Content deleted Content added
fx |
→Interpretive semantics and generative semantics: the is the question |
||
Line 10:
Generative semantics is no longer practiced under that name, though many of its central ideas have blossomed in the [[cognitive linguistics]] tradition. It is also regarded as a key part of the intellectual heritage of [[head-driven phrase structure grammar]] (HPSG) and [[construction grammar]], and some of its insights live on in mainstream generative grammar. [[Pieter Seuren]] has developed a '''semantic syntax''' which is very close in spirit to the original generative semantics framework, which he played a role in developing.<ref>{{cite book|author=Newmeyer, Frederick, J.|title=Linguistic Theory in America|year=1986|publisher=Academic Press|edition=Second}} See p. 138.</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Seuren |first1=Pieter |title=Essentials of Semantic Syntax: an Appetiser |journal=Cadernos de Linguística |date=28 January 2021 |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=01–20 |doi=10.25189/2675-4916.2021.V2.N1.ID290 |url=https://cadernos.abralin.org/index.php/cadernos/article/view/290 |access-date=27 March 2022|doi-access=free }}</ref>
==Interpretive
The controversy surrounding generative semantics stemmed in part from the competition between two fundamentally different approaches to [[semantics]] within [[Transformational grammar|transformational]] [[Generative grammar|generative syntax]]. In the 1960s, work in the generative tradition assumed that semantics was ''interpretive'' in the sense that the meaning of a sentence was computed on the basis of its syntactic structure rather than the other way around. In these approaches, syntactic structures were generated by rules stated in terms of syntactic structure alone, with no reference to meaning. Once generated, these structures would serve as the input to a semantic computation which would output a denotation. This approach captured the relationship between syntactic and semantic patterns, while allowing the syntax to work independently of the semantics, as Chomsky and others had argued for on the basis of empirical observations such as the famous "[[colorless green ideas sleep furiously]]" sentence.
Line 16:
Despite its opposition to generative grammar, the generative semantics project operated largely in Chomskyan terms. Most importantly, the generative semanticists, following Chomsky, were opposed to [[behaviorism]] and accepted his idea that language is [[Language acquisition|acquired]] and not learned.<ref>https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-linguistics-wars-9780199740338</ref> Chomsky and Lakoff were united by their opposition to the establishment of [[Formal semantics (natural language)|formal semantics]] in the 1970s.<ref name="Partee">{{cite book |last=Partee |first=Barbara |title=The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication |publisher=BIYCLC |year=2011 |volume=6 |pages=1–52 |chapter=Formal Semantics: Origins, Issues, Early Impact |doi=10.4148/biyclc.v6i0.1580}}</ref> The notion that meaning generates grammar is itself old and fundamental to the [[Port-Royal Grammar]] (1660), [[Ferdinand de Saussure|Saussure's]] [[Course in General Linguistics]] (1916), and [[Lucien Tesnière|Tesnière's]] [[dependency grammar]] (1957) among others. By contrast, generative semantics was faced with the problem of explaining the emergence of meaning in [[Neuroscience|neuro-biological]] rather than social and rational terms. This problem was solved in the 1980s by Lakoff in his version of [[Cognitive linguistics#Cognitive Linguistics (linguistics framework)|Cognitive Linguistics]], according to which language generates through [[sensory experience]]. Thus, engaging with the physical world provides the person with [[Visual system|visual]], [[Somatosensory system|tactile]] and other sensory input, which crystallizes into language in the form of [[Conceptual metaphor|conceptual metaphors]], organizing [[rational thinking]].<ref name="Lakoff_1990">{{cite journal |last=Lakoff |first=George |date=1990 |title=Invariance hypothesis: is abstract reasoning based on image-schemas? |journal=Cognitive Linguistics |volume=1 |issue=1 |pages=39–74 |doi=10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39 |s2cid=144380802}}</ref> Such a view of the mind has not been fully approved by neuroscientists.<ref name="Freeman">{{Cite journal |last=Freeman |first=Jeremy |year=2008 |title=Mind Games |url=https://www.thenationalnews.com/arts-culture/books/mind-games-1.233084 |volume=9 |issue=Jul 03}}</ref>
==Notes==
{{note|1}} There is little agreement concerning the question of whose idea generative semantics was. All of the people mentioned here have been credited with its invention (often by each other). <!-- Will add reference to RAH's "The Linguistics Wars when I get a chance. -->
| |||