Grattan 1

Different Ways in which Past Tense Verbs are Stored in our Lexical
Memory, and how this affects their Learnability
Introduction
When acquiring a language, learners may apply different strategies to categorize
linguistic features in their lexical memory. For example, many researchers believe that the
brain processes morphological components differently for morphemes that do not conform
to the languages linguistic restraints. A well-researched inflectional morpheme that
experiences irregularity is the English past tense. Inflectional morphemes are affixes that
can be added to a word to mark grammatical information (e.g. past tense marker in
laughed). While a vast number of these verb conjugations adhere to a regular rule, there are
small groups of exceptions that behave otherwise. These irregular forms are registered as
exceptions to the suffixation rule, and are argued to be either saved separately than their
rule-governed counterparts, or processed through the same mental network into a
different category. These two theories about how regular and irregular items are stored
and processed are the dual-system and single-system models.
Past Tense Rules and Irregularities
For English past tense construction there is a rule followed by the majority of verbs
stating that past tense forms require the suffix ed added to a stem. While this rule can be
applied to most English verbs, there are approximately 180 exceptions that do not conform
to the suffixation rule and therefore must be generated by other means (Pinker, 1998, 219).
In general, when learning a language extraordinary words may be more memorable due to
their distinctiveness. These idiosyncratic forms, whether phonetic, phonemic, or
morphemic are processed as exceptions in the language system and stored outside the
confines of their regular complements. Studies of tense-aspect morphology claim that a
learners sequence of morphological development understands and produces frequently
used irregular simple past tense forms before the rule-following forms (Housen, 2000, p.
158). Many words that are used in everyday speech do not abide by the suffixation rule. For
instance, go and went, run
and ran, and do and did are all common expressions heard on a
daily basis. Due to these irregular forms applicability and practicality in language use, their
conjugated versions are stored in the learners associative memory as opposed to forms
that follow the morphological rule (Lavric, Pizzagalli, Forstmeier, & Rippon, 2001, p. 301).
This emergence of tense formation and variation is a step in the progression English
language learners must take when developing their linguistic systems.
Inflectional Morphemes as Tense Markers
For roughly 86% of English verbs, the suffixation rule has phonemic variation
depending of the final stems sound. This means the words grab and bug have /b/ and /g/
in the syllable-final position, so the morpheme attached to make them past tense will be
voiced [d]. Furthermore, verbs that end in voiceless consonants such as the /k/ and /p/ in
 Grattan 2

pick and stop have the voiceless morpheme [t] added to their past tense form. Lastly, words
that end with [t] or [d] such as wait and explode require the morpheme [Id] in their past
tense versions (Bird, Ralph, Seidenberg, McClelland, & Patterson, 2002, p. 503). These past
tense inflectional morphemes correlate with the final voicing of the stem, so voiced
syllable-final sounds receive a voiced tense marker, while voiceless ones receive a voiceless
tense marker (McClelland & Patterson, 2002, p. 466). This ensures that the phonemic
additions follow English rules regarding sound patterns.
Learner Mistakes
Overgeneralization and Overextension
In the beginning stages of verb conjugation tense markers are interchanged and
treated much like allophones due to the lack of defined morphological categories. Language
learners struggle with overgeneralization and overextension of morphemic rules, as well as
confusing verb forms altogether (Housen, 2002, p. 160). When a learner overgeneralizes a
rule, they are applying it to context where is it not appropriate. For example, if a language
learner produces the sentence hopefully he will gets there safe, they are most likely
overgeneralizing the third-person singular suffix (Freeman, 1975, p. 412). Overextension
occurs when the learner implements a rule that is not appropriate in the given context. This
can be seen with words that share similar phonetic or phonemic qualities, such as drink
and drop. While drop becomes dropped in past tense form, following the morphological
rule, the past tense of drink is drank not adhering to the suffixation rule. Overextending
morphological rules that are applicable to the vast number of items is a struggle that most
language learners have to overcome when acquiring the English language.
Similar Sounding Word Pairs
Another challenge for language learners is differentiating between past tense verbs

and phonologically equivalent words. For example, stress and stressed, which are

interpreted as the present and past tense verb forms, versus less and lest, which are two
words with no association. Even though some pairs of words sound like they should be
related, they have no correlation, and this distinction needs to be addressed when
teaching/learning vocabulary (Pinker & Ullman, 2002, p. 474). This separation can be
perplexing for language learners if exposed to these types of word duos before having a
solid grasp on the past tense rules of English.
Dual System versus Single System
While the vast majority of verbs follow the suffixation rule in English, there are still
approximately 14% of verbs that are irregular in past tense. For example, two very
common occurrences are have becoming had, and be becoming was in past tense. Irregular
past tense verb conjugations may seem arbitrary, but through closer analysis there are
patterns in these exceptional verbs. There are two models currently being debated in the
field; two separate processing systems for words and rules, and one system of networks
that map connections between regular and quasi-regular (i.e. semi-regular) past tense verb
 Grattan 3

forms. The dual-system model claims that irregular word constructions are stored as
complete items while words that follow the languages suffixation rules are not. This is
opposed to the single-system model that claims all English verbs are connected in a system
of associations that maintain consistency between past tense conjugations. These models of
past tense storage and production procedures have been analyzed and contested by
researchers. For example, this paper will focus on how these models relate to language
acquisition, and examine any implications caused by the different storing methods of
regular and irregular past tense verbs on language learnability. When it comes to learning
past tense, are learners more likely to remember and be able to access irregular cases, or
are deviations from the rule more challenging to secure in our lexical memory?
Dual System
In studies of English regular and irregular past tense verbs, the dual-system model
claims that irregular past tense verbs are stored in our lexical memory in their full form, so
both go and went are stored as two separate items (Justus, Larsen, Davies, & Swick, 2008, p.
178). Since regular past tense forms follow the suffixation rule, words following this are not
individually memorized, but are stored in their uninflected form and inflected when
produced. Concerning irregular conjugations, the dual-system model predicts that
abnormalities from the rule are stored in associative memory, as opposed to regular verb
forms that use the default construction when the word has not yet been committed to
memory.
As language instructors begin to teach students verbs that behave outside the
suffixation rule norms, deciding which verbs to teach explicitly and which to disregard can
be a challenge. In this model irregular verbs are thought to be a part of a closed word class
with additions no longer being added. Since students do not have to worry about new verbs
being introduced into this word category, memorization of these nonstandard verbs and
their past tense pairs can take place. There are many irregular past tense verb forms used
in everyday speech, so teachers may wish to address these grammatical inconsistencies
early in the curriculum in order for students to recognize and produce these common
words in conversation. If this dual-system model were used as a format for instruction, the
teacher may begin by providing a model of the rule and then moving on to teach the
frequently used irregular forms such as to be, to have, and to give.
For language learners, comprehensible input is required for a word or rule to be
ready for production. This exposure must be sufficient enough that the learner can adapt
its form in various contexts. There is evidence found in child acquisition in favor of the
dual-system model pertaining to rule construction. As children are exposed to regular
verbs forms they experiment with producing them in the past tense. This may lead to
errors in conjugation where children apply the patterns they have heard to irregular forms.
For instance, a child may produce the verb sleeped mistakenly applying the suffixation rule
to this irregular verb. Incidents such as these are products of hypothesis testing with verbs
 Grattan 4

learners have not heard before (Pinker, 1998, p. 222). There is reason to believe that these
mistakes are a result of the child implementing the suffixation rule.
Single System
The single system model recognizes the English past tense as a quasi-regular
linguistic system that incorporates consistency within regular and irregular forms. Lupyan
and McClelland argue that more than half of irregular past tense verbs mirror patterns
used in regular past tense conjugations since a number of them still end with a
syllable-final /t/ or /d/ (2003, p. 2). One example of consistency within the irregulars are
the verbs bring becoming brought and seek becoming sought which involve replacing the
final consonant cluster with /t/, and modify the vowel in the present tense form to // in
the past tense (Pinker & Ullman, 2002, p. 464). The single-system model claims groups of
irregular verbs that share characteristics with past tense forms can be processed through
networking patterns and establishing rules.
Categories of irregular past tense verbs, despite their morphological irregularity,
maintain a phonological consistency that many regular forms do not. In general, most verbs
are monosyllabic and adhere to English word-structuring patterns, but there are some
regular verbs such as greet/greeted that are irregular phonologically (Burzio, 2002, p. 157).
The single-system model states that because there are these irregular morphological and
phonological occurrences, word formation must be accomplished through a single network
(McClelland & Patterson, 2002, p. 466). In the neural-mapping network generated by a
single-system for all verb forms, regular and irregular forms are retained through
homogeneous parallels within the words (Lavric, Pizzagalli, Forstmeier, & Rippon, 2001, p.
302). This would allow both rule-following forms and exceptions to be stored in the same
way.
Order of Acquisition
In the language classroom, verb tenses may be taught by providing an example that
follows the rule first. For example, a teacher would write the infinitive form to live on the
board, followed by its conjugations when used after all possible pronouns I, you, he/she/it,
they, and we. This same word would then be used to present the suffixation rule for past
tense English verbs. Since to live conjugates to lived in past tense this verb can be used as a
prototype for students to emulate when they need to conjugate other regular verbs. Once
the teacher explains the rules pattern, additional regular past tense verbs can be given to
students for conjugation practice. This preparation educates the students about the
majority-followed suffixation rule (Pinker, 1998, p. 222). If the students learn the patterns
there is no need to memorize every regular form because an understanding of the rule
makes regular past tense conjugations predictable.
For English language learners, there appears to be an order in which the acquisition
of past tense is realized and implemented. Shirai claims that learners apply past tense
markings first on achievement and accomplishment words such as to break and to leave
 Grattan 5

because they have distinct endpoints (2012, p. 173). Once these verbs have been practiced,
learners may extend their use of past tense to active and stative verbs such as to drive and
to love (Salaberry, 2000, p. 138). However, these stages of acquisition are not definite and
mistakes when conjugating achievement verbs may continue while action verbs are being
accurately produced (Rumelhart & McClelland, 1985, p. 5).
Order of Acquisition Between Regular and Irregular Verb Forms
Research shows that there is also an order of acquisition of irregular past tense
forms being accurately produced more consistently than regular past tense forms (Housen,
2002, p. 158). One possible explanation is that the majority of irregular verb forms are
short allowing them to be remembered easily. For example, there are 28 irregular verbs
that require no additions or changes in the past tense, such as to set. Many quasi-regular
categories of irregulars are shorter than they would have been if produced using the
suffixation rule. There are a number of irregular verb groups ending with the syllable-final
/l/ or /n/ followed by /t/ in the past tense such as to feel becoming felt (Pinker & Ullman,
2002, p. 464). Through analyzing the main categories of quasi-regular past tense verbs, the
simplicity in phonetics and word length surpasses the level found in most regular forms.
Most monosyllabic irregular stems (i.e. forms that affixes can be attached to) are
conjugated into the past tense maintaining their monosyllabic nature.
Conclusions and Implications
Through considering irregular past tense verbs against regular ones the acquisition
rate and order can rely on multiple factors. The learners exposure to the word in its
various forms can affect its learnability and how long it will take for the individual to be
able to produce it accurately. Frequency and necessity are key factors into attaining any
component of a language and verb forms are no exception. This explains the reason why
many frequently-used irregular forms are established quicker in the learners vocabulary
than regular forms. However, while many irregular verbs have the advantage of being
common, phonetically consistent, and short in their past tense, there are plenty that
require specific attention due to their lack of pattern and seldom use. In contrast, once the
suffixation rule for regular past tense verbs is able to be used productively, all verbs that
follow this pattern should be accessible for English language learners regardless of input
received. The process of learning past tense verbs and their conjugations takes repeated
exposure and practice. As teachers, providing explanations and examples help
contextualize these forms so students can understand how to use them correctly.
 Grattan 6

References
Bird, H., Ralph, M. A. L., Seidenberg, M. S., McClelland, J. L., & Patterson, K. (2003). Deficits in
phonology and past-tense morphology: Whats the connection?. Journal of Memory
and Language, 48(3), 502-526.
Burzio, L. (2002). Missing players: Phonology and the past-tense debate. Lingua, 112(3),
157-199.
Freeman, D. E. L. (1975). The acquisition of grammatical morphemes by adult ESL students.
TESOL quarterly, 409-419.
Housen, A. (2002). The development of tense-aspect in English as a second language and
the variable inuence of inherent aspect. The L2 acquisition of tense-aspect
morphology, 155-197.
Justus, T., Larsen, J., de Mornay Davies, P., & Swick, D. (2008). Interpreting dissociations
between regular and irregular past-tense morphology: Evidence from event-related
potentials. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(2), 178-194.
Lavric, A., Pizzagalli, D., Forstmeier, S., & Rippon, G. (2001). Mapping dissociations in verb
morphology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(7), 301-308.
Lupyan, G., & McClelland, J. L. (2003). Did, made, had, said: Capturing quasi-regularity in
exceptions. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol.
25, pp. 740-745).
McClelland, J. L., & Patterson, K. (2002). Rules or connections in past-tense inflections: what
does the evidence rule out?. Trends in cognitive sciences, 6(11), 465-472.
McClelland, J. L., & Patterson, K. (2002). Words or rules cannot exploit the regularity in
exceptions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(11).
Pinker, S. (1998). Words and rules. Lingua, 106(1), 219-242.
Pinker, S., & Ullman, M. (2002). Combination and structure, not gradedness, is the issue.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(11), 472-474.
Pinker, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in cognitive
sciences, 6(11), 456-463.
Plunkett, K., & Juola, P. (1999). A connectionist model of English past tense and plural
morphology. Cognitive Science, 23(4), 463-490.
Rumelhart, D. E. McClelland, J. E. (1986). On learning the past tense of English verbs.
Parallel Distributed Processing, 216-271.
Salaberry, M. R. (2000). The acquisition of English past tense in an instructional setting.
System, 28(1), 135-152.
Shirai, Y. (2010). Semantic bias and morphological regularity in the acquisition of
tense-aspect morphology: what is the relation?. Linguistics, 48(1), 171-194.