CATEGORIES:
BiologyChemistryConstructionCultureEcologyEconomyElectronicsFinanceGeographyHistoryInformaticsLawMathematicsMechanicsMedicineOtherPedagogyPhilosophyPhysicsPolicyPsychologySociologySportTourism
Explaining why languages are not perfect“…because men often follow the meaning of their thoughts rather than the words which are used to express them, and because often, in order to abbreviate, they omit something from discourse, or even because, considering elegance of style, they allow some word which seems superfluous, or they reverse the natural order of words — for all these reasons it has come about that four modes of speaking called figurative were introduced, which are like so many irregularities in grammar, although they are sometimes perfections and beautifications of a language”. Chomsky on Port Royal An important role in the current perception of the Port Royal grammar is played by Chomsky’s book Cartesian grammar (1966). This book has been heavily criticized by specialists in 17th Century linguistics, for not representing Port Royal in the right frame It still plays an important role at least in our perception (reception) of the Port Royal Grammar • Chomsky’s Epiphenomenalism about Language • Language vs. Grammar “Grammar” is a precise definite term while “language” is a vague and derivative term which we could well dispense of, without much loss. The grammar in someone mind/brain is real while language is not. • The aim of linguistics can be summarized by four questions. 1. What constitutes knowledge of language?
2. How is such knowledge acquired?
3. How is such knowledge put to use?
4. What are the physical mechanisms that serve as the material basis? Problems with Chomsky’s approach • Chomsky is not so much interested in the historical truth about the people involved (how did these people see themselves), but mostly in finding intellectual forefathers (which he also explicitly mentions), hence in their ideas • For instance, the fact that PR had a pedagogical goal is ignored, and so is the fact that there might have been conceptual gaps between Cartesian philosophy and PR Grammar • He therefore appropriates the book, as is quite commonly the case (as weh have seen) with historical work. Rene Descartes • For Chomsky, the linguistics expressed in (among others) the PR Grammar is Cartesian, because it is based on a rationalist spirit which is expressed most clearly in Descartes • An important difference between man and animal for Descartes is that animal behaviour can be explained purely mechanistically, but man has unique abilities (although most of his bodily behaviour can be explained in such a way) • The difference is clearest in human language • Discourse on Method “It is quite remarkable that there are no men so dull-witted or stupid — and this includes even madmen — that they are incapable of arranging various words together and forming an utterance from them in order to make their thoughts understood; whereas there is no other animal, however perfect and well endowed it may be, that can do the same.” Humboldt • The most important and last heir to Descartes according to Chomsky was Wilhelm von Humboldt • For Humboldt, the only true definition of language is “a productive activity”: “It is the ever repeated mental labour of making articulated sound capable of expressing thought” • Deep Structure vs. Surface Structure “In these terms, we can formulate a second fundamental conclusion of Cartesian linguistics, namely, that deep and surface structures need not be identical. The underlying organization of a sentence relevant to semantic interpretation is not necessarily revealed by the actual arrangement and phrasing of its given components.” • Deep Structure vs. Surface Structure Complex sentences “contain, at least in our mind, several judgments, from which one can make as many propositions. Thus, for example, when I say ‘Invisible God created the visible world’ three judgments that pass through my mind are included in this proposition. For I judge: 1 that God is invisible; 2 that He created the world; 3 that the world is visible; and of these three propositions, the second is the principal and essential one of the original proposition. But the first and the third are only subordinate, and comprise only part of the principal proposition — the first composing its subject, the third its Predicate” • Deep vs. Surface Structure, and Creativity The deep/surface structure distinction is what helps explaining linguistic creativity. The Port Royal’s distinction between deep and surface structure implicitly contains recursive devices allowing for infinite uses of the finite means that it disposes. The deep structure is what gets represented in the mind when a sentence is produced/heard. • Relative clauses A further example of an analysis in PR Grammar is the distinction between explicative (nonrestrictive or appositive) and determinative (restrictive) clauses • “A complex expression is a mere explication if either (1) the idea expressed by the complex expression is already contained in the comprehension of expressed by the principal word of the complex expression, or (2) the idea expressed by the complex expression is the idea of some accidental characteristic of all the inferiors of an idea expressed by the principal word. • A complex expression is a determination if the extension of the idea expressed by the complex term is less than the extension of the idea expressed by the principal word.” • The inner/outer aspect of language • According to Port Royal grammarians we must distinguish between language having an inner and an outer aspect. • Hence we distinguish between a sentence qua expression of a thought and the physical shape of a sentence (i.e. an utterance). • To show the structure of the mind the grammar should reflect properties of all minds, it should be universal. • Transformation Rules There are transformation rules operating from deep to surface structure. It is the linguist’s job to figure out these rules. The grammarians of Port Royal are the first to recognize the two systems of rules: 1. A base system generating deep structure.
2. A transformational system mapping these deep structures into surface structure. • Innate We do not necessarily mean that it is present at birth or in an embryo. It rather means that it automatically appears during the development, regardless on whether it is present at birth or not. It does not mean that it is free from the input of the environment. E.g. vision capacity. • Linguistic creativity and the argument for mental grammar The expressive variety of language use implies that the brain of a linguistically competent user contains a set of unconscious grammatical principles. (cf. Jackendoff R. 1994. Patterns in the Mind. Basic Books Harper Collins, New York: 6).
Date: 2015-12-24; view: 1105
|