Generative semantics: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:47, 25 October 2016

Revision as of 05:39, 6 January 2017

Line 10:

The nature and genesis of the program are a matter of some controversy and have been extensively debated. Generative semanticists took Chomsky's concept of [[Deep structure and surface structure|deep structure]] and ran with it, assuming (contrary to later work by Chomsky and [[Ray Jackendoff]]) that deep structures were the sole input to [[semantics|semantic interpretation]]. This assumption, combined with a tendency to consider a wider range of empirical evidence than Chomskyan linguists, led generative semanticists to develop considerably more abstract and complex theories of deep structure than those advocated by Chomsky and his students—and indeed to abandon altogether the notion of "deep structure" as a locus of lexical insertion.

Throughout the late 1960s and 1970s, there were heated debates between generative semanticists and more orthodox Chomskyans. TheNeither generativeside semanticistscan lostbe theaccurately debate,said insofarto have "won" those debates, as theirpositions researchand programtheories groundshifted toconsiderably aalong haltwith byeach thebit 1980s.of However,new thisdata that was inexamined. part becauseBy the interestsend of keythe generative1970s, semanticiststhere suchwere asfew [[Georgelinguists Lakoff]]who hadwould graduallycall shiftedthemselves awaygenerative fromsemanticists, thewhile narrowChomsky's studyprogram ofcontinued [[syntax]]to andproduce able students dedicated to advancing Chomsky's evolving [[semantics]]theories.

=="Interpretive" vs. "generative" semantics==