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

kayaulai at umail.ucsb.edu kayaulai at umail.ucsb.edu
Tue Feb 11 21:46:38 UTC 2020 

Dear Adam,

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:

Köhler, Reinhard. 2012. *Quantitative syntax analysis* (Quantitative
Linguistics 65). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Ryan

On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:21 AM <lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org>
wrote:

> Send Lingtyp mailing list submissions to
>         lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         lingtyp-owner at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Lingtyp digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)  linguistics
>       (TALLMAN Adam)
>    2. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in   (generative)
>       linguistics (Hartmut Haberland)
>    3. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)
>       linguistics (Haspelmath, Martin)
>    4. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)
>       linguistics (paolo Ramat)
>    5. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)
>       linguistics (Eitan Grossman)
>    6. Re: The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)
>       linguistics (Bernat Bardagil Mas)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 06:12:03 +0000
> From: TALLMAN Adam <Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr>
> To: "lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org"
>         <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in (generative)
>         linguistics
> Message-ID:
>
> <61CC03E3918A004C9F811E488EE05C040A9B7A97 at CNREXCMBX04P.core-res.rootcore.local
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> 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
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/d96f610d/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:18:21 +0000
> From: Hartmut Haberland <hartmut at ruc.dk>
> To: TALLMAN Adam <Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr>
> Cc: LINGTYP <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in
>         (generative)    linguistics
> Message-ID:
>         <64BC5F23CF335040B77A5CCE9CF7A7E80180618323 at MBX4.ad.ruc.dk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> 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>
> Sendt: 11. februar 2020 09:33
> Til: TALLMAN Adam <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
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/8a6ca907/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:47:04 +0000
> From: "Haspelmath, Martin" <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>
> To: "lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org"
>         <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in
>         (generative) linguistics
> Message-ID: <ae48eb6b-906d-11a5-4e83-2ef9f369b364 at shh.mpg.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> 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
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/f865c331/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:16:09 +0100
> From: paolo Ramat <paolo.ramat at unipv.it>
> To: "Haspelmath, Martin" <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>
> Cc: "lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org"
>         <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in
>         (generative)    linguistics
> Message-ID:
>         <CAEaecYHnhC04Tne5PqJK8RpfWo0b=3NVsv=
> q4_m+uDh_M5TarQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> 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> 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> <hartmut at ruc.dk>
> > *Sendt:* 11. februar 2020 09:33
> > *Til:* TALLMAN Adam <Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr> <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>:
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://
> listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Martin Haspelmath (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
> > http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/935f4bd4/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:38:19 +0200
> From: Eitan Grossman <eitan.grossman at mail.huji.ac.il>
> To: paolo Ramat <paolo.ramat at unipv.it>
> Cc: "Haspelmath, Martin" <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>, LINGTYP
>         <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in
>         (generative)    linguistics
> Message-ID:
>         <CAA00bN=XgxXfSYS_y32kru=+
> ajWxVOzWgMzgEWnaag0qAfNqkg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> 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
> >:
>
> > 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> 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> <hartmut at ruc.dk>
> >> *Sendt:* 11. februar 2020 09:33
> >> *Til:* TALLMAN Adam <Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr> <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>:
> >>
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://
> listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Martin Haspelmath (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
> >> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/a34a4a6a/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 08:17:34 -0400
> From: Bernat Bardagil Mas <bardagil at berkeley.edu>
> To: Eitan Grossman <eitan.grossman at mail.huji.ac.il>
> Cc: paolo Ramat <paolo.ramat at unipv.it>, LINGTYP
>         <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] The (ab)use of the term "theory" in
>         (generative)    linguistics
> Message-ID:
>         <CAG8jxKVQrt35YTFzt-10=
> JGNuYeNARcagQ3+PMCyYO_fKBj_yQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> 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> 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>:
> >
> >> 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> 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> <hartmut at ruc.dk>
> >>> *Sendt:* 11. februar 2020 09:33
> >>> *Til:* TALLMAN Adam <Adam.TALLMAN at cnrs.fr> <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>:
> >>>
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Lingtyp mailing listLingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.orghttp://
> listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Martin Haspelmath (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
> >>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Lingtyp mailing list
> >> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> >> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20200211/5c3e0c97/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Lingtyp Digest, Vol 65, Issue 7
> **************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200211/953974fb/attachment.htm>

More information about the Lingtyp mailing list