Prof John Goldsmith on Generative Grammar
John Goldsmith
Biography
Edward Carson Waller Distinguished Service Professor, Departments of Linguistics and Computer Science
Ph.D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1976
Teaching at UChicago since 1984
Born: 1951
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Alma mater: Swarthmore College (B.A.), MIT (PhD Linguistics)
Awards: Fellow of the AAAS
Scientific career fields: Phonology, Generative grammar
Institutions: University of Chicago, Indiana University
Doctoral advisor: Morris Halle
Career: Edward Carson Waller Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago in linguistics and computer science.
Doctoral advisor: Morris Halle,Considered the father of modern phonology, known for pioneering work in generative phonology, Co-authored "The Sound Pattern of English" with Noam Chomsky and other significant publications.
(Source: Wikipedia)
Introduction
John A. Goldsmith is regarded as a towering figure in the area of linguistics, having made significant contributions to the study of language structure in the fields of generative grammar and phonology. His scholarly efforts encompass a large body of work in which he delves extensively into fundamental areas of linguistic theory, particularly the origins and implications of generative grammar.
An in-depth investigation of the theoretical underpinnings of generative grammar, a paradigm proposed by Noam Chomsky to comprehend the innate and universal laws that control language within the human mind, is at the forefront of his contributions. Goldsmith's research has been instrumental in rethinking the origins of generative grammar, a topic to which he has devoted numerous illuminating discussions, as evidenced by his notable lectures such as "Where did generative grammar come from, anyway?" and "Rethinking the origins of generative grammar."
Goldsmith's research, which focuses on illuminating the evolutionary trajectory of generative grammar, demonstrates his steadfast dedication to deciphering the intricacies of linguistic structures and their connection with the underlying principles of universal grammar. His incisive discoveries and thought-provoking analyses, which have been presented in a variety of scholarly books and captivating lectures, have considerably enhanced our understanding of how language is constructed and processed in the human cognitive framework.
Furthermore, Goldsmith's groundbreaking work, which is strongly anchored in the study of phonological patterns, acts as a critical link between the delicate nuances of phonology and the broader terrain of generative grammar. His multidisciplinary approach has influenced not only the area of linguistics but also the discourse surrounding language universals and their realization within the framework of generative grammar.
John A. Goldsmith's scholarly achievements remain a guiding beacon in the exploration of generative grammar, changing the outlines of linguistic theory and paving the path for a greater understanding of the universal principles governing human language.
Goldsmith's dedication to both pioneering research and dynamic instruction demonstrates his unrelenting commitment to pushing the boundaries of linguistic theory and practical application, making his influence a cornerstone in the discipline of linguistics.
Research Interests:
Phonology, Computational Morphology, Historical Epistemology
Dr. John Goldsmith is a well-known scholar who has had a distinguished academic career at the University of Chicago. His research interests include phonological theory, Bantu tone systems, computational morphology and phonology, and computational morphology and phonology. In linguistics, he is well-known for his work on unsupervised learning approaches. Among his major accomplishments are autosegmental phonology, harmonic phonology, dynamic computational models of stress and sonority, and participation in open source initiatives such as Linguistica and geometric morphology.
Dr. Goldsmith co-wrote "Battle in the Mind Fields," the first of a series of works on the epistemology and sociology of idea development in linguistics, philosophy, and psychology, in 2019. His contributions have had a long-term impact on these fields.
Recent Publications
Books:
Battle in the Mind Fields (2019)
Empiricism and Language Learnability (2015)
Ideology and Linguistic Theory (1995)
Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology (1990)
Selected Articles/Chapters:
"American descriptivist morphology in the 1950s" (in press)
"Generative phonology: its origins, its principles, and its successors" (in press);
"Learning Swahili morphology (in press); A group structure for strings: Towards a learning algorithm for morphophonology" (Radical, 2019);
"Computational approaches to morphology" (2017); Geometric morphology (2017);
"Information theoretic approaches to phonology: the case of Finnish vowel harmony." (2017)
2019-2020 Course Offerings
Battle in the Mind Fields (LING 26550/36555) - Autumn 2019
In this course, Dr. Goldsmith explores the evolution of languages, psychology, and philosophy from the nineteenth century to around 1960. The course looks at the roots of linguistics and psychology, their transplantation to the United States, the growth of behaviorism in psychology, and the interaction of cybernetics, cognitive psychology, and generative grammar during the mid-twentieth century.
Computational Linguistics (CS) (LING 28600/LING 38600) - Spring 2020
Dr. Goldsmith teaches this computer science course to advanced undergraduates and graduate students who are proficient in programming. It focuses on natural language processing and integrates theory with hands-on linguistic corpus experiments. The course covers a wide spectrum of human languages and focuses on drawing conclusions from training data.
Dr. John Goldsmith has made significant contributions to linguistics and computer science, and his lectures provide students with a rare opportunity to interact with his broad knowledge and talents.
YouTube Channel: LINK
Personal Website: Link
University Profile : Link
Source: The University of Chicago: Division of the Humanities and Linguisitcs Link
Generative Grammar:Prof. John Goldsmith's Insights through via YouTube Videos
Prof. John Goldsmith's YouTube lectures on generative grammar reveal a labyrinth of language structure ready to be explored about the sophisticated set of rules and principles that govern language construction. His method turns what appears to be a convoluted maze into an understandable map, guiding the reader through the delicate routes of syntax and semantics. He has prepared meticulously designed maps to facilitate the readers. Prof. Goldsmith's ideas not only illuminate the mechanics of generative grammar, but also provide an enthralling voyage into the nature of language itself. Each video lecture becomes a key to unlocking the layers of language framework, and his lectures construct a tapestry of linguistic knowledge that engages both the imagination and the intellect.The subject is challenging, but because of the tremendous contributions of Professor Dr. John Goldsmith, generative grammar can now be understood. I am grateful to him for taking the time to create his lectures with maps, and I am especially grateful for making these lectures available on YouTube, allowing students and researchers to benefit from his expertise who would otherwise be unable to attend classes at prestigious universities from outstanding professors despite their strong desire. It is an effort to bringing quality teaching to the homes of knowledge seekers. Remarkable effort! Let us proceed.
Links to his Youtube Video Lectures/Sessions:
A presentation by John Goldsmith for the series organized by ABRALIN. July 7, 2020.
Where Did Generative Grammar Come from, Anyway?: Rethinking The Origins of Generative Grammar
We often fight about the answers to theoretical issues when we should be reflecting on how we arrived at the questions we ask. Looking into the origins of the questions is the greatest method to understand where they come from. Prof. John Goldsmith discusses how leading ideas linked with the Vienna Circle and others influenced by German mathematician David Hilbert were crucial in Chomsky's 1955 Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory and his vision of generative grammar at the time. Much of what I say is based on Goldsmith and Laks's Battle in the Mind Fields (University of Chicago Press, 2019).
Roots of the notion of transformation in the Vianna circle, philosopher
Map
The plot is convoluted.
create a drawing
David Hilpert, a German mathematician from the twentieth century, had a significant impact on the Viana circle.
Rudolf Kernak was a member of that circle, which was influenced by Russell and Wittgenstein.
And among them was a van Quine, among others.
Hilpert Allan Turing's concept of computing impacted many people in the field of mathematics.
Turing machine with a large impact
Creating sentences is akin to doing math.
Chomsky was influenced by Zellik Haris, Chomsky's tutor.
The history of generative grammar
Chomsky's language theory's logical structure
Where did generative grammar come from, anyway? Rethinking the origins of generative grammar
To watch complete YouTube Video, click the Link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aja2sO2FmWQ&t=675s
Europe comes to NY part 2 (from The real origins of generative grammar)
Link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmepDw5DTro
Rethinking the origins of generative grammar
To watch complete YouTube Video, click the Link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnueE838dM8
Interview with Professor John Goldsmith - Oxford University Linguistics Society
Professor John Goldsmith discusses his work in generative grammar, autosegmental phonology, machine learning, and other areas with the Oxford University Linguistics Society. More from Professor Goldsmith can be found on the Oxford University Linguistics Society's YouTube channel.
To watch complete YouTube Video, click the Link
Interview with Professor John Goldsmith - Oxford University Linguistics Society
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP6YOl1rty4
Randy Harris’s second take on the Linguistics Wars
Review of Randy Allen Harris:
The Linguistics Wars: Chomsky, Lakoff, and the Battle over Deep Structure. Second edition. Oxford University Press. 2021.
John Goldmith
University of Chicago
The review offers a captivating account of Randy Harris' book, providing a vivid depiction of the evolution of generative syntax and the linguists involved in its development, particularly in the clashes between generative grammarians. This new edition, which is more detailed than the previous one, keeps the book's snappy tone while also displaying a more contemplative approach. Harris, a rhetoric expert, portrays Chomsky as the major figure and provides a unique examination of his varied personality and influence.
Points of Interest and Critique:
Divergent Perspectives:
Captures the rivalry between Chomsky and the Generative Semanticists, detailing Chomsky's commanding influence.
The clashes between Chomsky and the Generative Semanticists reveal the lopsided nature of the conflict, focusing on Chomsky as the central figure.
Insight into Chomsky’s Complex Persona:
Offers a distinctive portrayal of Chomsky, revealing his contradictory yet fascinating character traits.
Chomsky emerges as an amalgamation of contradictory traits—gracious yet obstreperous, compassionate but also acrimonious.
Recommendation:
Despite a few criticisms, recommends the book for both seasoned linguists and newcomers, acknowledging its perceptiveness and insightful perspective.
Encourages readers, irrespective of their linguistic background, to delve into the book’s rich insights.
Development in Chomsky’s Syntax:
Delves into the evolution of Chomsky’s syntactic theories during the 1960s and beyond, especially post-Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, and the subsequent hostilities arising from varying viewpoints.
The book deeply explores Chomsky's transformative thinking about syntax and its implications, offering a historical yet relevant perspective.
Historical Lens with Contemporary Relevance:
Acknowledges the historical context but emphasizes its relevance to current linguistic insights.
Draws connections from past works—like Lakoff and Ross' statements—to contemporary observations in distributed morphology.
The review stresses the historical context while emphasizing the relevance and consequences for present linguistic research. Randy Harris' book assessment is complex and well-reasoned, proving its value and importance in the subject of linguistics.
Randy Harris delves into Chomsky's work on "Remarks on Nominalizations" and the dynamics it causes inside the syntactic domain, digging into the intricacies and interconnections between linguistic ideas. Harris depicts Chomsky's rejection of previous work, which sparked major revisions within the Aspects model, influencing his colleagues, particularly generative semanticists such as Lakoff and Ross. The book provides an intriguing perspective, attributing social meaning to Chomsky's actions while examining his professed intentions, resulting in a portrait of a varied, sometimes enigmatic man.
Psychological Analysis of Linguists:
Harris delves into the personal motivations of linguists, concentrating on Chomsky in particular, underlining that their activities may go beyond their claimed academic intentions.
Harris alludes to Chomsky's personal, sometimes confusing reasons for his work, calling into question the seeming transparency of his academic ambitions.
Historical Importance and Current Relevance:
The book seeks to make parallels between historical events and modern linguistic insights, especially in difficult situations.
Harris connects historical developments and current linguistic observations by referring to previous works and connecting them to recent linguistic concepts.
Personal Perspectives and Academic Analysis:
Harris navigates linguists' personal quirks and subjective tendencies without resorting to personal attacks, even when his comments are strong and controversial.
For example, despite academics' efforts to reject or remain silent about these factors, the book subtly uncovers the human aspects affecting linguistic study.
Limits to Objectivity:
Harris occasionally walks a fine line, implying that personal presence is more important than logical reasons, which may call the book's legitimacy into question in purely academic situations.
Harris may be undermining logical arguments by emphasizing the importance of individual presence rather than strong argumentation.
Selectivity in Historical Narration:
While the book does not cover all area of linguistics during that time period, the omissions are understandable given the inherent selectivity in historical narrative.
The reviewer points out that Harris does not cover all of the linguistic works of the time period, recognizing the limitations of historical narrative.
The review provides a multifaceted critique of Harris' text, citing issues about his perspectives on intellectual argumentation, the scope of historical narration, and the difference between rhetorical and intellectual history. Despite its difficult stance on the significance of linguistic works, the book is praised for its insights and stimulating debates.
Synopsis of Randy Harris's Account:
Early Linguistic Development:
The story follows Chomsky during his formative years in linguistics, his influential publications, and the formation of a dissenting group led by the generative semanticists: Ross, McCawley, Postal, and Lakoff. They offered a new approach to syntax, focusing on the link between surface and deep structures.
Dichotomy in Linguistic Approaches:
The conflict arose between two schools of thought: the distributional system (which studies word ordering and appearances) and the mediational system (which connects surface structure to inner meaning). Chomsky clashed with generative semanticists on the interpretation of deep structure and the function of transformations.
Shifts and Consequences:
Despite the generative conflicts of the 1960s, Chomsky's language theories evolved. He incorporated logical shape into his models, albeit he never directly acknowledged it.
Generative semanticists' influence.
Post-Disagreement Trajectories:
The book delves into the careers of linguists such as Lakoff, McCawley, Ross, and Postal. It focuses on their efforts following the linguistic conflicts and their shifts to various language areas.
Cognitive Linguistics and Pragmatics:
Harris digs into Lakoff's work on metaphor and cognitive grammar, highlighting cognitive psychology's importance in linguistics. In linguistic study, there is a growing emphasis on the function of pragmatics.
Chomsky's Persona:
The final chapters delve deeply into Chomsky's demeanor, offering a fair assessment of his virtues and shortcomings. While acknowledging his earnestness, Harris also challenges Chomsky's purported carelessness with facts and his unwillingness to tolerate alternative viewpoints.
The Complexity of Chomsky:
Harris ends by questioning Chomsky's method, expressing an arrogant assurance that he alone owns the ultimate truth. He recognizes Chomsky's inclinations as a hermeneutic and expressive pathology, owing largely to his apparent hubris.
Historical Story:
The book traverses the language environment, from confrontations to the evolution of many linguistic perspectives.
Harris methodically traces the pathways taken by notable linguists following disagreements, focusing on their later contributions to linguistics.
Chomsky's Complexities and Persona:
The book portrays Chomsky in a variety of ways, acknowledging his sincerity while emphasizing his alleged inflexibility and dogmatism.
Pragmatics and Cognitive Linguistics:
The impact of cognitive psychology and pragmatics in linguistic study is being investigated, indicating a developing linguistic landscape.
Harris' work weaves a thorough narrative, showing the generative semanticists' struggle with Chomsky, the fallout from differences, and the transition to cognitive linguistics. The essay delves into the paths of linguists and finishes with a detailed examination of Chomsky's persona and influence on linguistic discourse.
Randy Harris' description of linguistic battles in the past and the evolution of Noam Chomsky's method in his book appears to be filled with complexity and in-depth explorations. The article gives an in-depth analysis of the field's historical events and their importance, from examining the disagreements between Chomsky and generative semanticists to disputing the fundamental merit of the ideas provided.
Harris' balanced portrayal of Chomsky's manner, while challenging, strives to explain Chomsky's misrepresentations and strong answers to individuals he regarded antagonistic. While the article is respectful of Chomsky's contributions, it also addresses the combative dynamics and misconceptions of his work and the academic environment.
The book not only concentrates on the historical tale, but it also condemns the field's harsh hostilities. It indicates a lack of a reasonable, civil approach among the linguists engaged, raising worries about actual development and linguistic evaluation criteria.
Furthermore, the essay dives into the shortcomings of quantifying scientific advancement in linguistics. It illustrates the flaws in viewing the generation of new questions or the aesthetic attractiveness of ideas as valid indicators of scientific progress. Instead, it advocates for a rigorous, data-driven approach that is consistent with past linguistic and scientific triumphs.
Overall, the book tackles the need for a more complete understanding of language history as well as a more empirical foundation for assessing scientific progress in the area. It critically addresses the function of self-indulgence in scientific endeavor as well as the value of acknowledging and building on earlier language achievements.
Randy Harris's work, "The Linguistics Wars," appears to contain a significant critique, notably of the representation of linguistics and Chomsky's theories.
The book's emphasis on linguists' professional dynamics, methodology, and how issues emerged appears to diverge from typical science narratives. While popular scientific stories frequently emphasize the development of winning ideas, this article focuses on the tensions, complexities, and transformations that occur within language cognition.
Chomsky's concept of "simplicity" in his linguistic theories has been criticized. There appears to be a disconnect between the book's portrayal and the actual theoretical intricacies. Chomsky's emphasis on simplicity was more about formal description and extracting intricacies from specific grammars than it was about everyday simplicity. The shift in Chomsky's thinking from simplicity to restriction was not a rhetorical shift, but rather a shift in theory evaluation.
Furthermore, the portrayal of Bloomfieldians and pre-Chomskian linguistics appear to be challenged. The labeling of all pre-Chomskian linguists as "Bloomfieldians" risks oversimplifying the field's numerous techniques and perspectives prior to Chomsky's seminal work.
The fear that certain prominent linguists' contributions may have been overlooked or reduced to a single category in the book's depiction may have hampered an accurate rendering of the linguistic environment prior to Chomsky's era.
This in-depth examination appears to indicate that the book's depiction of linguistic history, Chomsky's theories, and labeling of linguistic movements may be oversimplified or distorted, failing to express the complexity and diversity of the discipline prior to the "Chomskyan revolution."
A comprehensive critique of Randy Harris's position, specifically regarding his portrayal of linguistics, Chomsky's influences across many fields, the significance of intuition in linguistic research, and the weight of proof in scientific discourse.
Plans and the Structure of Behavior:
The piece questions the portrayal of "Plans" as a Chomskyan work when it was a seminal work in the field of cognitive psychology. Despite Randy's assertions of Chomsky's ubiquitous impact, it has been contended that it was not prominently featured in the book.
Chomsky's Impact on Philosophy and Computer Science:
There are some differences in Chomsky's status in computer science and philosophy. The argument is provided against his major contributions to various subjects, particularly philosophy, implying that Chomsky's work does not accord with the claims made about his influence.
Intuition in Linguistics:
The piece challenges the use of intuition in linguistic study, pointing out that while intuition might be useful, it may not be as trustworthy or comprehensive as corpus-based investigations. The example of Jespersen's contributions through intensive text reading rather than corpus investigation is used to demonstrate the limitations of intuition in linguistic analysis.
The Burden of Proof in Scientific Debate:
Within scientific discourse, critiques of the burden of proof are presented. The discussion implies that time spent fighting about who has the burden of proof was ineffective, and it critiques the author's position on accepted scientific principles.
Overall, the analysis is fairly complex, with the goal of deconstructing statements made in Randy Harris' original text. It discusses Chomsky's influence in numerous domains, linguistic research technique, and the burden of proof in scientific discourse, presenting a balanced and opposing viewpoint.
Conclusion
Disagreements should not be used to dismiss a review, but rather to provide a different perspective and to continue the conversation started by the book. A reviewer's purpose is to provide context and differing opinions, while highlighting both the material's strengths and potential conflicts.
The goal is not to discourage readers from reading the work, but rather to promote exploration and conversation. Regardless of differences in interpretation, the book provides a whole story that readers should ponder, maybe beginning with the final chapter.
References to reputable linguistics sources improve the argument, providing a unique perspective that deepens the discussion.
Personal ties to the characters in the novel provide an informative gauge of how well the book depicts these people and their thoughts.
The critic recognizes Chomsky's talents and accomplishments, but wishes to address ambiguities in readings or portrayals of some historical writings, as well as their classification as "textbooks."
A reviewer's comment sought to avoid reducing disagreements to a single point of view, which diminishes the robustness of the conversation. Instead, these conflicts provide a broader perspective and useful feedback to potential readers.
There is a fear that statements will be misconstrued. The reviewer believes that their comments in the review are sometimes rejected as completely unreasonable, which they do not believe is the case.
The reviewer hopes that their disagreements will not be reduced to the perception that they were completely irrational. Instead, the goal of the review is to provide varied context and a distinct perspective, which is an important job of a reviewer.
Many peers may oppose to various sections of the review, particularly those more closely linked with Chomsky's linguistic perspective. However, the reviewer considers these disputes to be a legitimate part of the discussion sparked by the book.
Despite differences, the book presents the story thoroughly, providing both the positives and negatives. The objective is that these differences of opinion will not deter potential readers; rather, they will be encouraged to read the book, possibly beginning with the final chapter.
Challenged interpretation:
A specific example is given to refute Randy's claim about Reichling's criticism of generative grammar. Because of the severe misunderstanding, the speaker believes the criticism misinterprets the work and does not merit discussion.
Imre Lakatos' philosophy in action:
The speaker mentions the encouragement to explore new questions in philosophy of science, but they emphasize that this does not equate to true scientific progress or its assessment in the discipline of linguistics.
Criteria for syntactic correctness:
A syntax theory's correctness is determined by its simplicity as the best description for each language, as supported by empirical data.
Dispute about book classification:
The speaker engages in a back-and-forth debate, expressing disagreement with Randy on classifying a book as a textbook. They debate the content of the book, citing authoritative arguments about open topics offered as theoretical ideas. There is controversy about the book's categorization and contents, which influences perception and interpretation of its substance.
Source: Harris, R. (2022, October 24). Randy Harris’s second take on the Linguistics Wars. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://hiphilangsci.net/2022/10/24/randy-harris-linguistics-wars/?blogid=44993848&blogsub=flooded
Establishment of grammatical traditions
Ancient linguistic traditions such as Old-Babylonian and Hindu evolved as a result of language shifts and religious needs. In Old-Babylonian periods, for example, Sumerian was being superseded by Akkadian, forcing the establishment of grammatical traditions around 1900 BC to preserve Sumerian literature. The Hindu faith saw Sanskrit alter around 1200 BC, necessitating the formation of grammatical norms for the precise recitation of sacred books. Both faiths evolved grammar to maintain linguistic truth and religious purity as a result of the requirement to deal with language change within religious contexts.
Indian/Hindu Linguistic Tradition:
Despite the evolving Sanskrit language, it arose from the requirement for exact recital of religious scriptures.
Pini's work, together with the contributions of Ktyyana and Patajali, established grammatical norms for text accuracy and interpretation.
Grammar was highly valued in India and affected other fields of study.
Greek Tradition:
Evolved as the Greek language changed, focused on understanding and explaining ancient writings such as Homer's works.
Controversies concerning the origins of language, nature vs convention, continued, influencing ideas about word meanings.
Morphology was essentially historical in nature, dealing with word formation, but syntax was covered indirectly in rhetoric and logic.
Roman Influence:
Themes from Greek linguistics were passed down to Roman linguistics, which focused on morphology (noun and verb structures) rather than syntax.
Arabic Tradition:
Based on Greek grammar and influenced by Arabic scholarship, particularly the sacred Qur'n.
Concerned with preserving the ideal language's integrity, emphasizing on inflectional ends as proof of language logic.
Hebrew Tradition:
Emerged to establish the correct Hebrew text of the Old Testament using Arabic grammar principles.
Many authors contributed to grammatical analysis and had a considerable impact on European linguistics, particularly in the analysis of verbal forms.
Within their cultural and religious contexts, each tradition established unique ways and procedures for dealing with language changes, preserving sacred texts, and analyzing linguistic structures.
Hebrew Influence in Europe:
In 1506 Johannes Reuchlin's work introduced the method of morphological analysis in Europe, analyzing words into roots and affixes, a method that Theodor Bibliander proposed in 1548 for all languages.
Adapting classical Latin grammars for church education, early Christian writers studied Aristotle and Stoic concepts.
In the multilingual early Christian world, the idea that Hebrew was the original language from which all others descended gained traction.
The Shift to Logic and Universal Grammar:
Around the year 1000, logic began to supplant Donatus and Priscian ideas, ushering in a return to dialectics.
The recovery of Aristotle's writings through Arabic research had an impact, leading to the belief in universal grammar that applied to all languages.
The Modistae and speculative grammar evolved, combining philosophy into grammar and focused on ways to signify and explain the structure of the universe through syntax.
This approach fell out of favor in the 14th century when teaching grammars competed with scholastic commentary, but it had a resurrection in the 16th century thanks to the efforts of scholars such as Julius Caesar Scaliger and Francisco Sánchez de las Brozas.
This time period saw a shift in emphasis from grammatical structures and teachings affected by religious and historical settings to a more logic-dominated, universal approach to understanding language and its role in reflecting the structure of the cosmos.
Medieval Manuscripts and Logical Grammar:
In the Middle Ages, manuscripts utilized Latin inflectional paradigms paired with vernacular forms, which fused with the Port Royal Grammar in the 17th century, emphasizing logical grammar based on universal semantic notions.
Rise of Comparative Method:
Due to travels, conquests, and colonization, the 17th century saw an increase in familiarity with numerous languages, which led to linguistic classification and comparison.
The dispute over language beginnings (nature vs. convention), the idea of Hebrew as the original language, and the biblical account of Babel all contributed to this fascination.
Scholars compiled word lists for comparisons, resulting in the birth of comparative linguistics.
Father Figures of Comparative Linguistics:
Throughout the history of comparative grammar, multiple persons were regarded as the "father" of comparative linguistics at various times, each adding criteria for defining language families.
Evolutio of Evolution:
The focus of etymology has switched from exposing word meanings to the historical investigation of language stages and word origins.
Dutch etymologists, influenced by Hebrew grammar, divided words into roots and affixes and devised criteria for linguistic family ties.
Scythian Hypothesis and Indo-European Languages:
The "Scythian hypothesis," which attempted to link Scythians with various language groups and eventually associated Indo-European languages, was the first step in recognizing Indo-European languages.
Johannes Goropius Becanus stressed "Scythian," establishing Indo-European as a linguistic family.
Several scientists and writers, including Boxhorn, Leibniz, and Salmasius, contributed to the Scythian hypothesis, aiming to demonstrate a common origin for languages.
The growth of comparative linguistics, which was profoundly based in the search for language origins, language classification, and the construction of language families, led to the acknowledgment of the Indo-European language group.
Myth behind Sir William Jones's recognition in linguistics:
While Jones is widely credited with establishing comparative linguistics and revealing the relationship between Indo-European languages, the article takes a different approach, focusing light on the contributions of earlier scientists to linguistic comprehension.
Predecessors to Jones:
Earlier researchers such as Edward Lhuyd (1707) and Johannis Sajnovics (1770), proved language links among different families such as Indo-European and Hungarian, Lapp, and Finnish.
It attributes these researchers with pioneering comparative techniques and finding language links.
Jones's Contribution and Legacy:
Jones, known for his Persian grammar and work with Hindu law writings, was not mainly concerned in linguistics; rather, he was interested in the history of Asian peoples and their languages, which he saw as part of a larger historical framework.
Jones was inspired by his era's thinking and shared this interest in languages within the larger context of history and race.
Scholars' Influential Contributions:
Christian Jakob Kraus (1787), Sámuel Gyarmathi (1799), and Friedrich von Schlegel (1808) all made important contributions to linguistic comparison and classification, focusing on grammar, etymology, and structural similarities.
Rasmus Rask (1818) is credited with identifying sound correspondences and establishing what became known as Grimm's law.
Grimm's Law:
Jakob Grimm's law outlines a series of consonant shifts between Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Germanic languages.
The common fallacy that Sir William Jones was the originator of comparative linguistics by emphasizing past researchers' combined efforts to comprehend language links and historical linguistics.
Historical linguistic developments. The following are some key facts and concepts that will be discussed:
Grassmann's Law and Verner's Law:
Grassmann's Law describes the aspirated stop dissimilation inside Sanskrit and Greek words, which results in variations between the expected sound correspondences based on Grimm's Law.
Other exceptions to Grimm's Law were explained by Verner's Law, particularly in Germanic languages. It explained variations in sound correspondences that contradicted Grimm's Law.
Neogrammarians:
The Neogrammarians, who were active in Germany around 1876, claimed that sound laws were regular and without exception. They stressed sound change's regularity and tried to codify linguistics with the rigor of natural sciences.
They gathered under the phrase "sound laws suffer no exceptions," claiming that sound alterations happen automatically and without exception.
Opposing Views and The Wave Theory:
The Neogrammarians' opponents rejected the family tree model in favor of a "wave theory," which accounted for language changes caused by contact between languages and dialects. Like waves in a pond, this hypothesis proposed waves of language change radiating from distinct dispersion centers.
Typological-Evolutionary Outlook:
There was a schism in linguistic philosophy in the nineteenth century between Naturwissenschaft (physical science) and Geisteswissenschaft (humanities).
Scholars attempted to connect linguistics to the natural sciences and supported a linguistics-biology parallel.
Language speakers' social evolution was thought to be reflected in evolutionary phases and typological categories (isolating, agglutinative, flexional, and incorporating).
Schleicher and Schleicher's Glottogonic Orientation:
August Schleicher's work highlighted the idea of language evolution, with languages moving from simple to complex forms through isolation, agglutination, and bending.
Neogrammarians attacked Schleicher's idea that modern languages were imperfect mirrors of their forefathers as "glottogonic speculation." They insisted that the same language changes occurred throughout linguistic history.
The disagreement between the Neogrammarians' belief in regular, exceptionless sound change and the opposition's beliefs regarding language development variability and exceptions. It also outlines the numerous models and ideas that have been developed to explain language developments.
The rise of structuralism in linguistics, a movement that shifted the emphasis away from historical linguistics and toward the study of the structure of living languages. The following are major figures and concepts mentioned:
Ferdinand de Saussure:
Saussure's seminal work, particularly his "Cours de linguistique générale," shifted linguistic theory away from historical analysis and toward synchronic analysis.
He defined the linguistic sign, emphasizing the arbitrary relationship between signifiers (sounds) and signifieds (meanings).
The Prague School:
The structuralist concepts of Jan Baudouin de Courtenay and his pupils' contributions such as the terminology "phoneme," "morpheme," and "distinctive feature" impacted the Prague School.
Roman Jakobson and Prince Nicholai S. Trubetzkoy were essential in the development of structuralism at the Prague School, introducing concepts such as "distinctive features" and "linguistic areas."
Franz Boas:
Boas, widely regarded as the father of American linguistics and anthropology, emphasized the importance of accurately documenting Native American languages before they vanished.
He argued against generalizations and emphasized the importance of describing each language and culture in its unique words.
Boas' emphasis on the diversity of linguistic structures and mental worlds helped shape American structuralism.
Edward Sapir:
Sapir, a Boas pupil, made significant contributions to linguistics and anthropology.
He advanced traditional typological studies' psychological orientation and established the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which suggests that language impacts mind and perception.
The emphasis on the structure and synchronic study of languages by these significant authors, as well as their impact on subjects other than linguistics, such as anthropology, psychology, and philosophy, fueled the shift from historical linguistics to structuralism.
Leonard Bloomfield made substantial contributions to American structuralism, pushing for linguistics as a science. His work "Language" is regarded as a watershed moment, highly influenced by Saussure's concepts. Bloomfield, on the other hand, deviated from Boas and Sapir's mentalistic approach, disregarding the relevance of "mind." His followers, known as "Bloomfieldians," depended primarily on discovery processes but lacked a solid theoretical foundation.
From 1957 onwards, Noam Chomsky's pioneering influence marked a shift from Bloomfield's methodology. Chomsky incorporated mentalism into linguistics, emphasizing the "competence" or tacit knowledge of the local speaker. His proposal of a generative grammar sought to explain linguistic innovation by providing the formal methods to generate unique sentences.
Chomsky's approach shifted the emphasis from just deducing a language's structure from facts to characterizing and explaining native speakers' knowledge. He proposed the Universal Grammar idea, which holds that language has inherent, universal qualities. Chomsky criticized B.F. Skinner's thesis that language is learned through habits and stimulus-response conditioning in his response to behaviorist psychology. He emphasized the complexities of language acquisition, contending that children learn language with limited and frequently incorrect input, meaning that some components of language are intrinsic and cannot be learnt through direct teaching or experience.
This generative grammar theory has evolved through several forms, ranging from the "Standard Theory" to the "Minimalist Program," inspiring competing theories that share core goals and assumptions but investigate linguistic concepts in different ways.
Chomsky's emphasis on innate linguistic knowledge, the weakness of stimulus argument, and the developing character of generative grammar have profoundly altered linguistic theory and have been crucial in comprehending the cognitive basis of human language.
The "typologist" or "functional-typological" method
This orientation focuses on categorizing languages based on linguistic characteristics and then examining patterns and structures across languages. Typology entails understanding these tendencies in cross-linguistic comparison via the perspective of language function.
The origins of typology may be traced back to theorists like Wundt, who classified languages based on characteristics such as word order, prefixing vs. suffixing languages, and different treatments for nouns and verbs. Early typologies frequently focused on word morphology, prescribing the entire nature of a language based on its structure.
The Prague School contributed much to modern typological concepts. Roman Jakobson's work popularized "implicational universals," the idea that if a language has one quality, it implies the existence of another. The article on word order by H. Greenberg is considered basic to current typology.
Typological studies have made significant contributions to our understanding of grammar, its relationships, functions, and distributions among languages. It has also proposed notions like as "grammaticalization," which describes how words evolve into grammatical markers. The phrase was coined by Antoine Meillet to describe shifts in which autonomous words become grammatical parts.
The article predicts continuous interest in endangered languages, human cognition, and linkages with formal grammar in the future of linguistics. Interfaces between linguistics and computer science, as well as research into language universals, typology, and language function from both formal and functionalist perspectives, are predicted to develop.
The post-Noam Chomsky trajectory of linguistic theory emphasizes the need of continued research, methodological rigor, and the exploration of language links, change, and human language history. Overall, the future of linguistics promises continuing investigation and progress in areas such as language structure, change, and universal qualities.
Source:
Campbell, L. (2002). The History of Linguistics. In M. Aronoff & J. Rees-Miller (Eds.), The Handbook of Linguistics. Blackwell Publishing. Retrieved November 30, 2007, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227983472_The_History_of_Linguistics
The Handbook of Linguistics
Edited by: Mark Aronoff And Janie Rees-Miller
eISBN: 9781405102520
Print publication date: 2002
Panini
Pini, the famous ancient Sanskrit grammarian, was born and lived in modern-day Pakistan, which was then part of the ancient Indian subcontinent, and wrote the seminal "Adhyy." The text was written by Pini, an ancient Sanskrit grammarian. Pini, the famous ancient Sanskrit grammarian, was born and lived in modern-day Pakistan, then part of the ancient Indian subcontinent, where he wrote the foundational "Adhyy," a one-of-a-kind linguistic treatise that altered our understanding of language organization. This brief and comprehensive treatise, published in the fourth century BCE, laid the cornerstone for modern linguistic theory by teaching the basics of grammar, particularly the concept of linguistic analysis through a system of rules and structures.
Pini's important work on grammatical analysis and structure inspired generations of researchers and shaped grammatical analysis and structural concepts.
Panini's work is organized into four portions with eight chapters. The first section discusses the language's sounds, including phonemes and their classification. The second segment focuses on word formation and inflections. The third portion is about syntax and sentence structure. The fourth and last element is about semantics, which includes categorizing words based on their meaning.
The "Ashtadhyayi" is well-known for its intricate system of rules and algorithms for describing the structure and usage of the Sanskrit language. Panini's system is very systematic and comprehensive, covering practically every facet of Sanskrit grammar.
Panini's work on Sanskrit grammar was immensely significant and had a long-lasting impact on the study of linguistics and grammar. For its precision and thoroughness, his system of rules and algorithms is still studied and praised today.
Many ancient scholars studied on grammar and contributed to the development of linguistic and grammatical theories. Here are a couple such examples:
DIONYSIUS THRAX:
Dionysius Thrax is often regarded as the first Greek grammarian and the author of the first grammar book, either "Techne Grammatike" (The Art of Grammar) or "Hodegos" (The Guide). Dionysius Thrax was a student of the famed philosopher and grammarian Aristarchus of Samothrace in the second century BC.
Dionysius Thrax's work presented the fundamental elements of Greek grammar, such as parts of speech, sentence structure, and syntax norms. He also gave them examples and tasks to assist them master the language.
Dionysius Thrax's grammar work was extremely significant, serving as the foundation for much of the subsequent study of Greek and other languages in the Western tradition. His work was later translated into Latin and Arabic, and it became required reading in medieval and Renaissance schools.
The classification of parts of speech employed by Dionysius Thrax was close to what is used now, but there were notable changes in vocabulary and scope.
Dionysius Thrax identified eight parts of speech:
noun, verb, participle, article, pronoun, preposition, adverb, and conjunction.
This categorization is comparable to the one used today, which normally comprises nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, and interjections.
However, there are some terminology and scope variances. Dionysius Thrax, for example, considered participles and articles to be different parts of speech, although current grammar considers them to be forms of adjectives. Furthermore, Dionysius Thrax did not recognize interjections as a separate component of speech, but current grammar does.
Overall, Dionysius Thrax's classification of the components of speech was a significant step forward in the development of grammar, and it has impacted future classifications and studies of language. While parts of his terminology and scope may differ from modern grammar, his core insights into language structure and function remain valid today.
Aristotle:
Aristotle was a 4th century BCE Greek philosopher notable for his work in logic, metaphysics, ethics, and politics. He also wrote about language and grammar, and his work "Organon" includes a part on language studies and grammatical principles.
Varro:
Marcus Terentius Varro was a 1st century BCE Roman scholar well renowned for his work on language and grammar. "De Lingua Latina" is a comprehensive study of Latin grammar that contains detailed studies of morphology, syntax, and semantics.
Priscian:
Priscian was a 6th century CE Latin grammarian noted for his book "Institutiones Grammaticae," which is a comprehensive study of Latin grammar. His work was widely utilized as a textbook in medieval and Renaissance schools, covering the parts of speech, inflections, syntax, and semantics of Latin.
These are only a handful of the numerous ancient intellectuals who studied on grammar and contributed to the development of linguistic and grammatical theories. Their writings have left an indelible mark on the study of language and grammar, and they are still studied and loved today.
David Hilbert, German mathematician
David Hilbert, a German mathematician, had a significant impact on the development of generative grammar, particularly through his work in formal systems and mathematical logic. While he was not a direct participant in linguistics, his ideas lay the framework for the development of formal language theory, which was crucial in the development of generative grammar.
Hilbert's mathematical work, notably his study of formal systems and axiomatic theories, lays the groundwork for interpreting language through a formal, systematic lens. Hilbert's axioms and the Hilbert space, among other contributions to mathematical logic and formal systems, lay the framework for treating language as a system governed by rules and structures.
Hilbert's rigorous and systematic methods to mathematical logic inspired linguists, particularly Noam Chomsky. In his quest to comprehend the organization of language, Chomsky noticed parallels between formal systems in mathematics and the potential application of equivalent systematic rules and structures in language. This connection between mathematical formalism and language structure became an important concept in the development of generative grammar.
While Hilbert's work in mathematical logic did not directly contribute to linguistics or generative grammar, it did provide a conceptual foundation for other linguists, such as Chomsky, to use in their research of language structure.
C. Fries New Approach to Linguistics
HARLES CARPENTER FRIES The Structure of English(1952)
During the first half of the twentieth century, Charles C. Fries (1887-1967) was a key player in American linguistics and language teaching. Theoretical innovation and practical implementation were important themes in his work. Fries believed that attempting to solve practical difficulties was an important component of creating linguistic theory. He devoted the most of his time researching language as a tool for transmitting meaning. Charles C. Fries was a major figure in the creation of linguistics in the United States, although he stayed somewhat outside of the mainstream of the linguistics he helped to build. Contributors to this volume were invited to present and evaluate some aspect of Fries' work, as well as demonstrate how similar ideas are employed today.
four major syntactic categories
The Fries system has four major syntactic categories called "parts of speech" in "classes" numbered 1 through 4 (Roberts uses Fries' notation but is willing to label the four classes Noun, Verb, Adjective, and Adverb), as well as fifteen minor categories of "function words" in "groups" lettered A through O. Some groups have only one member (Group C, not; Group H, expletive there), and others collect words that are largely ignored in traditional English grammar (Group K, which includes utterance-initial well, oh, now, and exclamatory why; Group M, which includes the discourse markers look, say, and listen). There are extensive discussions of sentence patterns, immediate constituents, the grammatical functions "Subject" and "Object," and a variety of other topics.
But what happened? Why did Fries pretty much disappear from sight?
Examine the dates. While Fries was working on his book, Chomsky was working on The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory; he finished the manuscript in 1955, the year before Roberts' book was published, and the following year, Syntactic Structures was published. Fries died in 1967, at a period when generative grammar was thriving and American structuralism was becoming increasingly discredited. Fries' meticulous techniques and notions defined from (real-world) data had no place in Universal Grammar. They're back, and it's time to say some nice things about Charles Carpenter Fries.
Several prominent persons have contributed to generative grammar:
Zellig Harris, Chomsky’s Teacher
Zellig Harris was a key figure in linguistics, especially in the development of distributional methods and structural linguistics, both of which had a significant impact on generative grammar. Harris' contributions to structural linguistics and distributional analysis provided the foundation for subsequent developments in generative grammar, notably in relation to Chomsky's transformational grammar.
Harris' distributional analysis concept, which emphasizes the importance of comprehending language by analyzing the distribution of linguistic elements within a corpus, laid the framework for formalization of grammatical structure.
Many of his key ideas were published in his book "Methods in Structural Linguistics" (1951), particularly his emphasis on the distribution of elements in language as a fundamental foundation for linguistic analysis. His work had a considerable impact on Noam Chomsky and other linguists in the mid-twentieth century, contributing to the development of generative grammar.
His contributions were critical in shaping the landscape of linguistic theory, particularly the transition from structural to generative grammar.
Wilhelm von Humboldt:
Humboldt, a German philosopher and linguist most renowned for his work in the early nineteenth century, established some fundamental ideas in generative grammar, particularly concerning structural relationships within language.
Ferdinand de Saussure:
De Saussure was a Swiss linguist who influenced the structuralist movement, which influenced generative grammar.
Noam Chomsky:
Chomsky, widely regarded as the father of modern generative grammar, transformed linguistic theory in the mid-20th century. "Syntactic Structures" (1957) and "Aspects of the Theory of Syntax" (1965) were important contributions.
Noam Chomsky:
Syntactic Structures" (1957)
"Aspects of the Theory of Syntax" (1965)
"Language and Mind" (2006)
"Rules and Representations" (1980)
"Knowledge of Language" (1986)
"The Minimalist Program" (1995)
Ray Jackendoff:
An outstanding modern linguist, Jackendoff has made substantial contributions to the domains of semantics and language faculty architecture.
"Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar" (1972)
"Patterns in the Mind: Language and Human Nature" (1995)
"The Architecture of the Language Faculty" (2003)
"A User’s Guide to Thought and Meaning" (2012)
John Goldsmith:
Goldsmith has made significant contributions to phonology within generative grammar with works such as
Books:
Battle in the Mind Fields (2019)
Empiricism and Language Learnability (2015)
Ideology and Linguistic Theory (1995)
Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology (1990)
"Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology" (1990) and "The Handbook of Phonological Theory" (1995).
"Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology" (1990)
"The Handbook of Phonological Theory" (1995)
"Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology" (1976)
"The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching" (2011)
Selected Articles/Chapters:
"American descriptivist morphology in the 1950s" (in press)
"Generative phonology: its origins, its principles, and its successors" (in press);
"Learning Swahili morphology (in press); A group structure for strings: Towards a learning algorithm for morphophonology" (Radical, 2019);
"Computational approaches to morphology" (2017); Geometric morphology (2017);
"Information theoretic approaches to phonology: the case of Finnish vowel harmony." (2017)
Roman Jakobson:
Jakobson, a Russian-American linguist, impacted generative grammar with his work on language structure, particularly his contributions to phonology and morphology.
"Selected Writings" (1962)
"Fundamentals of Language" (1956)
"Linguistics and Poetics" (1960)
"Selected Writings: Word and Language" (1971)
Morris Halle:
Halle was a pivotal player in generative phonology, and his partnership with Chomsky resulted in ground-breaking advances in the comprehension of phonological structures.
"Sound Pattern of English" (1968)
"Metrical Structures in Phonology" (1987)
"Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality" (1968)
"From Memory to Speech and Back" (2002)
Steven Pinker:
Pinker, who is well-known for his work on language and cognition, has contributed to generative grammar with books such as "The Language Instinct" (1994) and "Words and Rules" (1999).
"The Language Instinct" (1994)
"Words and Rules" (1999)
"The Stuff of Thought" (2007)
"The Sense of Style" (2014)
Geoffrey Pullum:
Pullum's contributions to generative grammar, particularly in syntax, are widely acknowledged as co-author of "The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language" (2002).
"The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language" (2002)
"Far from the Madding Gerund and Other Dispatches from Language Log" (2006)
"Phrasal Nominals in English: The Syntax and Semantics of the English Noun Phrase" (1982)
"Papers in Lexical Functional Grammar" (1987)
Richard Montague:
Montague is best recognized for his contributions to formal philosophy and its applications to syntax and semantics, but he also made important contributions to formal grammar.
"Formal Philosophy: Selected Papers of Richard Montague" (1974)
"The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English" (1970)
"English as a Formal Language" (1970)
"Universal Grammar" (1972)
These authors have made substantial contributions to generative grammar, influencing our understanding of language structure, syntax, and semantics.
Generative Grammar Overview:
Concept of Grammar:
Grammar is defined in modern linguistics as the underlying structure of language, with an emphasis on spontaneous language evolution and intuitive grasp by native speakers rather than prescriptive correction.
Chomsky's Generative Idea:
The generative method of Noam Chomsky emphasizes the limitless number of well-formed sentences within a language, as well as the concept of grammars as devices that generate sentences through rules.
Generative Grammar Principles:
Descriptive Nature:
Rather than enforcing language rules, it focuses on explaining language structures.
Competence vs. Performance:
Focuses on innate language knowledge (competence) rather than actual language use (performance).
Explicitness:
The goal is to create accurate rules without relying on past linguistic understanding or context.
Maximal Generality:
Overarching rules are given precedence over individual, situational rules.
Universal Claims:
Derives language facts from universal principles, in search of fundamental linguistic truths.
Psychological Relevance:
Language theories are linked to the mental processes involved in language acquisition and comprehension.
Formal Elements:
Context-Free Grammar:
Rules, tree diagrams, and transformations are used to logically characterize sentences in a language.
Transformational Grammar:
Focuses on deriving new sentences from base sentences through transformations and rules.
Enhancements:
Incorporates a semantic component to address the interaction between syntax and meaning within sentences.
Feature Structures and CFG:
Reflexive Pronouns:
Explains the relationship between reflexive pronouns (-self, -selves) and their antecedents, enabling specific classifications.
Decomposing Categories:
Allows for fine distinctions and references within broader expression classes.
Structural Analyses:
X-bar Theory:
Views phrases as projections of lexical heads, assisting in structural analysis.
Binding Principles:
Establishes rules governing the distributional differences between reflexive and non-reflexive pronouns.
Filler-Gap Dependencies:
Relate to distant relationships between sentence elements, like wh-questions and dependencies between elements.
Language Constraints:
Island Constraints: Imposes limitations on the positions of fillers and gaps, notably in relative clauses.
Coordinate Constructions:
Demand sharing most features, including GAP, across conjuncts in sentences.
Generative Grammar Varieties:
Transformational Theories:
Explore the derivations from underlying to surface forms within a language.
Non-transformational Analyses:
Investigate alternatives based on feature structures and dependencies rather than focusing on transformational processes.
Genesis of Generative Grammar: Robert May
Reflections: Robert May (The Genesis of Generative Grammar: Syntax and Logical Form)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGawYedpR8k&t=6s
The Genesis of Generative Grammar: Syntax and Logical Form
Howard Lasnik
Howard Lasnik is Distinguished University Professor of Linguistics at the University of Maryland
https://nacs.umd.edu/facultyprofile/lasnik/howard
lasnik@umd.edu
Syntax: Richard S. Kayne
https://as.nyu.edu/faculty/richard-s-kayne.html
Professor Andrew Carnie
Andrew Carnie, a Canadian linguist at the University of Arizona, is well-known for his contributions to syntax, morphology, and phonology. He has written or co-written nine books and numerous papers on formal syntactic theory and linguistic characteristics of Gaelic languages, with a strong focus on Celtic languages, particularly Irish and Scottish Gaelic. Carnie has displayed a varied passion, teaching Balkan and worldwide folk dance in addition to his academic achievements. Carnie was named one of the Linguist List's "Linguists of the Day" in 2009, and has worked at the University of Arizona in a variety of roles, including Faculty Director and later interim Dean of the Graduate College, before becoming Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Dean of the Graduate College until 2022. His contributions to academia go beyond scholarship, including key work in building the University's Graduate Center, increasing student diversity, and lobbying for better working conditions and salaries for students.
Link to his YouTube Channel:
Carnie 2021 Syntax 4th Edition
Professor Ian Roberts
https://www.dow.cam.ac.uk/people/professor-ian-roberts
Subject
Linguistics
College PositionFellow in Linguistics
University Position
Professor of Linguistics
Degrees and Honours
BA (Bangor), PhD (USC), LittD, FBA
Research Interests
His research corresponds with Noam Chomsky's premise of an innate human ability for language—Universal Grammar—present from birth and altered by early environmental inputs, since he specialize in comparative syntax within theoretical linguistics. He addresses the problem given by varied grammatical structures across world languages by explaining how these systems differ along accessible lines, which is critical for youngsters learning to speak. His research encompasses Germanic, Romance, and Celtic languages, elucidating the arrangement of grammatical choices given by Universal Grammar through comparative and historical syntax. Notably, from 2011 to 2017, he led a European Research Council Advanced Grant project, which culminated in their 2019 monograph "Parameter Hierarchies and Universal Grammar," which looks into the structuring of grammatical choices given by Universal Grammar.
Select Publications
Galves, C., M. Kato & I. Roberts. 2019. Português Brasileiro; A Segunda Viagem Diacrônica. Campinas: Editora Unicamp.
Ledgeway, A. & I. Roberts. 2017. The Cambridge Handbook of Historical Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Roberts, I. 2017. The Oxford Handbook of Universal Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Roberts, I. 2021. Diachronic Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press [2nd edition].
Roberts, I. 2019. Parameter Hierarchies and Universal Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Roberts, I. 2018. Comparative and Diachronic Syntax. London: Routledge (Routledge Leading Linguists Series).
Sheehan, M., T. Biberauer, A. Holmberg & I. Roberts. 2017. The Final over Final Condition: A Syntactic Universal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Roberts, I. 2017. The Wonders of Language, or How to Make Noises and Influence People. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rethinking Comparative Syntax: Link
Rethinking Comparative Syntax ERC-funded research project
Dr Theresa Biberauer
https://www.mmll.cam.ac.uk/dr-theresa-biberauer
Position(s):
Principal Research Associate
Department/Section:
Theoretical and Applied Linguistics
Faculty of Modern & Medieval Languages & Linguistics
Faculty of Modern & Medieval Languages
University of Cambridge
United Kingdom
Theresa Biberauer is a well-known figure in theoretical, comparative, and historical syntax, with a great interest in language interface, acquisition, and contact concerns. Much of her comprehensive study focuses on the sophisticated clause structures seen in Germanic languages, with a special focus on the different patterns of variation and evolution displayed in Afrikaans, which served as the foundation of her doctoral studies. She has given significant attention to various aspects of the diachrony of English and other Germanic languages since receiving her Ph.D. in 2003. Her significant contributions include key involvement in numerous AHRC-funded projects, most notably as a Research Associate examining Null subjects and parametric theory and later as a Senior Research Associate investigating Structure and Linearization in Disharmonic Word Orders. Theresa has been leading a 5-year ERC-funded grant project, "Reconsidering Comparative Syntax," with a team of specialists and PhD students to develop the topic since 2011. Aside from her research, she is an honorary Associate Professor at her alma mater, Stellenbosch University in South Africa.
Recent research projects:
Rethinking Comparative Syntax ERC funded project in DTAL
Additional notes:
Head in Syntax:
Definition:
The head is the most important element in a phrase; it determines the phrase's grammatical category and often governs the behavior and properties of the entire phrase.
Examples: In phrases, the head could be:
For a noun phrase (NP): The noun is often the head (e.g., "the big dog").
For a verb phrase (VP): The main verb is typically the head (e.g., "is running").
For a prepositional phrase (PP): The preposition functions as the head (e.g., "in the box").
Understanding Syntax
Head Rules in Syntax (General Overview)
Head Identification
Description: Introduces the concept of heads governing phrases' properties.
English: The dog chased the cat.
Phrase Structure and Head-Initial Languages
Explanation: Details the structure differences in phrases concerning head-initial and head-final languages.
English: In head-initial languages like English, the head typically precedes its complements in phrases.
Head Complement Phrases
Discussion: Focuses on how heads and their complements form phrases and how this relationship impacts their structural arrangement.
English: The teacher (head) teaches students (complement).
Head-Movement and Phrasal Movement
Exploration: Considers syntactic operations involving head and phrasal movement, altering sentence structures.
English: The cat chased the mouse, the dog chased the ball. ('Chased' in different positions)
Function of Heads in Syntax
Explanation: Explores the integral role of heads in determining the syntactic and semantic properties of phrases and sentences.
English: The teacher teaches the class.
Head Licensing and Projection Principle
Examination: Investigates the principles governing head licensing and their projection within syntactic structures.
English: [The dog] [is chasing the cat] vs. [The cat is chasing].
Role of Heads in Syntactic Categories
Explanation: Demonstrates how different heads contribute to the establishment of various syntactic categories.
English: The dog chases. ('Dog' as a noun)
Head Rules in Syntax (General Overview):
Head Identification:
Heads are crucial elements within phrases that determine the phrase's properties and characteristics.
Phrase Structure and Head-Initial Languages:
Explains the structural variations in phrases and how they differ between head-initial and head-final languages.
Example: English is head-initial in phrases, where the head appears first (e.g., "the big house").
Head Complement Phrases:
Discusses the relationship between heads and their complements, elucidating how they create phrases.
Example: In the phrase "watch a movie," "watch" is the head taking "a movie" as its complement.
Head-Movement and Phrasal Movement:
Explores syntactic operations involving head-movement and phrasal movement, altering sentence structures.
Example: In questions like "What did you eat?" the movement of "what" (interrogative head) changes the sentence structure.
Function of Heads in Syntax:
Details how heads play a pivotal role in establishing the syntactic and semantic properties of sentences.
Example: In "the fast car," "fast" functions as the head, determining the type of car.
Head Licensing and Projection Principle:
Examines the principles that govern the licensing of heads and their projection within syntactic structures.
Example: In "running fast," the head "fast" is projected from the adjective category.
Role of Heads in Syntactic Categories:
Explores how different heads contribute to establishing various syntactic categories in a sentence.
Example: The verb head in "he reads intently" establishes the action within the sentence.
Syntax Fundamentals:
Description: Provides an introductory understanding of basic syntax principles in linguistics.
English: Understanding the structure of sentences.
Syntactic Structures and Phrase Analysis:
Description: Explores phrase constituents and structures through a generative lens.
English: The quick brown fox jumps.
Dependency Grammar and Structure Relations
Description: Discusses dependencies between sentence elements and their structural relations.
English: The boy saw a girl with a telescope.
Syntactic Theories and Frameworks
Description: Explores various theories and frameworks governing sentence structure.
English: Transformational grammar and case grammar.
Case Studies and Language Diversity
Description: Illustrates different syntactic structures across languages through case studies.
English: Comparing subject-verb-object (SVO) and subject-object-verb (SOV) languages.
Syntactic Categories and Features
Description: Explores various syntactic categories and their distinguishing features.
English: Nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs.
Generative Principles and Language Universals
Description: Focuses on universal principles in language structures.
English: Universal grammar principles by Noam Chomsky.
Syntax and Cognitive Processes
Description: Examines syntax's role in cognitive processes and language acquisition.
English: Understanding sentence structure in language development.
Syntax: Generative Grammar
Introduction to Syntax:
English: The study of sentence structure provides insights into how words combine to form coherent expressions. For instance, "The cat sat on the mat" follows a specific structure.
Urdu: "میری کتاب ٹیبل پر ہے" (Meri kitaab table par hai) shows how Urdu sentences are structured, conveying possession ("my book") and location ("on the table").
Saraiki: "اس چھوٹے بچے دا نام احمد ہے" (Aas chhote bache da naan Ahmed hai) highlights sentence structure by stating "The name of this small child is Ahmed."
Phrase Structure Rules:
Explores the construction of sentences through phrase structure rules and tree diagrams, elucidating the relationships between different linguistic elements.
English: The sentence "She eats fruit" follows a subject-verb-object (SVO) structure common in English.
Urdu: "وہ کتاب پڑھتا ہے" (Woh kitaab parhta hai) exhibits an SOV structure, different from English, where the verb comes after the object.
Saraiki: "اوہ ڪتاب پڙهندي اَهي" (Oh kitaab parhandi ahi) demonstrates the SOV pattern similar to Urdu.
X-bar Theory and Structural Analysis:
Discusses X-bar theory, which presents phrases as projections of lexical heads, facilitating structural analysis in syntax.
English: "The cat on the mat" reveals hierarchical structures, where "on the mat" functions as a single phrase within the larger structure.
Transformations and Sentence Derivation:
Examines transformational rules and processes for deriving new sentences from base sentences, emphasizing the mechanisms of these transformations.
English: "The cat sat on the mat" transforms to "On the mat sat the cat," demonstrating how word order can change for emphasis.
Urdu: "وہ کتاب پڑھتا ہے" (Woh kitaab parhta hai) might transform to "کتاب وہ پڑھتا ہے" (Kitaab woh parhta hai) for emphasis.
Saraiki: "اوہ ڪتاب پڙهندي اَهي" (Oh kitaab parhandi ahi) can transform to "ڪتاب اوہ پڙهندي اَهي" (Kitaab oh parhandi ahi) for a different emphasis.
Generative Principles and Language Universals:
Focuses on the principles guiding generative grammar, especially its claims about universal linguistic features and structures.
English, Urdu, and Saraiki: All three languages adhere to basic syntactic principles, such as subject-verb agreement, word order, and noun-phrase structure, despite variations in syntax.
Dependency Relations and Filler-Gap Structures:
Explores dependencies between sentence elements, such as filler-gap structures and their relevance in understanding language constructions.
English: "The book that I read" shows filler-gap relations where "that I read" is a relative clause describing the book.
Urdu: "وہ لڑکی جس نے کتاب پڑھی" (Woh larki jis ne kitaab parhi) portrays a similar filler-gap structure.
Saraiki: "اوه لڑکی جنھن نے ڪتاب پڙھندی" (Oh larki jinhan ne kitaab parhandi) also exhibits a parallel construction.
Constituent Structure and Sentence Comprehension:
How constituent structure within sentences aids in understanding and comprehending the syntax and meaning of different linguistic elements.
Understanding the structure of sentences aids in comprehending how words and phrases interact, shaping meaning in each language,English, Urdu, and Saraiki
Description: Shows how the arrangement of words and phrases in sentences helps understand their meaning and structure in different languages.
Examples:
English: The cat (noun phrase) sat on the mat (prepositional phrase).
Urdu: بلی گدھے پر بیٹھی (Billi gadhay par baithi).
Saraiki: ڪتی گھوڑی تے بیٹھی ائی (Katti ghoRi te baithi ai).
References
Auroux, Sylvain; E. F. K. Koerner; Hans-Josef Niederehe; and Kees Versteegh (eds.) 2000–2006. History of the language sciences/Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaften/Histoire des sciences du langage. 3 vols. (Handbooks of linguistics and communication science.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Brighton, Shane. 2019. Critical war studies. Routledge handbook of critical international relations, ed. by Jenny Edkins, 129–42. London: Routledge
Burke, Kenneth. 1941. The philosophy of literary form: Studies in symbolic action. Baton Rouge: University of Louisiana Press.
Chomsky, A. Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Falk, J. S. (1997). [Review of Ideology and Linguistic Theory: Noam Chomsky and the Deep Structure Debates, by G. J. Huck & J. A. Goldsmith]. Language, 73(2), 406–409. https://doi.org/10.2307/416035
Goldsmith, John A. 2015. Towards a new empiricism for linguistics. Chapter 3 of Chater et al.
Goldsmith, John A. and Bernard Laks. 2019. Battle in the Mind Fields. University of Chicago Press.
Grevisse, Maurice. 2016 [1936]. Le bon usage. Duculot.
Halitsky, David. 2006. BPEL and the ‘generative wars’ of the last century: A cautionary tale. SAP, No - vember 29, 2006. Online: https://blogs.sap.com/2006/11/29/bpel-and-the-generative-wars-of-the-last -century-a-cautionary-tale/
Harris, Randy Allen. 2021 [1993]. The linguistics wars. 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [1st edn. 1993.]
Harris, R. (2021). The Linguistics Wars.
Heschel, Susannah. 2008. The Aryan Jesus: Christian theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Huck, Geoffrey J. and John A. Goldsmith. 1995. The Ideological Structure of Linguistic Theory. London: Routledge.
Huck, Geoffrey, and John Goldsmith. 1995. Ideology and linguistic theory: Noam Chomsky and the deep structure debates. London: Routledge.
Itkonen, Esa. 1991. Universal history of linguistics: India, China, Arabia, Europe. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kiparsky, Paul. 1985. Some consequences of lexical phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2, 85-138.
Kniffka, Hannes (ed.) 2001. Indigenous grammar across cultures. Bern: Peter Lang.
Müller, F. Max. 1868. On the stratification of language. London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer.
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 1986 [1980]. Linguistic theory in America. 2nd edn. New York: Academic Press. [1st edn. 1980.]
(Chater,) Nicolas, Alexander Clark, John Goldsmith, and A. Perfors. 2015. Empiricism and Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ruwet, Nicolas. 1991. Syntax and Human Experience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Trubetzkoy, Nikolai. 1991 [1935]. The legacy of Genghis Khan and other essays on Russiaʼs identity. Ed by Anatoly Liberman. Trans. by Kenneth Brostrom and Anatoly Liberman. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
The Linguistics Wars: Chomsky, Lakoff, and the Battle over Deep Structure, 2nd edn (New York, 2021; online edn, Oxford Academic, 18 Nov. 2021), https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199740338.002.0020, accessed 12 Nov. 2023.
Versteegh, Kees. 2006. The study of non-Western linguistic traditions. In Auroux et al., vol. 3, 2791–2802. Whitney, William Dwight. 1867. Language and the study of language. New York: Charles Scribner & Co.
Instructor. Prof. Norvin W. Richards
Introduction To Linguistics
