AW: AW: Increasing interest in the HPSG conference

[Carl Pollard]

Hi Tibor,

Surely John meant "standard analyses OF controlled VP's", not
"standard analyses [of certain constructions] AS controlled VP's"? The
very term "controlled VP" suggests the standard John had in mind was
that of non-EST/GB transformationless grammar of the
Brame-Bresnan-Gazdar-et-al.  ilk, which analyzed control in terms of
VP (i.e. no PRO subject), Extended Projection Principle be damned. (If
I remember right, the Hinrichs-Nakazawa analysis was anticipated, at
least in part, by (GPSG-based) work of John's.)

While we're on the subject, how did you manage to construe the word
"standard" as meaning GB/MP? This is the kind of hegemonistic usage
(likewise: "generative grammar" to mean GB/MP) that fuels
cross-framework animosity.

I'm curious what other examples you had in mind of unjustified attacks
on non-existent GB/MP analyses. In my experience what non-GB/MP folk
have usually attacked were existent GB/MP non-analyses (in the sense
of not being clearly enough specified to be straightforwardly
supported or refuted by facts).

Carl