[Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative) linguistics

Tue Feb 11 13:38:41 UTC 2020

Dear Bernat

Which generativist case theory actually contains a "set of tested explanations"? How are "tested explanations" different from "predictions"?

A.

Adam James Ross Tallman (PhD, UT Austin)
ELDP-SOAS -- Postdoctorant
CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)
Bureau 207, 14 av. Berthelot, Lyon (07)
Numero celular en bolivia: +59163116867
________________________________
De : Lingtyp [lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org] de la part de Bernat Bardagil Mas [bardagil at berkeley.edu]
Envoyé : mardi 11 février 2020 13:17
À : Eitan Grossman
Cc : paolo Ramat; LINGTYP
Objet : Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative) linguistics

There is another sense of theory, that I have not yet seen discussed here, which corresponds to the shall we say technical sense of the word, with a meaning of "a set of tested explanations of a phenomenon" (as in the film title A Theory of Everything). The word is used quite a bit in that sense in the (transformational) generative framework, and that gives us things like case theory, or how someone might propose their theory of inverse agreement in language L. I wouldn't call that an abuse.

Bernat

- -
Bernat Bardagil
Postdoctoral researcher
Department of Linguistics, UC Berkeley
http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/bbardagil

On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 6:38 AM Eitan Grossman <eitan.grossman at mail.huji.ac.il<mailto:eitan.grossman at mail.huji.ac.il>> wrote:
Hi all,

In oral comments and reviews, I encounter two main uses of "theory" and "theoretical." One is simply an autonym of generative linguists, as in "John only hangs out with theoretical linguists" or "Mary does great fieldwork but we want to hire a theoretician."
You might also encounter something along the lines of "This abstract makes some very interesting observations but does not reference the theoretical literature, and it is unclear how it relates to theory."

The other use is something like "having a point (beyond describing facts)" or "referencing general linguistic literature."

But in my experience, the first is by far the most common.

Eitan

בתאריך יום ג׳, 11 בפבר׳ 2020, 12:16, מאת paolo Ramat ‏<paolo.ramat at unipv.it<mailto:paolo.ramat at unipv.it>>:
Hi everyone,
Martin H. has written that  <<there is confusion also about ]...] the relation between "typology" and "theory">>. I fully agree. But Martin says further that <<the term "theory" can be used as a count noun , or as a mass noun ("linguistic theory", "grammatical theory">>. This sounds rather strange: I had always thought that mass nouns are nouns such as 'sugar', 'blood', 'sand' etc. Can we consider abstract nouns like 'philosophy','theology' or even 'democracy'  as mass nouns? Let alone by adding an adjective as in "linguistic/grammatic theory". This is not the habitual use of the term and sounds confusing.
Paolo

prof. dr. Paolo Ramat
 Università di Pavia (retired)
Istituto Universitario Studi Superiori (IUSS Pavia) (retired)
Accademia dei Lincei, Socio corrispondente
'Academia Europaea'
'Societas Linguistica Europaea', Honorary Member
piazzetta Arduino 11 - I 27100 Pavia
##39 0382 27027
347 044 98 44

Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 alle ore 10:47 Haspelmath, Martin <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de<mailto:haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>> ha scritto:
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.

In my 2010 paper on "Framework-free grammatical theory" (https://zenodo.org/record/814947), I distinguished four senses of "theory".

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.

Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. Non-verbal predication: Theory, typology, diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Polinsky, Maria & Robert Kluender. 2007. Linguistic typology and theory construction: Common challenges ahead. Linguistic Typology 11(1). 273–283.
Van Langendonck, Willy. 2008. Theory and typology of proper names. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

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: https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1915

Martin

On 11.02.20 10:18, Hartmut Haberland wrote:
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
Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1974. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic grammar (Part I)". Theoretical Linguistics 1: 39-115.
Hans-Heinrich Lieb 1976. "Grammars as theories: The case for axiomatic grammar (Part II)". Theoretical Linguistics 3: 1-98.

Fra: Hartmut Haberland <hartmut at ruc.dk><mailto:hartmut at ruc.dk>
Sendt: 11. februar 2020 09:33
Til: TALLMAN Adam <Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr><mailto:Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr>
Emne: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative) linguistics

Hans-Heinrich Lieb has written extensively about this in the 70s, also Jün-tin Wang. Hartmut

Den 11. feb. 2020 kl. 07.12 skrev TALLMAN Adam <Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr<mailto:Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr>>:
Hello all,

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.

best,

Adam

Adam James Ross Tallman (PhD, UT Austin)
ELDP-SOAS -- Postdoctorant
CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)
Bureau 207, 14 av. Berthelot, Lyon (07)
Numero celular en bolivia: +59163116867
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

--
Martin Haspelmath (haspelmath at shh.mpg.de<mailto:haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>)
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Kahlaische Strasse 10
D-07745 Jena
&
Leipzig University
Institut fuer Anglistik
IPF 141199
D-04081 Leipzig

_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/23b578b3/attachment.htm>