Fwd: Re: The Myth of G

[H Stephen Straight]

>
> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 00:38:41 -0500
> To: Elizabeth Bates <bates at crl.ucsd.edu>
> From: H Stephen Straight <sstraigh at binghamton.edu>
> Subject: Re: The Myth of G
>
> Dear Liz -
>         At the risk of logic-chopping, I submit that the claim that "grammar
> exists" differs significantly from the claim that "grammars exist", so that
> reflection on the significance of your change of wording might make you
> regret your earlier espousal of the latter claim.  Moreover, the notion that
> "a" grammar "maps between form and meaning" implies a non- or
> ambi-directional view of the mapping relation, which is, IMnsHO, the root of
> most of the formalist evils against which you and others have so impressively
> battled over the years.  Until we can wrest linguistic theory away from the
> set-theoretic mentality implicit in the long-standing commitment to
> "grammars", the functionalist-processualist alternative will remain
> subservient to the regnant formalist-structuralist paradigm.
>         (You're not the only one of my favorite linguists that continue to
> harbor the Myth of G, but you're arguably the one whose work I most admire.
> Please consider your position carefully.)




                Best.           'Bye.           Steve

 H Stephen Straight -- Anthro, Ling, & Langs Across the Curric (LxC)
 Office: 607.777.2824 - Home: 607.723.0157 - Fax: 607.777.2889/.2477
 Spring 1999 Ofc Hrs, Sci 1 Rm 220: T 2-4, W 2-3:30 & by appointment