Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Active: from the perspective of an agent. The passive form of the corresponding verb does not lead to a change in the meaning of the verb._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
N. Chomsky on Active/passive - Dictionary of Arguments
Lyons I 258 Active/Passive/Transformational Grammar/Chomsky/Lyons: although subject and object are interchanged, identity or similarity prevails between the two corresponding sentences in the deep structure. However, this is also a prerequisite for determining that subject and object can be exchanged. >Transformational grammar, >Subject, >Object, >Grammar, >Syntax. Problem: there is disagreement about whether dissimilation prevails here or not. For example, suppose that "the shooting of the hunters" is not ambiguous. Problem: then we would still require the grammar to be written in the following way that a) between "the shooting of the hunters" and the transitive sentence NP1 "shoot the hunters", and b) between "the hunters shooting" and the intransitive "the hunters shoot" relationships are established. Lyons I 261 Active/Passive/Transformational Grammar/Chomsky/Lyons: (N. Chomsky, Syntactic Structures, Berlin, New York 1957) Passive (optional) Structural descriptions: NP – Aux – V NP Structural change: X1 – X2 - X3 – X4 > X4 – X2 + be + en – V – by + X1 (Notation: concatenation: sometimes „+“, sometimes “–„ (is not explained here). different: (formally more precise): NP1 – Aux – V – NP2 > Aux + be + en – V – by + NP1 T-rule: contains two parts: the description (analysis, notation: SA, SB) and the change (structural change, notation: SC, SV). By definition, T-rules are only effective in chains that can be analyzed by means of the elements indicated in their structural description. Transformation: its result is exactly what has already been described in the alternative representation of the rule: NP1 – Aux – V – NP2 > Aux + be + en – V – by + NP1 What does it mean that the chain can be analyzed using four elements (NP, Aux, V and NP)? I 262 The following chains resulted from the rules: from (1): NP + VP (2): NP + Verb + NP (3) : NP sing + Verb + NP sing (4): T + N + 0 + Verb + T + N + 0 (6): T + N + 0 + Aux+ V + T + N + 0 (7) T + N + 0 + C + M + have + en + V + T ü N + 0. Rule (3) n d(4) was applied twice (4), because NP sing f both positions were selected in the output of rule (2). Rule (5) was not applicable. Rule (7): Au has been replaced by C + M + have + en. The edition of (7) is a core chain which is underlied by the type of corresponding active and passive sentences, e.g. "The man will have read the book" and "The book will have been read by the man". Passive transformation: now we apply them to the chain: where none of the elements specified in the structural description with respect to the passive transformation occur in the core chain. Furthermore, we did not come across the chain NP + Aux + V + Np at any stage of deriving the core chain through the PS rules. Therefore, we review the rules again to create the constituent structure of the desired core chain: By rule (1): ∑ (NP + VP) (2): ∑ (NP + VP)(Verb + NP)) (3): ∑ (NP (NP sing) + VP(Verb + NP(NP sing))) (4): ∑ (NP (NP sing (T + N + 0)) + VP(Verb + NP(NP sing(T + N + 0)))) (6): ∑ (NP (NP sing (T + N + 0)) + VP(Verb (Aux + V)+ NP(NP sing(T + N + 0)))) (7): ∑ (NP (NP sing (T + N + 0)) + VP(Verb (Aux (C + M + have + en) + V)+ NP(NP sing(T + N + 0)))). This is the constituent structure of sentences that is the basis of sentences such as "The man will have read the book" and "The book will have been read by the man." (active/passive). Lyons I 262 Definition Phrase Marker/P-Marker/Grammar/Chomsky/Lyons: if a chain is represented with constituent parentheses and parentheses indices (labelled-bracketing), this is referred to as a formation marker or P-marker. Def parenthesis index: labelled-bracketing/terminology: Designation of a node in the tree diagram or symbol in front of a parenthesis. I 263 Def Dominate/Dominance/Chomsky/Lyons: a symbol dominates an entire parentheses expression when the parentheses in the P marker is opened immediately after this symbol. In the tree diagram: The symbol dominates everything that is derived from the node indicated by the symbol. Def (structural) analyzability/grammar/Chomsky/Lyons: (is a condition for the application of T-rules): if a chain without residual elements can be broken down into subchains, each of which is dominated by a symbol given in the structural description of the T-rules, then the chain satisfies the conditions defined by the structural description (SB). Passive transformation/Chomsky/Lyons: (is optional) and looks like this: {T + N + 0} + {C + M + have + en} + {V} + {T + N + 0} NP1 - Aux - V - NP2 Transformation: due to the operation of the actual T-Rule (in the structural change), a further chain (no more core chain) results as output, which then serves with its P-marker as input for further T-Rules. >Unambiguity._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Chomsky I Noam Chomsky "Linguistics and Philosophy", in: Language and Philosophy, (Ed) Sidney Hook New York 1969 pp. 51-94 In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle, Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Chomsky II Noam Chomsky "Some empirical assumptions in modern philosophy of language" in: Philosophy, Science, and Method, Essays in Honor of E. Nagel (Eds. S. Morgenbesser, P. Suppes and M- White) New York 1969, pp. 260-285 In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle, Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 Chomsky IV N. Chomsky Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge/MA 1965 German Edition: Aspekte der Syntaxtheorie Frankfurt 1978 Chomsky V N. Chomsky Language and Mind Cambridge 2006 Ly II John Lyons Semantics Cambridge, MA 1977 Lyons I John Lyons Introduction to Theoretical Lingustics, Cambridge/MA 1968 German Edition: Einführung in die moderne Linguistik München 1995 |
||
> Counter arguments against Chomsky
> Counter arguments in relation to Active/passive
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-18