通用英语语法.ppt

1、1,7Universal Grammar,2,Slides on the net at: http:/http-server.carleton.ca/ecorazza/ http:/http-server.carleton.ca/ecorazza/online_courses/Mind_World_and_knowledge/,3,Chomskys Epiphenomenalism about Language,Language vs. Grammar “Grammar” is a precise definite term while “language” is a vague and de

2、rivative term which we could well dispense of, without much loss. The grammar in someone mind/brain is real while language is not.,4,The aim of linguistics can be summarized by four questions. 1. What constitutes knowledge of language? 2. How is such knowledge acquired? 3. How is such knowledge put

3、to use? 4. What are the physical mechanisms that serve as the material basis?,5,Deep vs. Surface Structure,Port Royal Grammar (1660) It is heavily influenced by Descartes. It aims to propose the general form of any possible grammar. In so doing it elaborates the universal structure underlying the “n

4、atural manner in which we express our thoughts”.,6,The inner/outer aspect of language According to Port Royal grammarians we must distinguish between language having an inner and an outer aspect. Hence we distinguish between a sentence qua expression of a thought and the physical shape of a sentence

5、 (i.e. an utterance). To show the structure of the mind the grammar should reflect properties of all minds, it should be universal.,7,Mental Grammar The deep structure is often only implicit and does not get expressed. It is only represented in the mind. The same deep structure can be realized diffe

6、rently in different languages (e.g.: “Video canem currentum” and “Je vois un chien qui court”). The rules of this grammar are not represented in the language user: they are simply there. Yet they must be “learned”. But see poverty of the stimulus argument.,8,Transformation Rules There are transforma

7、tion rules operating from deep to surface structure. It is the linguists job to figure out these rules. The grammarians of Port Royal are the first to recognize the two systems of rules: 1.A base system generating deep structure. 2. A transformational system mapping these deep structures into surfac

8、e structure.,9,UG,UG corresponds to the deep structure. Since it is the expression of though, it is common to all languages. It is thus universal. Hence Universal Grammar, UG. The transformation rules converting the deep structure into surface structure may differ from language to language. Differen

9、t outputs can correspond to the same inner structure.,10,Port Royal Within the Cartesian tradition exemplified by the grammarians of Port Royal, the deep structure is what constitutes the meaning (sense) in the mind. It can be transmitted in different way (e.g.: active/passive). E.g.: different lang

10、uages or different surface structures transmit the same meaning/sense which is a mental entity.,11,Nowadays UG means the initial state of a language learner. It is the “innate” (genetically transmitted) aspect of grammatical rules; the language instinct (Pinker). It is that aspect of the human mind

11、that causes one to learn the language. UG qua initial state is biologically determined. As such, it does not belong to a specific language.,12,UG need not be supposed to be what is universal among languages (see Jackendoff 2002: 72ff.). It is merely the human capacity, i.e., the initial state, allow

12、ing one to learn a language. The aspects of the initial sate one ends up using in ones learning periods depends on the stimuli/input. Languages (inputs) affect the development of the initial state and thus the outputs one ends up producing (cf. switches metaphor explaining the learning of phonetics)

13、.,13,Innate We do not necessarily mean that it is present at birth or in an embryo. It rather means that it automatically appears during the development, regardless on whether it is present at birth or not. It does not mean that it is free from the input of the environment. E.g. vision capacity.,14,

14、Deep vs. Surface Structure, and Creativity The deep/surface structure distinction is what helps explaining linguistic creativity. The Port Royals distinction between deep and surface structure implicitly contains recursive devices allowing for infinite uses of the finite means that it disposes. The

15、deep structure is what gets represented in the mind when a sentence is produced/heard (see LF).,15,Linguistic creativity and the argument for mental grammar The expressive variety of language use implies that the brain of a linguistically competent user contains a set of unconscious grammatical prin

16、ciples. (cf. Jackendoff R. 1994. Patterns in the Mind. Basic Books Harper Collins, New York: 6).,16,LOT In adopting the language of thought hypothesis, LOT (or Mentalese) the argument for mental grammar can be stated along the compositional principle for thoughts, or what Fodor characterizes as the

17、productivity of thought. The classical argument that mental states are complex adverts to the productivity of the attitudes The LOT story is, of course, a paradigm of this sort of explanation, since it takes believing to involve a relation to a syntactically structured object for which a composition

18、al semantics is assumed. (Fodor J. 1987. Psychosemantics. MIT: 147-8),17,Logical vs. Grammatical Form Arnauld with another, Yoruba. The conditions of language acquisition make it plain that the process must be largely inner-directed, as in other aspects of growth, which means that all languages must

19、 be close to identical, largely fixed by initial state. (Chomsky 2000. New Horizons : 121-2),39,The paradox of language acquisition An entire community of highly trained professionals, bringing to bear years of conscious attention and sharing of information, has been unable to duplicate the feat tha

20、t every normal child accomplishes by the age of ten or so, unconsciously and unaided. (Jackendoff 1994: 26),40,Language Perception and Understanding Perception of speech rests on innate discriminatory capacities. There is a fundamental difference between the perception of speech and the perception o

21、f unarticulated sounds. Speech perception, unlike visual perception for instance, requires the activation of the generative rules playing the role in the production of speech.,41,Both the perceptual mechanism and the mechanism of speech production make use of the same underlying system of generative

22、 rules. It is because these underlying systems are the same among us that communication can occur. It is because of this uniformity of human nature that we talk the way we do and succeed in understanding each others (cf. Humboldt 1836).,42,Every young child (raised in an English speaking community)

23、would know that in English blug is phonetically possible while bkr is not. And they know it without being told. Science of Intelligent Behaviour It may be within the boundary of some other cognitive beings (Martians, God) but it transcends human capacities.,43,Reasons vs. causes Wittgenstein (Blue B

24、ook) says that in explaining action in terms of their coherence and appropriateness with respect to human aims etc. we “give reasons”, not “give causes”. When talking about creative linguistic actions Chomsky and Descartes seem to accept Wittgensteins view in assuming that we are giving reasons, not

25、 causes.,44,Descartes dualism It was a scientific hypothesis dictated by the science of his time (mechanism). Descartes did not have at his disposal the biological science of our time, he did not know of genetic transmission and could not possibly imagine how human cognition can rest to such an exte

26、nt on a biological base of concept and structure acquisition. Descartes could not imagine that these biological mechanisms need only a little input to produce rich conceptual material.,45,At present little is known on how UG is embodied in the brain. UG is considered as a computational system in the head, but we do not know about