Abstract
In this paper, I address the issue of scientific modelling in contemporary linguistics, focusing on the generative tradition. In so doing, I identify two common varieties of linguistic idealisation, which I call determination and isolation respectively. I argue that these distinct types of idealisation can both be described within the remit of Weisberg’s (J Philos 104(12):639–659, 2007) minimalist idealisation strategy in the sciences. Following a line set by Blutner (Theor Linguist, 37(1–2):27–35, 2011) (albeit for different purposes), I propose this minimalist idealisation analysis for a broad construal of the generative linguistic programme and thus cite examples from a wide range of linguistic frameworks including early generative syntax (i.e. Standard Theory, Government and Binding and Principles and Parameters), Minimalism (Chomsky in The minimalist program, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995), the parallel architecture (Jackendoff in Foundations of language: brain, meaning, grammar, evolution, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002) and optimality theory (Prince and Smolensky in Optimality theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar, 1993/2004). Lastly, I claim that from a modelling perspective, the dynamic turn in syntax (Kempson et al. in Dynamic syntax—the flow of language understanding, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, 2001; Cann et al. in The dynamics of language: an introduction, Elsevier, Oxford, 2005) can be explained as a continuation, as opposed to a marked shift (or revolution), of the generative modelling paradigm (despite radical theory change). Seen in this light, my proposal is an even broader construal of the generative tradition, along scientific modelling lines. Thus, I offer a lens through which to appreciate the scientific contribution of generative grammar, amid an increased resistance to some of its core theoretical posits, in terms of a brand of structural realism in the philosophy of science and specifically scientific modelling.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bar-Hillel, Y. (1953). On recursive definitions in empirical science. In Proceedings of the 11th natural congress of philosophy (Vol. 5, pp. 160–165).
Blackburn, P., & Bos, J. (1999). Representation and inference for natural language. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Blackburn P., Meyer-Viol W. (1994) Linguistics, logic, and finite trees. Bulletin of Interest Group of Pure and Applied Logics 2: 2–39
Blutner R. (2000) Some aspects of optimality in natural language interpretation. Journal of Semantics 17: 189–216
Blutner R. (2011) Taking a broader view: Abstraction and idealization. Theoretical Linguistics 37(1–2): 27–35
Bos, J. (1996). Predicate logic unplugged. In P. Dekker & M. Stokhof (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Amsterdam colloquium (pp. 133–143). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
Bueno O., Colyvan M. (2011) An inferential conception of the application of mathematics. Nous, 45(2): 345–374
Bunt, H. (2007). The semantics of semantic annotation. In Proceedings of the 21st Pacific Asia conference on language, information and computation (PACLIC21) (pp 13–28).
Bunt, H., & Muskens, R. (1999). Computational semantics. In H. Bunt & R. Muskens (Eds.), Computing meaning (Vol. 1, pp. 1–32). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Burten-Roberts N., Poole G. (2006) ‘Virtual conceptual necessity’, feature-dissociation and the Saussurian legacy in generative grammar. Journal of Linguistics, 42: 575–628
Cann, R. (2001). Case: A dynamic approach. Unpublished manuscript.
Cann, R., Kempson, R., & Otsuka, M. (2003). On left and right dislocation: A dynamic perspective. MS, University of Edinburgh/King’s College London.
Cann R., Kempson R., Marten L. (2005) The dynamics of language: An introduction. Elsevier, Oxford
Cann, R., Kempson, R., & Wedgwood, D. (2012). Representationalism and linguistic knowledge. In R. Kempson, T. Fernando, & N. Asher (Eds.), Philosophy of linguistics (pp. 356–401). Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V North Holland.
Carr P. (1990) Linguistic realities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Cartwright N. (1983) How the laws of physics lie. Clarendon Press, New York
Cartwright, N. Shomar, T., & Suárez. M. (1995). The tool box of science: Tools for the building of models with a superconductivity example. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 44, 137–149.
Chomsky N. (1957) Syntactic structures. Mouton, The Hague
Chomsky N. (1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Chomsky, N. (1973). Conditions on transformations. In S. Anderson & P. Kiparsky (Eds.), A festschrift for Morris Halle. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Chomsky N. (1981) Lectures on government and binding. Foris, Dordrecht
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press
Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries. In R. Martin, D. Michaels, & J. Uriagereka (Eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik (pp. 89–155). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (2004). Beyond explanatory adequacy. In A. Belletti (Ed.), Structures and beyond. The cartography of syntactic structures (Vol. 3, pp. 104–131). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chomsky, N. (2008). On phases. In R. Freidin, C. Peregrín Otero, & M. Zubizarreta (Eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory. Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud (pp. 133–166). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N., Hauser, M., & Fitch, W. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569–1579.
Cinque G. (1990) Types of A-dependencies. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Clark, A. (2001). Mindware: An Introduction to thePhilosophy of Cognitive Science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Culbertson, J., & Adger, D. (2014). Language learners privilege structured meaning over surface frequency. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(16), 5842–5847.
Culbertson, J., & Newport, E. (2015). Harmonic biases in child learners: In support of language universals. Cognition, 139, 71–82.
Devitt M. (2006) Ignorance of language. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Elgin M., Sober E. (2002) Cartwright on explanation and idealization. Erkenntnis, 57(3): 441–450
Evans, G. (1981). Semantic theory and tacit knowledge. In Collected papers 1996 (pp. 322–342). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Fodor J. (1983) The modularity of mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Frey, W. (2004). Notes on the syntax and the pragmatics of German left-dislocation. In H. Lohnstein & S. Trissler (Eds.), The syntax and semantics of the left periphery (pp. 203–233). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Giere R. (1988) Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Chicago University Press, Chicago
Godfrey-Smith P. (2006) The strategy of model-based science. Biology and Philosophy 21: 725–740
Greenberg, J. (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of Language (pp. 73–113). London: MIT Press.
Hammond, M. (1997). Parsing syllables: Modeling OT computationally. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona.
Harris Z. (1951) Methods in structural linguistics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Hintikka K. (1999) The emperor’s new intuitions. The Journal of Philosophy 96(3): 127–147
Hinzen, W. (2000). Minimalism. In R. Kempson, T. Fernando, & N. Asher (Eds.), Handbook of philosophy of science 14: Philosophy and linguistics (pp. 93–142). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Hinzen, W. (2012). Minimalism. In R. Kempson, T. Fernando, & N. Asher (Eds.), Philosophy of linguistics (pp. 91–141). Oxford: Elsevier B.V North Holland.
Jackendoff R. (1977) X syntax: A study of phrase structure. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Jackendoff R. (2002) Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Karlsson, F. (2010). Recursion and iteration. In H. van Hulst (Ed.), Recursion and human language (pp. 43–68). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Katz, J. (1981). Language and other abstract objects. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.
Katz J., Postal P. (1991) Realism vs. conceptualism in linguistics. Linguistics and Philosophy 14(5): 515–554
Kempson, R., Meyer-Viol, W., & Gabbay, D. (2001). Dynamic syntax—The flow of language understanding. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Kincaid H. (2008) Structural realism and the social sciences. Philosophy of Science 75(5): 720–731
Kuipers, T. (2007). General philosophy of science: Focal issues. Amsterdam/London: Elsevier/North Holland.
Ladyman J. (1998) What is structural realism?. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 29(3): 409–424
Langendoen, T. (1998). Linguistic theory. In W. Bechtel & G. Graham (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 235–244). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Langendoen, T., & Postal, P. (1984). The vastness of natural languages. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Lappin S., Levine R., Johnson D. (2000) The structure of unscientific revolutions. Natural language and Linguistic Theory 18: 665–671
Lesmo, L., & Robaldo, L. (2006). Dependency tree semantics. Foundations of intelligent systems (pp. 550–559). Berlin: Springer.
Lobina, D. (2010). Recursion and linguistics: An addendum to Marcus Tomalin’s reconsidering recursion in syntactic theory. Interlingüística XX.
Ludlow P. (2011) The philosophy of generative grammar. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Mäki U. (2011) Models and the locus of their truth. Synthese 180: 47–63
Manning, C. (2003). Probabilistic syntax. In R. Bod, J. Hay, & S. Jannedy (Eds.), Probabilistic linguistics (pp. 289–342). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Marten L. (2005) The dynamics of agreement and conjunction. Lingua 115: 527–547
McCarthy, J. (2003). Optimality theory in phonology: A reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Morgan M., Morrison M. (1999) Models as mediators. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Morrison M. (2015) Reconstructing reality: Models, mathematics, and simulations. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Newmeyer F. (2002) Generative linguistics: A historical perspective. Routledge, London
Ott D. (2014) An ellipsis approach to contrastive left-dislocation. Linguistic Inquiry 45(2): 269–303
Poole G. (2002) Syntactic theory. Palgrave, New York
Portides, D. (2013). Idealization in economic modeling. In H. Andersen, D. Dieks, W. J. Gonzalez, T. Uebel, & G. Wheeler (Eds.), New challenges to the philosophy of science (pp. 253–263). Berlin: Springer.
Postal, P. (2003). Remarks on the foundations of linguistics. The Philosophical Forum, XXXIV(3 & 4), 233–252.
Postal P. (2009) The Incoherence of Chomsky’s ’biolinguistic’ ontology. Biolinguistics 3(1): 104–123
Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993/2004). Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University and University of Colorado at Boulder. Technical Report RuCCSTR-2, available as ROA 537-0802. Revised version published by Blackwell, 2004.
Pullum, G. (1983). How many possible human languages are there? Linguistic Inquiry, 14(3), 447–467.
Pullum G. (2013) The central question in comparative syntactic metatheory. Mind & Language 28(4): 492–521
Pullum, G., & Scholz, B. (2001). On the distinction between model-theoretic and generative-enumerative syntactic frameworks. In P. de Groote, G. Morill, & C. Retoré (Eds.), Logical aspects of computational linguistics: 4th international conference (pp. 17–43). Berlin: Springer.
Pullum, G., & Scholz, B. (2010). Recursion and the infinitude claim. In H. van der Hulst (Ed.), Recursion in human language (studies in generative grammar 104) (pp. 113–138). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Pustejovsky J. (1995) The generative lexicon. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Pylyshyn Z. (1984) Computation and cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Rambow, O., & Joshi, A. (1997). A formal look at dependency grammars and phrase structure grammars, with special consideration of word-order phenomena. In L. Wanner (Ed.), Recent trends in meaning-text theory (pp. 167–190). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sag, I., Wasow, T., & Bender, E. (2003). Syntactic theory: A formal introduction (2nd ed.). Chicago: CSLI Publications.
Sampson G. (2001) Empirical linguistics. Continuum Press, London
Savitch W. (1993) Why it might pay to assume that languages are infinite. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 8: 17–25
Searle, J. (1974). Chomsky’s revolution in linguistics. In Harman, G. (Ed.), On Noam Chomsky: Critical Essays (Modern Studies in Philosophy) (pp 2–33). Anchor Press.
Smolensky, P. (2001). Optimality theory: Frequently asked ’questions. In H. Fukazawa & M. Kitahara (Eds.), Gengo. Taishukan: Tokyo.
Soames S. (1984) Linguistics and psychology. Linguistics and Philosophy 7: 155–179
Stabler, E. (1997). Derivational minimalism. In C. Retoré (Ed.), Logical aspects of computational linguistics (pp. 68–95). Berlin: Springer.
Stabler E. (2011) Meta-meta-linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics 37(1/2): 69–78
Stainton, R. (2014). Philosophy of linguistics. Oxford Handbooks Online.
Strevens, M. (2007). Why explanations lie: Idealization in explanation. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Philosophy, New York University.
Suárez, M., & Cartwright, N. (2008). Theories: Tools versus models. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 39(1), 62–81.
Suppe F. (1989) The semantic conception of theories and scientific realism. University of Illinois Press, Urbana
Thomson-Jones, M. (2005). Idealization and abstraction: A framework. In N. Cartwright & M. Jones (Eds.), Correcting the model: Idealization and abstraction in the sciences (pp. 173–218). Amsterdam: Rodopi Press.
Tiede, H., & Stout, L. (2010). Recursion, infinity and modeling. In H. van der Hulst (Ed.), Recursion and human language (pp. 147–158). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Tomalin M. (2006) Linguistics and the Formal Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Tomalin M. (2007) Reconsidering recursion in syntactic theory. Lingua 117: 1784–1800
Tomalin, M. (2010). Migrating propositions and the evolution of Generative Grammar. In D. Kibbee (Ed.), Chomskyan (r)evolutions (pp. 315–337). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
van Fraasen B. (1980) The scientific image. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Van Hulst, H. (2010). Preliminaries. In van Hulst, H. (Ed.), Recursion and human language. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Weisberg M. (2007) Three kinds of idealization. The Journal of Philosophy 104(12): 639–659
Weisberg M. (2013) Simulation and similarity: Using models to understand the world. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Wiltschko, M. (1997). Parasitic operators in German left-dislocations. In E. Anagnostopoulou, H. van Riemsdijk, & F. Zwarts (Eds.), Materials on left dislocation (pp. 307–339). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Zaenen, A. (1997). Contrastive dislocation in Dutch and Icelandic. In E. Anagnostopoulou, H. van Riemsdijk, & H. Zwarts (Eds.), Materials on left dislocation (pp. 119–148). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Area of Paper: Theoretical linguistics, Syntax, Generative grammar, philosophy of linguistics, philosophy of science.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Nefdt, R.M. Scientific modelling in generative grammar and the dynamic turn in syntax. Linguist and Philos 39, 357–394 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-016-9193-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-016-9193-4