Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 2 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Generative Grammar | Lyons | I 158 Generative Grammar/Transformational Grammar/Lyons: "generative" is often misunderstood: generative grammar does not have to be transformational grammar. Both are often confused, since Chomsky introduced the terms at the same time. Transformation: was already used by Harris before in the same way as later by Chomsky. Def Generative/Grammar/Lyons: 1. "projective" ("predictive"): this also determines potential sentences. Through a number of grammatical rules that describe a corpus of sentences by "projecting" this corpus onto a larger number of sentences. I 159 2. "Explicit" ("formal"): provides a decision procedure as to whether sentences or combinations of language elements are grammatical or not. (similar in mathematics: Example 2 n: gives even numbers). A structural description is also provided. I 161 This second meaning of "generative" requires the formalization of grammatical theory. ((s) Instead of a list of rules). >Distribution/Lyons, >Grammar, cf. >Universal grammar, >Transformational grammar, >Categorial grammar. Lyons I 237 Generative Grammar/ChomskyVsBloomfield/Lyons: Chomsky speaks of generation. Generative Method, >Generative Grammar. BloomfieldVsChomsky: Bloomfield speaks of analysis (classification). >L. Bloomfield, >N. Chomsky. |
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 |
| Words | Bloomfield | Lyons I 200 Lexeme/Linguistics/Lyons: in this (abstract) use we determined above that e. g."singing" is only a form of another word, while "singer" is a word of its own. >Lexemes. Modern LinguisticsVs: neglects this abstract form. e.g.: BloomfieldVsTradition: the school grammar is inaccurate because it describes units such as e.g. book, books, or e.g. do, does, did, as different forms of the same word. I 201 LyonsVsBloomfield: however, is inaccurate in that it is still up to us how we define "word". Lexeme/Lyons: let's introduce the lexeme here as the more abstract form of the word (neither phonological, nor grammatical). These abstract units, according to the syntactic rules, are present in different forms of flexion. Cf. >Morphemes, >Phonemes, >Phonology, cf. >Signs, Lexeme/Spelling/Lyons: with capital letters e.g. CUT. Lyons I 204 Def Word/Bloomfield/Lyons: (most famous modern definition): the word is the "smallest free form". Def Bound Form/Bloomfield/Lyons: Shapes that never appear alone as whole utterances. Def Free Form: a form that can occur alone as an expression. Def Smallest Free Form/Bloomfield: any free form that does not contain any part of its own. (= word). ((s)Vs: Problem: then unacceptable is not a word, because acceptable is a word). LyonsVsBloomfield: this applies to phonological rather than grammatical words. I 205 Bloomfield: did not distinguish clearly between grammatical and phonological words. BloomfieldVsBloomfield/Lyons: he himself recognised that some words are not covered by his definition, such as "the" and "a" (indefinite article). This is because they hardly ever appear as independent utterances. Solution/Bloomfield: additional criterion: treat "the" and "a" as "this" and "that". These occur sometimes freely ((s) in answers) and are in the same environment within the sentence. LyonsVsBloomfield: the definition has been accepted by many, but it does not serve the main purpose of the grammatical description to create sentences ((s) rules?) from which actual and possible expressions can be derived. All questions of classification must be subordinated to this objective. |
LingBloom I Leonard Bloomfield Language New York 1945 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 |
| |||
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author Vs Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bloomfield, L. | Chomsky Vs Bloomfield, L. | Lyons I 237 ChomskyVsBloomfield: speaks of creation. Generative method > generative grammar. BloomfieldVsChomsky: speaks of analysis (classification). generative grammar/Chomsky/Lyons: sets limits to the classification. E.g. longlegs/Bloomfield: are exocentric so that they can occur both as singular as well as plural. However, this shows that these forms are no constructions. They must rather be registered in the lexicon as not further analyzable entities. Distribution: of E.g. longlegs is different from that of long legs. BloomfieldVsChomsky: this cannot be accounted for with a productive formation rule. |
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 |
| Bloomfield, L. | Lyons, J. Vs Bloomfield, L. | Lyons I 201 Lexem/Linguistics/Lyons: in this (more abstract) use we have stated above that e.g. "singing" is only a form of another word, while "singer" is a word of its own. Modern LinguisticsVs: neglects this abstract form. E.g.: BloomfieldVsTradition: the school grammar is inaccurate because it designates units such as e.g. book, books, or e.g. do, does, did as different forms of the same word. I 201 LyonsVsBloomfield: but is inaccurate in that it is still up to us how we define "word". Lexem/Lyons: here we introduce the more abstract form of word (neither phonological nor grammatical). It is these abstract units that occur in different flexion forms according to the syntactic rules. Lexem/Writing/Lyons: with capital letters e.g. CUT. Word/Definition/Lyons: Problem: how to define a unit that occupies a middle rank between morpheme and proposition, so that it corresponds to some extent to our intuitions, whereby these intuitions are rather guided by the non-essential orthographic convention? Def Word/Bloomfield/Lyons: (best known modern definition): the word is the "smallest free form" ((s) in the language). Def bound form/Bloomfield/Lyons: forms that never occur alone as whole utterances. Def free form: a form that can occur alone as an utterance. Def smallest free form/Bloomfield: any free form that does not contain a part itself. (= word). LyonsVsBloomfield: this applies more to phonological than to grammatical words. I 205 Bloomfield: did not clearly distinguish between grammatical and phonological words. BloomfieldVsBloomfield/Lyons: Bloomfield himself realized that some words are not covered by his definition like "the" and "a" (indefinite article). This is because they hardly ever occur as independent utterances. Solution/Bloomfield: additional criterion: to treat "the" and "a" like "this" and "that". These sometimes occur freely ((s) in answers) and stand within the sentence in the same environment. LyonsVsBloomfield: the definition has been accepted by many, but it does not serve the main purpose of grammatical description to generate sentences from which actual and possible utterances can be derived. All questions of classification must be subordinated to this goal. |
Ly II John Lyons Semantics Cambridge, MA 1977 |
| |||