Phonology

Dianne K. Patterson dkp at U.ARIZONA.EDU
Fri Dec 10 19:09:41 UTC 1999


On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Noel Rude wrote:

> Folks!
>
>         Have been away from the lit for quite a spell now and can't say I know
> anything about acronymic linguistics (nor much of anything, for that
> matter).
>
>         What bothers me about letting linguistics degenerate into phonology is
> that this is what happens when we insist on grounding everything in
> neurology and physiology.

Perhaps I am missing something...but the standard position is that we do
not want to confuse phonetics (which is mechanistic and mechanical) with
phonology (which is a rule governed system and usually included as part of
the grammar)...now people may wish to say phonology is not on the right
track and should in fact be grounded in biology (e.g., John Ohala...and I
have my own leanings in this direction)...but such views are outside the
standard accepted views.

> Such was the error of the Bloomfeldians.
> Chomsky was right in so far as he argued for studying Language--syntax
> and semantics and universals and all--apart from any purely mechanistic
> theory (behaviorist or otherwise--is that what his "innateness" was
> meant to do?).  We can still study Language and keep it
> empirical--grounding it in legitimate data (texts, etc.)--even if the
> Chomskians have tended not to do this.  We can operate within a purely
> communicative theory of language.  And yes as far as possible our
> functional explanations should be grounded in reality (biology,
> psychology, pragmatics).  But we might remember that no one as yet has
> succeeded in defining information in purely physical terms (grams,
> centimeters, volts, etc.).

There is a standard information theory.  It is grounded in bits and
underlies computer technology...but it is also used in standard ethology
(the study of the behavior of communicating) which is generally used when
looking at nonhuman behavior...but can, of course also be used to look at
human behavior

> If we don't want to deal with the
> logical/informational side of language then it will have to fall to the
> philosophers and mathematicians to do so.
>
>         Of course I know most of us still believe in syntax and semantics.  I
> just thought it would be good to remind ourselves that Chomsky did help
> in delivering us from the "biological extremism"

I hope this is helpful,

Dianne Patterson



More information about the Funknet mailing list