Journal of Logic, Language and Information

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 235–251 | Cite as

What Is Context For? Syntax in a Non-Abstract World

  • Tom Sgouros


An explanation for the uncertain progress of formalist linguistics is sought in an examination of the concept of syntax. The idea of analyzing language formally was made possible by developments in 20th century logic. It has been pointed out by many that the analogy between natural language and a formal system may be imperfect, but the objection made here is that the very concept of syntax, when applied to any non-abstract system of communication, is flawed as it is commonly used. Syntax is properly defined with respect to an individual transformation rule that might be applied to some message. Collections of syntax rules, however, are inevitably due to categories imposed by an observer, and do not correspond to functional features found in non-abstract systems. As such, these categories should not be relied upon as aids to understanding any natural system.


information semantics Shannon syntax 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ancel, L.W., 2000, “Undermining the Baldwin expediting effect: Does phenotypic plasticity accelerate evolution?” Theoretical Population Biology 58, 307–319.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, R.W., 1995, “Learning and evolution: A quantitative genetics approach,” Journal of Theoretical Biology 175, 89–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldwin, J.M., 1896, “A new factor in evolution,” American Naturalist 30, 441–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bar-Hillel, Y., 1953, “A quasi-arithmetical notation for syntactic description,” Language 29, 47–58.Google Scholar
  5. Bar-Hillel, Y., 1954, “Logical syntax and semantics,” Language 30, 230–237.Google Scholar
  6. Bar-Hillel, Y., 1964, Language and Information: Selected Essays on their Theory and Application, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Contains Bar-Hillel, 1953 and Bar-Hillel, 1954.Google Scholar
  7. Bocheński, I.M., 1961, A History of Formal Logic, University of Notre Dame Press, Translated from the German edition of 1956 by Thomas Ivo.Google Scholar
  8. Bresnan, J. (ed.), 1982, The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brillouin, L., 1962, Science and Information Theory, 2nd edition, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Carnap, R., 1937, The Logical Syntax of Language, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  11. Chaitin, G.J., 1982, “GÖdel’s theorem and information,” International Journal of Theoretical Physics 22, 941–954.Google Scholar
  12. Cheney, D.L. and Seyfarth, R.M., 1990, How Monkeys See The World: Inside the Mind of Another Species, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Cherry, C., 1978, On Human Communication, 3rd edition, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Chomsky, N., 1995, The Minimalist Program, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Chomsky, N., 2000, New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Cornillon, P., Gallagher, J., and Sgouros, T., 2003, “OPeNDAP: Accessing data in a distributed, heterogeneous environment,” CODATA Data Science Journal 2, 164–174. Online 5 November, 2003:
  17. Deacon, T.W., 1997, The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain, New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  18. Dupuy, J.-P., 2001, The Mechanization of the Mind: On the Origins of Cognitive Science, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Translated from French (1994) by M.B. DeBevoise.Google Scholar
  19. Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter, L., Leach, P., and Berners-Lee, T., 1999, Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.1, RFC 2616, Network Working Group.Google Scholar
  20. Fodor, J.A., 1994, The Elm and the Expert: Mentalese and its Semantics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Graffi, G., 2001, 200 Years of Syntax: A Critical Survey, Vol. 98 of Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  22. Hartley, R.V.L., 1928, “Transmittion of information,” Bell System Technical Journal 7, 535– 563.Google Scholar
  23. IEC, 1994, “Information technology – Open Systems Interconnection – Basic Reference Model: The Basic Model – ISO/IEC 7498,” Technical report, International Electrotechnical Commission.Google Scholar
  24. IHGSC, 2001, “Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome,” Nature 409, 860–921.Google Scholar
  25. Jackendoff, R., 2002, Foundations of Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Montague, R., 1970a, “English as a formal language,” in Linguaggi nella societ’,a e nella tecnica, B. Visentini ed., Milan: Edizioni di Comunit’,a.Google Scholar
  27. Montague, R., 1970b, “Universal grammar,” Theoria 36, 373–398.Google Scholar
  28. Papaj, D.R., 1993, “Automatic behavior and the evolution of instinct: Lessons from learning in Parasitoids,” in Insect Learning: Ecological and Evolutionary Perspectives, D.R. Papaj and A.C. Lewis eds., New York: Chapman & Hall, Chapter 10, pp. 243–272.Google Scholar
  29. Pollard, C. and Sag, I.A., 1994, Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  30. Resnick, P., 2001, Internet Message Format, RFC 2822, Network Working Group.Google Scholar
  31. Rogers, J., 1999, A Descriptive Approach to Language-Theoretic Complexity, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  32. Shannon, C.E., 1948, “A mathematical theory of communication,” Bell System Technical Journal 27, 379–423, 623–656.Google Scholar
  33. Shapiro, J.A., 1999, “Genome system architecture and natural genetic engineering in evolution,” in Molecular Strategies in Biological Evolution, L. Caporale ed., Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 870, 23–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Stevens, W.R., 1999, UNIX Network Programming, 2nd edition, New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  35. Turkel, W.J., 2002, “The learning guided evolution of language,” Chapter 8, pp. 235–254 in Linguistic Evolution Through Language Acquisition, T. Briscoe ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Waddington, C., 1961, “Genetic assimilation,” Advances in Genetics 10, 257–293.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Warren, E., 1964, Report of the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  38. Wiener, N., 1961, Cybernetics, 2nd edition, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.WickfordU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations