<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Adam,</div><div><br></div><div>Köhler discusses this, not just in the generative context but for linguistics in general, in the intro to his textbook on/review of quantitative syntax:<br></div><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail-csl-bib-body" style="line-height:1.35;margin-left:2em"><div class="gmail-csl-entry">Köhler, Reinhard. 2012. <i>Quantitative syntax analysis</i> (Quantitative Linguistics 65). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.</div></div></div><div><br></div><div>Ryan</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:21 AM <<a href="mailto:lingtyp-request@listserv.linguistlist.org">lingtyp-request@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Send Lingtyp mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:lingtyp-request@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-request@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:lingtyp-owner@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-owner@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of Lingtyp digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative) linguistics<br>
(TALLMAN Adam)<br>
2. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
linguistics (Hartmut Haberland)<br>
3. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
linguistics (Haspelmath, Martin)<br>
4. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
linguistics (paolo Ramat)<br>
5. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
linguistics (Eitan Grossman)<br>
6. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
linguistics (Bernat Bardagil Mas)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 06:12:03 +0000<br>
From: TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>><br>
To: "<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
Subject: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
linguistics<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<61CC03E3918A004C9F811E488EE05C040A9B7A97@CNREXCMBX04P.core-res.rootcore.local><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
Hello all,<br>
<br>
Does anyone have any sources that discuss the abuse of the term "theory" in generative linguistics (or in linguistics generally)? I figure that a paper like this must exist given the deeply insightful comments that I have received by some reviewers.<br>
<br>
best,<br>
<br>
Adam<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Adam James Ross Tallman (PhD, UT Austin)<br>
ELDP-SOAS -- Postdoctorant<br>
CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)<br>
Bureau 207, 14 av. Berthelot, Lyon (07)<br>
Numero celular en bolivia: +59163116867<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/d96f610d/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/d96f610d/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:18:21 +0000<br>
From: Hartmut Haberland <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>><br>
To: TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>><br>
Cc: LINGTYP <<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in<br>
(generative) linguistics<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:64BC5F23CF335040B77A5CCE9CF7A7E80180618323@MBX4.ad.ruc.dk" target="_blank">64BC5F23CF335040B77A5CCE9CF7A7E80180618323@MBX4.ad.ruc.dk</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
Jün-Tin Wang 1973. "On the representation of generative grammars as first-order theories." In: Radu J. Bogdan and Ilkka Niinilouto eds. Logic, Language and Probability. Dordrecht: Reidel, 302-316<br>
Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1974. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic grammar (Part I)". Theoretical Linguistics 1: 39-115.<br>
Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1976. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic grammar (Part II)". Theoretical Linguistics 3: 1-98.<br>
<br>
<br>
Fra: Hartmut Haberland <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>><br>
Sendt: 11. februar 2020 09:33<br>
Til: TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>><br>
Emne: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative) linguistics<br>
<br>
Hans-Heinrich Lieb has written extensively about this in the 70s, also Jün-tin Wang. Hartmut<br>
<br>
Den 11. feb. 2020 kl. 07.12 skrev TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>>>:<br>
Hello all,<br>
<br>
Does anyone have any sources that discuss the abuse of the term "theory" in generative linguistics (or in linguistics generally)? I figure that a paper like this must exist given the deeply insightful comments that I have received by some reviewers.<br>
<br>
best,<br>
<br>
Adam<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Adam James Ross Tallman (PhD, UT Austin)<br>
ELDP-SOAS -- Postdoctorant<br>
CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)<br>
Bureau 207, 14 av. Berthelot, Lyon (07)<br>
Numero celular en bolivia: +59163116867<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/8a6ca907/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/8a6ca907/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:47:04 +0000<br>
From: "Haspelmath, Martin" <<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>><br>
To: "<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in<br>
(generative) linguistics<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:ae48eb6b-906d-11a5-4e83-2ef9f369b364@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">ae48eb6b-906d-11a5-4e83-2ef9f369b364@shh.mpg.de</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"<br>
<br>
I would talk about "confusion", not about "abuse", because there are many different kinds of linguistic theories. Moreover, the term "theory" can be used as a count noun (as in the last sentence), or as a mass noun ("linguistic theory", "grammatical theory"). Linguists rarely reflect on kinds of theories, or on kinds of senses of the word "theory", and the papers that Hartmut mentioned have not become well-known. So there is a lot of confusion.<br>
<br>
In my 2010 paper on "Framework-free grammatical theory" (<a href="https://zenodo.org/record/814947" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://zenodo.org/record/814947</a>), I distinguished four senses of "theory".<br>
<br>
But there is confusion also about the relation between "typology" and "theory": Quite a few people have contrasted them as if they were different ways of doing linguistics, or different parts of research, e.g.<br>
<br>
Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. Non-verbal predication: Theory, typology, diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br>
Polinsky, Maria & Robert Kluender. 2007. Linguistic typology and theory construction: Common challenges ahead. Linguistic Typology 11(1). 273–283.<br>
Van Langendonck, Willy. 2008. Theory and typology of proper names. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.<br>
<br>
But on the other hand, it is clear that "atheoretical typology" is impossible, so this usage is confusing. See this recent blogpost, which proposes an alternative: <a href="https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915</a><br>
<br>
Martin<br>
<br>
<br>
On 11.02.20 10:18, Hartmut Haberland wrote:<br>
Jün-Tin Wang 1973. ”On the representation of generative grammars as first-order theories.” In: Radu J. Bogdan and Ilkka Niinilouto eds. Logic, Language and Probability. Dordrecht: Reidel, 302-316<br>
Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1974. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic grammar (Part I)". Theoretical Linguistics 1: 39-115.<br>
Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1976. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic grammar (Part II)". Theoretical Linguistics 3: 1-98.<br>
<br>
<br>
Fra: Hartmut Haberland <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>><mailto:<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>><br>
Sendt: 11. februar 2020 09:33<br>
Til: TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>><mailto:<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>><br>
Emne: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative) linguistics<br>
<br>
Hans-Heinrich Lieb has written extensively about this in the 70s, also Jün-tin Wang. Hartmut<br>
<br>
Den 11. feb. 2020 kl. 07.12 skrev TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>>>:<br>
Hello all,<br>
<br>
Does anyone have any sources that discuss the abuse of the term "theory" in generative linguistics (or in linguistics generally)? I figure that a paper like this must exist given the deeply insightful comments that I have received by some reviewers.<br>
<br>
best,<br>
<br>
Adam<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Adam James Ross Tallman (PhD, UT Austin)<br>
ELDP-SOAS -- Postdoctorant<br>
CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)<br>
Bureau 207, 14 av. Berthelot, Lyon (07)<br>
Numero celular en bolivia: +59163116867<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Martin Haspelmath (<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>>)<br>
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History<br>
Kahlaische Strasse 10<br>
D-07745 Jena<br>
&<br>
Leipzig University<br>
Institut fuer Anglistik<br>
IPF 141199<br>
D-04081 Leipzig<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/f865c331/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/f865c331/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:16:09 +0100<br>
From: paolo Ramat <<a href="mailto:paolo.ramat@unipv.it" target="_blank">paolo.ramat@unipv.it</a>><br>
To: "Haspelmath, Martin" <<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>><br>
Cc: "<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in<br>
(generative) linguistics<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAEaecYHnhC04Tne5PqJK8RpfWo0b=3NVsv=<a href="mailto:q4_m%2BuDh_M5TarQ@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">q4_m+uDh_M5TarQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Hi everyone,<br>
Martin H. has written that <<there is confusion also about ]...] the<br>
relation between "typology" and "theory">>. I fully agree. But Martin says<br>
further that <<the term "theory" can be used as a count noun , or as a mass<br>
noun ("linguistic theory", "grammatical theory">>. This sounds rather<br>
strange: I had always thought that mass nouns are nouns such as 'sugar',<br>
'blood', 'sand' etc. Can we consider abstract nouns like<br>
'philosophy','theology' or even 'democracy' as mass nouns? Let alone by<br>
adding an adjective as in "linguistic/grammatic theory". This is not the<br>
habitual use of the term and sounds confusing.<br>
Paolo<br>
<br>
<br>
prof. dr. Paolo Ramat<br>
Università di Pavia (retired)<br>
Istituto Universitario Studi Superiori (IUSS Pavia) (retired)<br>
Accademia dei Lincei, Socio corrispondente<br>
'Academia Europaea'<br>
'Societas Linguistica Europaea', Honorary Member<br>
piazzetta Arduino 11 - I 27100 Pavia<br>
##39 0382 27027<br>
347 044 98 44<br>
<br>
<br>
Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 alle ore 10:47 Haspelmath, Martin <<br>
<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>> ha scritto:<br>
<br>
> I would talk about "confusion", not about "abuse", because there are many<br>
> different kinds of linguistic theories. Moreover, the term "theory" can be<br>
> used as a count noun (as in the last sentence), or as a mass noun<br>
> ("linguistic theory", "grammatical theory"). Linguists rarely reflect on<br>
> kinds of theories, or on kinds of senses of the word "theory", and the<br>
> papers that Hartmut mentioned have not become well-known. So there is a lot<br>
> of confusion.<br>
><br>
> In my 2010 paper on "Framework-free grammatical theory" (<br>
> <a href="https://zenodo.org/record/814947" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://zenodo.org/record/814947</a>), I distinguished four senses of<br>
> "theory".<br>
><br>
> But there is confusion also about the relation between "typology" and<br>
> "theory": Quite a few people have contrasted them as if they were different<br>
> ways of doing linguistics, or different parts of research, e.g.<br>
><br>
> Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. *Non-verbal predication: Theory, typology,<br>
> diachrony*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br>
> Polinsky, Maria & Robert Kluender. 2007. Linguistic typology and theory<br>
> construction: Common challenges ahead. *Linguistic Typology* 11(1).<br>
> 273–283.<br>
> Van Langendonck, Willy. 2008. *Theory and typology of proper names*.<br>
> Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.<br>
><br>
> But on the other hand, it is clear that "atheoretical typology" is<br>
> impossible, so this usage is confusing. See this recent blogpost, which<br>
> proposes an alternative: <a href="https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915</a><br>
><br>
> Martin<br>
><br>
><br>
> On 11.02.20 10:18, Hartmut Haberland wrote:<br>
><br>
> Jün-Tin Wang 1973. ”On the representation of generative grammars as<br>
> first-order theories.” In: Radu J. Bogdan and Ilkka Niinilouto eds.<br>
> *Logic,* *Language and Probability*. Dordrecht: Reidel, 302-316<br>
><br>
> Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1974. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic<br>
> grammar (Part I)". *Theoretical Linguistics* 1: 39-115.<br>
><br>
> Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1976. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic<br>
> grammar (Part II)". *Theoretical Linguistics* 3: 1-98.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> *Fra:* Hartmut Haberland <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>> <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>><br>
> *Sendt:* 11. februar 2020 09:33<br>
> *Til:* TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>> <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>><br>
> *Emne:* Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
> linguistics<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Hans-Heinrich Lieb has written extensively about this in the 70s, also<br>
> Jün-tin Wang. Hartmut<br>
><br>
><br>
> Den 11. feb. 2020 kl. 07.12 skrev TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>>:<br>
><br>
> Hello all,<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Does anyone have any sources that discuss the abuse of the term "theory"<br>
> in generative linguistics (or in linguistics generally)? I figure that a<br>
> paper like this must exist given the deeply insightful comments that I have<br>
> received by some reviewers.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> best,<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Adam<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Adam James Ross Tallman (PhD, UT Austin)<br>
><br>
> ELDP-SOAS -- Postdoctorant<br>
> CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)<br>
> Bureau 207, 14 av. Berthelot, Lyon (07)<br>
><br>
> Numero celular en bolivia: +59163116867<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Martin Haspelmath (<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>)<br>
> Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History<br>
> Kahlaische Strasse 10 <br>
> D-07745 Jena<br>
> &<br>
> Leipzig University<br>
> Institut fuer Anglistik<br>
> IPF 141199<br>
> D-04081 Leipzig<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/935f4bd4/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/935f4bd4/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 5<br>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:38:19 +0200<br>
From: Eitan Grossman <<a href="mailto:eitan.grossman@mail.huji.ac.il" target="_blank">eitan.grossman@mail.huji.ac.il</a>><br>
To: paolo Ramat <<a href="mailto:paolo.ramat@unipv.it" target="_blank">paolo.ramat@unipv.it</a>><br>
Cc: "Haspelmath, Martin" <<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>>, LINGTYP<br>
<<a href="mailto:LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in<br>
(generative) linguistics<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAA00bN=XgxXfSYS_y32kru=+<a href="mailto:ajWxVOzWgMzgEWnaag0qAfNqkg@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">ajWxVOzWgMzgEWnaag0qAfNqkg@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Hi all,<br>
<br>
In oral comments and reviews, I encounter two main uses of "theory" and<br>
"theoretical." One is simply an autonym of generative linguists, as in<br>
"John only hangs out with theoretical linguists" or "Mary does great<br>
fieldwork but we want to hire a theoretician."<br>
You might also encounter something along the lines of "This abstract makes<br>
some very interesting observations but does not reference the theoretical<br>
literature, and it is unclear how it relates to theory."<br>
<br>
The other use is something like "having a point (beyond describing facts)"<br>
or "referencing general linguistic literature."<br>
<br>
But in my experience, the first is by far the most common.<br>
<br>
Eitan<br>
<br>
<br>
בתאריך יום ג׳, 11 בפבר׳ 2020, 12:16, מאת paolo Ramat <<a href="mailto:paolo.ramat@unipv.it" target="_blank">paolo.ramat@unipv.it</a><br>
>:<br>
<br>
> Hi everyone,<br>
> Martin H. has written that <<there is confusion also about ]...] the<br>
> relation between "typology" and "theory">>. I fully agree. But Martin says<br>
> further that <<the term "theory" can be used as a count noun , or as a mass<br>
> noun ("linguistic theory", "grammatical theory">>. This sounds rather<br>
> strange: I had always thought that mass nouns are nouns such as 'sugar',<br>
> 'blood', 'sand' etc. Can we consider abstract nouns like<br>
> 'philosophy','theology' or even 'democracy' as mass nouns? Let alone by<br>
> adding an adjective as in "linguistic/grammatic theory". This is not the<br>
> habitual use of the term and sounds confusing.<br>
> Paolo<br>
><br>
><br>
> prof. dr. Paolo Ramat<br>
> Università di Pavia (retired)<br>
> Istituto Universitario Studi Superiori (IUSS Pavia) (retired)<br>
> Accademia dei Lincei, Socio corrispondente<br>
> 'Academia Europaea'<br>
> 'Societas Linguistica Europaea', Honorary Member<br>
> piazzetta Arduino 11 - I 27100 Pavia<br>
> ##39 0382 27027<br>
> 347 044 98 44<br>
><br>
><br>
> Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 alle ore 10:47 Haspelmath, Martin <<br>
> <a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>> ha scritto:<br>
><br>
>> I would talk about "confusion", not about "abuse", because there are many<br>
>> different kinds of linguistic theories. Moreover, the term "theory" can be<br>
>> used as a count noun (as in the last sentence), or as a mass noun<br>
>> ("linguistic theory", "grammatical theory"). Linguists rarely reflect on<br>
>> kinds of theories, or on kinds of senses of the word "theory", and the<br>
>> papers that Hartmut mentioned have not become well-known. So there is a lot<br>
>> of confusion.<br>
>><br>
>> In my 2010 paper on "Framework-free grammatical theory" (<br>
>> <a href="https://zenodo.org/record/814947" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://zenodo.org/record/814947</a>), I distinguished four senses of<br>
>> "theory".<br>
>><br>
>> But there is confusion also about the relation between "typology" and<br>
>> "theory": Quite a few people have contrasted them as if they were different<br>
>> ways of doing linguistics, or different parts of research, e.g.<br>
>><br>
>> Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. *Non-verbal predication: Theory, typology,<br>
>> diachrony*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br>
>> Polinsky, Maria & Robert Kluender. 2007. Linguistic typology and theory<br>
>> construction: Common challenges ahead. *Linguistic Typology* 11(1).<br>
>> 273–283.<br>
>> Van Langendonck, Willy. 2008. *Theory and typology of proper names*.<br>
>> Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.<br>
>><br>
>> But on the other hand, it is clear that "atheoretical typology" is<br>
>> impossible, so this usage is confusing. See this recent blogpost, which<br>
>> proposes an alternative: <a href="https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915</a><br>
>><br>
>> Martin<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On 11.02.20 10:18, Hartmut Haberland wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Jün-Tin Wang 1973. ”On the representation of generative grammars as<br>
>> first-order theories.” In: Radu J. Bogdan and Ilkka Niinilouto eds.<br>
>> *Logic,* *Language and Probability*. Dordrecht: Reidel, 302-316<br>
>><br>
>> Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1974. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic<br>
>> grammar (Part I)". *Theoretical Linguistics* 1: 39-115.<br>
>><br>
>> Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1976. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic<br>
>> grammar (Part II)". *Theoretical Linguistics* 3: 1-98.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> *Fra:* Hartmut Haberland <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>> <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>><br>
>> *Sendt:* 11. februar 2020 09:33<br>
>> *Til:* TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>> <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>><br>
>> *Emne:* Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
>> linguistics<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Hans-Heinrich Lieb has written extensively about this in the 70s, also<br>
>> Jün-tin Wang. Hartmut<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Den 11. feb. 2020 kl. 07.12 skrev TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>>:<br>
>><br>
>> Hello all,<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Does anyone have any sources that discuss the abuse of the term "theory"<br>
>> in generative linguistics (or in linguistics generally)? I figure that a<br>
>> paper like this must exist given the deeply insightful comments that I have<br>
>> received by some reviewers.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> best,<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Adam<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Adam James Ross Tallman (PhD, UT Austin)<br>
>><br>
>> ELDP-SOAS -- Postdoctorant<br>
>> CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)<br>
>> Bureau 207, 14 av. Berthelot, Lyon (07)<br>
>><br>
>> Numero celular en bolivia: +59163116867<br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> Martin Haspelmath (<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>)<br>
>> Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History<br>
>> Kahlaische Strasse 10 <br>
>> D-07745 Jena<br>
>> &<br>
>> Leipzig University<br>
>> Institut fuer Anglistik<br>
>> IPF 141199<br>
>> D-04081 Leipzig<br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
>><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/a34a4a6a/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/a34a4a6a/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 6<br>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 08:17:34 -0400<br>
From: Bernat Bardagil Mas <<a href="mailto:bardagil@berkeley.edu" target="_blank">bardagil@berkeley.edu</a>><br>
To: Eitan Grossman <<a href="mailto:eitan.grossman@mail.huji.ac.il" target="_blank">eitan.grossman@mail.huji.ac.il</a>><br>
Cc: paolo Ramat <<a href="mailto:paolo.ramat@unipv.it" target="_blank">paolo.ramat@unipv.it</a>>, LINGTYP<br>
<<a href="mailto:LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in<br>
(generative) linguistics<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAG8jxKVQrt35YTFzt-10=<a href="mailto:JGNuYeNARcagQ3%2BPMCyYO_fKBj_yQ@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">JGNuYeNARcagQ3+PMCyYO_fKBj_yQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
There is another sense of theory, that I have not yet seen discussed here,<br>
which corresponds to the shall we say technical sense of the word, with a<br>
meaning of "a set of tested explanations of a phenomenon" (as in the film<br>
title A Theory of Everything). The word is used quite a bit in that sense<br>
in the (transformational) generative framework, and that gives us things<br>
like case theory, or how someone might propose their theory of inverse<br>
agreement in language L. I wouldn't call that an abuse.<br>
<br>
Bernat<br>
<br>
- -<br>
Bernat Bardagil<br>
Postdoctoral researcher<br>
Department of Linguistics, UC Berkeley<br>
<a href="http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/bbardagil" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/bbardagil</a><br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 6:38 AM Eitan Grossman <<br>
<a href="mailto:eitan.grossman@mail.huji.ac.il" target="_blank">eitan.grossman@mail.huji.ac.il</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Hi all,<br>
><br>
> In oral comments and reviews, I encounter two main uses of "theory" and<br>
> "theoretical." One is simply an autonym of generative linguists, as in<br>
> "John only hangs out with theoretical linguists" or "Mary does great<br>
> fieldwork but we want to hire a theoretician."<br>
> You might also encounter something along the lines of "This abstract makes<br>
> some very interesting observations but does not reference the theoretical<br>
> literature, and it is unclear how it relates to theory."<br>
><br>
> The other use is something like "having a point (beyond describing facts)"<br>
> or "referencing general linguistic literature."<br>
><br>
> But in my experience, the first is by far the most common.<br>
><br>
> Eitan<br>
><br>
><br>
> בתאריך יום ג׳, 11 בפבר׳ 2020, 12:16, מאת paolo Ramat <<br>
> <a href="mailto:paolo.ramat@unipv.it" target="_blank">paolo.ramat@unipv.it</a>>:<br>
><br>
>> Hi everyone,<br>
>> Martin H. has written that <<there is confusion also about ]...] the<br>
>> relation between "typology" and "theory">>. I fully agree. But Martin says<br>
>> further that <<the term "theory" can be used as a count noun , or as a mass<br>
>> noun ("linguistic theory", "grammatical theory">>. This sounds rather<br>
>> strange: I had always thought that mass nouns are nouns such as 'sugar',<br>
>> 'blood', 'sand' etc. Can we consider abstract nouns like<br>
>> 'philosophy','theology' or even 'democracy' as mass nouns? Let alone by<br>
>> adding an adjective as in "linguistic/grammatic theory". This is not the<br>
>> habitual use of the term and sounds confusing.<br>
>> Paolo<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> prof. dr. Paolo Ramat<br>
>> Università di Pavia (retired)<br>
>> Istituto Universitario Studi Superiori (IUSS Pavia) (retired)<br>
>> Accademia dei Lincei, Socio corrispondente<br>
>> 'Academia Europaea'<br>
>> 'Societas Linguistica Europaea', Honorary Member<br>
>> piazzetta Arduino 11 - I 27100 Pavia<br>
>> ##39 0382 27027<br>
>> 347 044 98 44<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 alle ore 10:47 Haspelmath, Martin <<br>
>> <a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>> ha scritto:<br>
>><br>
>>> I would talk about "confusion", not about "abuse", because there are<br>
>>> many different kinds of linguistic theories. Moreover, the term "theory"<br>
>>> can be used as a count noun (as in the last sentence), or as a mass noun<br>
>>> ("linguistic theory", "grammatical theory"). Linguists rarely reflect on<br>
>>> kinds of theories, or on kinds of senses of the word "theory", and the<br>
>>> papers that Hartmut mentioned have not become well-known. So there is a lot<br>
>>> of confusion.<br>
>>><br>
>>> In my 2010 paper on "Framework-free grammatical theory" (<br>
>>> <a href="https://zenodo.org/record/814947" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://zenodo.org/record/814947</a>), I distinguished four senses of<br>
>>> "theory".<br>
>>><br>
>>> But there is confusion also about the relation between "typology" and<br>
>>> "theory": Quite a few people have contrasted them as if they were different<br>
>>> ways of doing linguistics, or different parts of research, e.g.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. *Non-verbal predication: Theory, typology,<br>
>>> diachrony*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br>
>>> Polinsky, Maria & Robert Kluender. 2007. Linguistic typology and theory<br>
>>> construction: Common challenges ahead. *Linguistic Typology* 11(1).<br>
>>> 273–283.<br>
>>> Van Langendonck, Willy. 2008. *Theory and typology of proper names*.<br>
>>> Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.<br>
>>><br>
>>> But on the other hand, it is clear that "atheoretical typology" is<br>
>>> impossible, so this usage is confusing. See this recent blogpost, which<br>
>>> proposes an alternative: <a href="https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> Martin<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On 11.02.20 10:18, Hartmut Haberland wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Jün-Tin Wang 1973. ”On the representation of generative grammars as<br>
>>> first-order theories.” In: Radu J. Bogdan and Ilkka Niinilouto eds.<br>
>>> *Logic,* *Language and Probability*. Dordrecht: Reidel, 302-316<br>
>>><br>
>>> Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1974. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic<br>
>>> grammar (Part I)". *Theoretical Linguistics* 1: 39-115.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1976. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic<br>
>>> grammar (Part II)". *Theoretical Linguistics* 3: 1-98.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> *Fra:* Hartmut Haberland <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>> <<a href="mailto:hartmut@ruc.dk" target="_blank">hartmut@ruc.dk</a>><br>
>>> *Sendt:* 11. februar 2020 09:33<br>
>>> *Til:* TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>> <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>><br>
>>> *Emne:* Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)<br>
>>> linguistics<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Hans-Heinrich Lieb has written extensively about this in the 70s, also<br>
>>> Jün-tin Wang. Hartmut<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Den 11. feb. 2020 kl. 07.12 skrev TALLMAN Adam <<a href="mailto:Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr" target="_blank">Adam.TALLMAN@cnrs.fr</a>>:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Hello all,<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Does anyone have any sources that discuss the abuse of the term "theory"<br>
>>> in generative linguistics (or in linguistics generally)? I figure that a<br>
>>> paper like this must exist given the deeply insightful comments that I have<br>
>>> received by some reviewers.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> best,<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Adam<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Adam James Ross Tallman (PhD, UT Austin)<br>
>>><br>
>>> ELDP-SOAS -- Postdoctorant<br>
>>> CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)<br>
>>> Bureau 207, 14 av. Berthelot, Lyon (07)<br>
>>><br>
>>> Numero celular en bolivia: +59163116867<br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> --<br>
>>> Martin Haspelmath (<a href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>)<br>
>>> Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History<br>
>>> Kahlaische Strasse 10 <br>
>>> D-07745 Jena<br>
>>> &<br>
>>> Leipzig University<br>
>>> Institut fuer Anglistik<br>
>>> IPF 141199<br>
>>> D-04081 Leipzig<br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
>>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
>><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/5c3e0c97/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/5c3e0c97/attachment.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of Lingtyp Digest, Vol 65, Issue 7<br>
**************************************<br>
</blockquote></div></div>