Ljiljana Progovac的《进化语法》

IF 2.1 N/A LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
R. Truswell
{"title":"Ljiljana Progovac的《进化语法》","authors":"R. Truswell","doi":"10.1093/JOLE/LZW008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evolutionary syntax , by Ljiljana Progovac, OUP (2015) 280 pp, £24.99.\n\nIn this monograph, Progovac argues for an incremental evolution of cognitive capacities underpinning syntactic structure, with Conjoin (a binary, non-recursive operation immune to movement and embedding) anteceding recursive Merge. This distinction plays out over four stages, described in Chapters 1–4, with Merge only visible in stage 4. \n\n1. Single words;\n\n2. Two-word combinations, for example, Case closed ;\n\n3. ‘Proto-coordination’, where linkers like English as or Mandarin de mark binary predicate–argument relations;\n\n4. Specific functional categories, permitting recursive syntactic structures.\n\nProgovac’s primary evidence comes from syntactic analysis of constructions, such as those above, identified as linguistic fossils (Jackendoff 1999). However, most chapters contain sections on ‘corroborating evidence’, summarizing findings from acquisition, imaging studies, and other related fields, although the interpretation of such evidence is often inconclusive (Boeckx 2016).\n\nThere are several innovations in the details. For example, the stage 2 grammar, which creates binary verb–noun (VN) combinations, is claimed to have no subject–object distinction (resulting in ‘absolutive’ grammar in Progovac’s terms). This is reflected in English and Serbian VN compounds, where a rattlesnake is a snake that rattles, while rotgut is alcohol that rots guts. Similar indeterminacy is demonstrated in Tongan and Riau Indonesian. A second novel claim is that the capacity for binary protosyntactic combination within a ‘clause’ (stage 2) is linked to binary combination of clauses (stage 2a), giving a strictly finite device which can mimic subordination to a limited extent. Likewise, linkers at stage 3 may appear between predicate and argument, or between clauses.\n\nMany of these novel accounts of individual constructions are genuinely insightful and thought-provoking. Progovac argues that constructions which look quirky and cussed from the perspective of modern syntactic theory may be elegantly analysed within the terms of less expressive models of syntax. As … rob.truswell{at}ed.ac.uk","PeriodicalId":37118,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language Evolution","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/JOLE/LZW008","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evolutionary Syntax , by Ljiljana Progovac\",\"authors\":\"R. Truswell\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/JOLE/LZW008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Evolutionary syntax , by Ljiljana Progovac, OUP (2015) 280 pp, £24.99.\\n\\nIn this monograph, Progovac argues for an incremental evolution of cognitive capacities underpinning syntactic structure, with Conjoin (a binary, non-recursive operation immune to movement and embedding) anteceding recursive Merge. This distinction plays out over four stages, described in Chapters 1–4, with Merge only visible in stage 4. \\n\\n1. Single words;\\n\\n2. Two-word combinations, for example, Case closed ;\\n\\n3. ‘Proto-coordination’, where linkers like English as or Mandarin de mark binary predicate–argument relations;\\n\\n4. Specific functional categories, permitting recursive syntactic structures.\\n\\nProgovac’s primary evidence comes from syntactic analysis of constructions, such as those above, identified as linguistic fossils (Jackendoff 1999). However, most chapters contain sections on ‘corroborating evidence’, summarizing findings from acquisition, imaging studies, and other related fields, although the interpretation of such evidence is often inconclusive (Boeckx 2016).\\n\\nThere are several innovations in the details. For example, the stage 2 grammar, which creates binary verb–noun (VN) combinations, is claimed to have no subject–object distinction (resulting in ‘absolutive’ grammar in Progovac’s terms). This is reflected in English and Serbian VN compounds, where a rattlesnake is a snake that rattles, while rotgut is alcohol that rots guts. Similar indeterminacy is demonstrated in Tongan and Riau Indonesian. A second novel claim is that the capacity for binary protosyntactic combination within a ‘clause’ (stage 2) is linked to binary combination of clauses (stage 2a), giving a strictly finite device which can mimic subordination to a limited extent. Likewise, linkers at stage 3 may appear between predicate and argument, or between clauses.\\n\\nMany of these novel accounts of individual constructions are genuinely insightful and thought-provoking. Progovac argues that constructions which look quirky and cussed from the perspective of modern syntactic theory may be elegantly analysed within the terms of less expressive models of syntax. As … rob.truswell{at}ed.ac.uk\",\"PeriodicalId\":37118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Language Evolution\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/JOLE/LZW008\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Language Evolution\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOLE/LZW008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language Evolution","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOLE/LZW008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《进化语法》,Ljiljana Progovac著,OUP出版社(2015),280页,24.99英镑。在这本专著中,Progovac论证了支撑句法结构的认知能力的增量进化,将Conjoin(一种二进制的、不受移动和嵌入影响的非递归操作)置于递归Merge之前。这种区别在第1-4章中描述了四个阶段,合并只在第4阶段可见。1. 单个词;2。2 .两个词的组合,例如:大小写封闭;3 .“原配位”,即英语as或普通话等联结者标记二元谓词-实参关系;特定的功能类别,允许递归语法结构。Progovac的主要证据来自对上述结构的句法分析,这些结构被认为是语言化石(Jackendoff 1999)。然而,大多数章节包含“确证证据”部分,总结了采集、成像研究和其他相关领域的发现,尽管对这些证据的解释往往是不确定的(Boeckx 2016)。在细节上有几处创新。例如,第二阶段语法,它创造了二元动词-名词(VN)组合,声称没有主语-宾语的区别(导致Progovac术语中的“绝对”语法)。这反映在英语和塞尔维亚语的VN化合物中,其中rattlesnake是一种发出嘎嘎声的蛇,而rotgut是一种腐烂内脏的酒精。类似的不确定性在汤加和印尼廖内也有体现。第二个新颖的主张是,在“子句”(阶段2)中二元原句法组合的能力与子句的二元组合(阶段2a)相关联,给出了一个严格有限的装置,可以在有限范围内模拟从属关系。同样,阶段3的连接器可能出现在谓词和参数之间,或者子句之间。这些关于个体建筑的新颖叙述中,有许多是真正有见地的,发人深省的。普罗戈瓦茨认为,从现代句法理论的角度来看,那些看起来古怪和拙劣的结构,可以在表达能力较差的句法模型中进行优雅的分析。就像…rob. trustwell {at} .ac.uk
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evolutionary Syntax , by Ljiljana Progovac
Evolutionary syntax , by Ljiljana Progovac, OUP (2015) 280 pp, £24.99. In this monograph, Progovac argues for an incremental evolution of cognitive capacities underpinning syntactic structure, with Conjoin (a binary, non-recursive operation immune to movement and embedding) anteceding recursive Merge. This distinction plays out over four stages, described in Chapters 1–4, with Merge only visible in stage 4. 1. Single words; 2. Two-word combinations, for example, Case closed ; 3. ‘Proto-coordination’, where linkers like English as or Mandarin de mark binary predicate–argument relations; 4. Specific functional categories, permitting recursive syntactic structures. Progovac’s primary evidence comes from syntactic analysis of constructions, such as those above, identified as linguistic fossils (Jackendoff 1999). However, most chapters contain sections on ‘corroborating evidence’, summarizing findings from acquisition, imaging studies, and other related fields, although the interpretation of such evidence is often inconclusive (Boeckx 2016). There are several innovations in the details. For example, the stage 2 grammar, which creates binary verb–noun (VN) combinations, is claimed to have no subject–object distinction (resulting in ‘absolutive’ grammar in Progovac’s terms). This is reflected in English and Serbian VN compounds, where a rattlesnake is a snake that rattles, while rotgut is alcohol that rots guts. Similar indeterminacy is demonstrated in Tongan and Riau Indonesian. A second novel claim is that the capacity for binary protosyntactic combination within a ‘clause’ (stage 2) is linked to binary combination of clauses (stage 2a), giving a strictly finite device which can mimic subordination to a limited extent. Likewise, linkers at stage 3 may appear between predicate and argument, or between clauses. Many of these novel accounts of individual constructions are genuinely insightful and thought-provoking. Progovac argues that constructions which look quirky and cussed from the perspective of modern syntactic theory may be elegantly analysed within the terms of less expressive models of syntax. As … rob.truswell{at}ed.ac.uk
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Language Evolution
Journal of Language Evolution Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
8
×
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