Mid-level generalizations of generative linguistics: Experimental robustness, cognitive underpinnings and the interdisciplinarity paradox

IF 0.6 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Evelina Leivada
{"title":"Mid-level generalizations of generative linguistics: Experimental robustness, cognitive underpinnings and the interdisciplinarity paradox","authors":"Evelina Leivada","doi":"10.1515/zfs-2020-2021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This work examines the nature of the so-called “mid-level generalizations of generative linguistics” (MLGs). In 2015, Generative Syntax in the 21st Century: The Road Ahead was organized. One of the consensus points that emerged related to the need for establishing a canon, the absence of which was argued to be a major challenge for the field, raising issues of interdisciplinarity and interaction. Addressing this challenge, one of the outcomes of this conference was a list of MLGs. These refer to results that are well established and uncontroversially accepted. The aim of the present work is to embed some MLGs into a broader perspective. I take the Cinque hierarchies for adverbs and adjectives and the Final-over-Final Constraint as case studies in order to determine their experimental robustness. It is showed that at least some MLGs face problems of inadequacy when tapped into through rigorous testing, because they rule out data that are actually attested. I then discuss the nature of some MLGs and show that in their watered-down versions, they do hold and can be derived from general cognitive/computational biases. This voids the need to cast them as language-specific principles, in line with the Chomskyan urge to approach Universal Grammar from below.","PeriodicalId":43494,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Sprachwissenschaft","volume":"39 1","pages":"357 - 374"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/zfs-2020-2021","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift Fur Sprachwissenschaft","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zfs-2020-2021","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Abstract This work examines the nature of the so-called “mid-level generalizations of generative linguistics” (MLGs). In 2015, Generative Syntax in the 21st Century: The Road Ahead was organized. One of the consensus points that emerged related to the need for establishing a canon, the absence of which was argued to be a major challenge for the field, raising issues of interdisciplinarity and interaction. Addressing this challenge, one of the outcomes of this conference was a list of MLGs. These refer to results that are well established and uncontroversially accepted. The aim of the present work is to embed some MLGs into a broader perspective. I take the Cinque hierarchies for adverbs and adjectives and the Final-over-Final Constraint as case studies in order to determine their experimental robustness. It is showed that at least some MLGs face problems of inadequacy when tapped into through rigorous testing, because they rule out data that are actually attested. I then discuss the nature of some MLGs and show that in their watered-down versions, they do hold and can be derived from general cognitive/computational biases. This voids the need to cast them as language-specific principles, in line with the Chomskyan urge to approach Universal Grammar from below.
生成语言学的中级概括:实验稳健性、认知基础和跨学科悖论
摘要这项工作考察了所谓的“生成语言学的中级概括”(MLG)的性质。2015年,组织了《21世纪的生成语法:前方之路》。出现的一个共识点涉及建立一个正典的必要性,有人认为,缺乏正典是该领域的一个重大挑战,提出了跨学科和互动的问题。为了应对这一挑战,本次会议的成果之一是一份MLG清单。这些是指已经确立且无争议接受的结果。本工作的目的是将一些MLG嵌入到更广阔的视野中。为了确定它们的实验稳健性,我以副词和形容词的五阶结构和词尾超过词尾约束作为案例研究。研究表明,至少有一些MLG在通过严格测试时面临不足的问题,因为他们排除了实际证明的数据。然后,我讨论了一些MLG的性质,并表明在它们淡化的版本中,它们确实成立,并且可以从一般的认知/计算偏见中得出。这就消除了将其视为特定语言原则的必要性,符合乔姆斯基从下面探讨通用语法的冲动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The aim of the journal is to promote linguistic research by publishing high-quality contributions and thematic special issues from all fields and trends of modern linguistics. In addition to articles and reviews, the journal also features contributions to discussions on current controversies in the field as well as overview articles outlining the state-of-the art of relevant research paradigms. Topics: -General Linguistics -Language Typology -Language acquisition, language change and synchronic variation -Empirical linguistics: experimental and corpus-based research -Contributions to theory-building
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信