Chomsky: Obsolete?

Thu Oct 11 19:00:44 UTC 2007

I agree.  Note, that I made no claims about "relevance."  Clearly, 
linguists like Chomsky and Halliday are relevant in many ways, and 
their thinking
still seriously influences much current work in various fields.  In 
my case, I took courses from Chomsky in the early sixties, when he was my hero;
he definitely refocused the field and phrased new and fruitful 
questions.  And I learned much from Halliday when he lectured at 
Berkeley, decades
ago.  With regard to Chomsky, the question is whether his current 
approach is useful for the fields that I listed in my last email.

Dan

At 10:01 AM 10/11/2007, Jeff MacSwan wrote:
>I would agree with these remarks. But I think it would be 
>insensitive, not to mention empirically incorrect, to say, for 
>instance, that Halliday is not relevant today. The question is, 
>relevant to whom? While many linguists find relevance in Halliday's 
>work, others don't. The same can be said of Chomsky. I think it 
>would be a mistake to say of either example that the figure is "not 
>relevant" to linguistics (or to anything) since the field includes 
>functionalists and formalists alike. Right?
>
>
>From: Dan I. Slobin [mailto:slobin at berkeley.edu]
>Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 9:52 AM
>To: Jeff MacSwan
>Subject: RE: Chomsky: Obsolete?
>
>It depends on what you consider "the current linguistics literature."
>I enjoy the rich literature on functional, conceptual, typological, 
>diachronic,
>developmental, anthropological, psychological, sociological, pedagogical
>linguistic literature--all of which quite happily make great 
>progress with little
>or no reference to generativist work.  There was hardly a mention of Chomsky,
>for example, in last month's five-day international conference in Paris of
>the Association for Linguistic Typology, as well as four more days of
>associated workshops on many topics.  Like many ideologies in our world,
>things look different depending on which camp you live in.
>
>Dan
>
>At 09:23 AM 10/11/2007, you wrote:
>
>It's not a surprise that those who are committed to frameworks which
>disavow generativist work would gleefully await the day when the most
>influential figure, who also created the field, is no longer "relevant."
>
>But Chomsky's work actually continues to grow in significance and
>influence, precisely due to its relevance not only to linguistics
>generally, but also to the social sciences, the cognitive sciences,
>computer science and mathematics, and philosophy.
>
>While one can do interesting and important linguistic research that does
>not heavily rely on Chomsky's own specific contributions to linguistic
>theory, the idea that his work has generally lost relevance or
>significance reflects a lack of acquaintance with the current
>linguistics literature.
>
>Jeff MacSwan
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: info-childes at mail.talkbank.org
>[ mailto:info-childes at mail.talkbank.org] On Behalf Of Anat Ninio
>Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 7:56 AM
>To: r.n.campbell
>Cc: info-childes at mail.talkbank.org
>Subject: Re: Chomsky: Obsolete?
>
>Hi Robin,
>
>Chomsky actually changed his mind about what syntax is, so maybe he's
>now a more relevant figure than before?
>
>Anat Ninio
>
>
>
>r.n.campbell wrote:
> >> *Competence vs. Performance: A False Distinction?*
> >
> > A broader topic (which includes this one and is equally worth
> > discussing) is that Noam Chomsky and all his works are also obsolete.
> > For me, it will be a happy day when this is so.
> > --
> >
> > Dr Robin N Campbell
> > Dept of Psychology
> > University of Stirling
> > STIRLING FK9 4LA
> > Scotland, UK
> >
> > telephone: 01786-467649  facsimile: 01786-467641
> > email: r.n.campbell at stir.ac.uk
> > Website: http://www.psychology.stir.ac.uk/staff/rcampbell/index.php
> >
> > --
> >
> > The University of Stirling is a university established in Scotland by
> > charter at Stirling, FK9 4LA. Privileged/Confidential Information may
> > be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated
> > in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such
> > person), you may not disclose, copy or deliver this message to anyone
> > and any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is
> > prohibited and may be unlawful. In such case, you should destroy this
> > message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise
> > immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email
> > for messages of this kind.
> >
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Dan I. Slobin, Professor of the Graduate School
>Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Linguistics
>
>Department of Psychology        email: slobin at berkeley.edu
>3210 Tolman #1650                 phone (Dept):  1-510-642-5292
>University of California             phone (home): 1-510-848-1769
>Berkeley, CA 94720-1650         fax: 1-510-642-5293
>USA                                      http://ihd.berkeley.edu/slobin.htm
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>

 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dan I. Slobin, Professor of the Graduate School
Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Linguistics

Department of Psychology        email: slobin at berkeley.edu
3210 Tolman #1650                 phone (Dept):  1-510-642-5292
University of California             phone (home): 1-510-848-1769
Berkeley, CA 94720-1650         fax: 1-510-642-5293
USA                                      http://ihd.berkeley.edu/slobin.htm
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/info-childes/attachments/20071011/d7048c45/attachment.htm>