-local grammatical dependencies with some success. Here, we provide new evidence that RNN language models are sensitive to hierarchical syntactic structure by investigating the filler--gap dependency and constraints on it, known as syntactic islands. Previous work is inconclusive about whether RNNs learn to attenuate their expectations for gaps in island constructions in particular or in any sufficiently complex syntactic environment. This paper gives new evidence for the former by providing control studies that have been lacking so far. We demonstrate that two state-of-the-art RNN models are are able to maintain the filler--gap dependency through unbounded sentential embeddings and are also sensitive to the hierarchical relationship between the filler and the gap. Next, we demonstrate that the models are able to maintain possessive pronoun gender expectations through island constructions---this control case rules out the possibility that island constructions block all information flow in these networks. We also evaluate three untested islands constraints: coordination islands, left branch islands, and sentential subject islands. Models are able to learn left branch islands and learn coordination islands gradiently, but fail to learn sentential subject islands. Through these controls and new tests, we provide evidence that model behavior is due to finer-grained expectations than gross syntactic complexity, but also that the models are conspicuously un-humanlike in some of their performance characteristics.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 24 May 2019.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 0; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 2.
5 papers.
- 2021Accounting for Agreement Phenomena in Sentence Comprehension with Transformer Language Models: Effects of Similarity-based Interference on Surprisal and Attentioncited by 26
- 2024Incremental Comprehension of Garden-Path Sentences by Large Language Models: Semantic Interpretation, Syntactic Re-Analysis, and Attentioncited by 10
- 2025Large Language Models as Proxies for Theories of Human Linguistic Cognitioncited by 10
- 2021Can RNNs learn Recursive Nested Subject-Verb Agreements?cited by 9
- 2025Language Models Largely Exhibit Human-like Constituent Ordering Preferencescited by 1
- 2025Large Language Models as Proxies for Theories of Human Linguistic Cognition11 Feb 2025
- 2025Language Models Largely Exhibit Human-like Constituent Ordering Preferences8 Feb 2025
- 2024Incremental Comprehension of Garden-Path Sentences by Large Language Models: Semantic Interpretation, Syntactic Re-Analysis, and Attention25 May 2024
- 2021Accounting for Agreement Phenomena in Sentence Comprehension with Transformer Language Models: Effects of Similarity-based Interference on Surprisal and Attention26 Apr 2021
- 2021Can RNNs learn Recursive Nested Subject-Verb Agreements?6 Jan 2021