15.3309, Disc: Re: Deep Structure/Initial PP

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-15-3309. Fri Nov 26 2004. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 15.3309, Disc: Re: Deep Structure/Initial PP

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org)
        Sheila Collberg, U of Arizona
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <fox at linguistlist.org>
================================================================

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.


===========================Directory==============================

1)
Date: 26-Nov-2004
From: Peter T. Daniels < <grammatim at worldnet.att.net >
Subject: Re: Deep Structure/Initial PP



-------------------------Message 1 ----------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:43:28
From: Peter T. Daniels < <grammatim at worldnet.att.net >
Subject: Re: Deep Structure/Initial PP


For previous messages in this discussion, see
   Linguist 15.3231 (http://linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-3231.html)
   Linguist 15.3262 (http://linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-3262.html)
   Linguist 15.3263 (http://linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-3263.html)
   Linguist 15.3272 (http://linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-3272.html)
   Linguist 15.3277 (http://linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-3277.html)
   Linguist 15.3303 (http://linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-3303.html)

LINGUIST List wrote:

> On  21-Nov-2004  Pius ten Hacken < P.Ten-Hacken at swansea.ac.uk > wrote:

>Two obvious remarks any Chomskyan linguist would make in this respect are:

>1. Phrase structure rules and transformations are meant to describe the
>grammatical competence of a speaker, not the processes of production or
>interpretation of linguistic performance.

>What is less obvious, however, is whether (Dan Slobin's) psycholinguistic
>experimentations with such rules, which established the (true?) belief
>that these rules are at best those of linguistic competence rather than
>those of real-time speakers' performance/mental processes are still valid
>given the superiority of parallel processing models to serial ones for a
>good number of mental activities including visual ones, and most probably
>also for those of mental grammar:


But see Jackendoff's recent Foundations of Language for reasons why
parallel processing isn't a good model for language.

--
Peter T. Daniels                       grammatim at att.net


Linguistic Field(s): Linguistic Theories; Syntax





-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-15-3309