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

[Christian Chiarcos]

Hi,

if I remember Popper correctly, a theory in science is largely defined by
falsibility. If a theory cannot be falsified by criticism, it is not a
scientific theory. In linguistics, we see numerous "theories" that cannot
be falsified. My favorite example is Centering Theory (Grosz et al. 1995):
Because it is/evolved into a "parameterized theory" with an extensible set
of parameters, it is theoretically impossible to disprove it because
counter-evidence can only be brought forward against a specific parameter
combination. (I'm actually sympathetic of CT, but it should be referred to
as a framework, not as a theory.) Is that the "abuse" of "theory" you're
asking about?

Best,
Christian

Am Di., 11. Feb. 2020 um 07:12 Uhr schrieb TALLMAN Adam <
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
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/dcec6607/attachment.htm>