15.3318, Disc: Penultimate Posting: Deep Structure/Initial PP

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-15-3318. Sat Nov 27 2004. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 15.3318, Disc: Penultimate Posting: 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: Philip Carr < <philip.carr at univ-montp3.fr >
Subject: Penultimate Posting: Deep Structure/Initial PP



-------------------------Message 1 ----------------------------------
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 15:40:34
From: Philip Carr < <philip.carr at univ-montp3.fr >
Subject: Penultimate Posting: 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 15.3309 (http://linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-3309.html)



Ahmad Lofti's points (Linguist 15.3303) are interesting. We see here an
attempt to sustain a process-based interpretation of 'psychological
realism', but defined in terms of parallelism, rather than sequential
mental operations.

But it's still a process-based approach, and I find it hard to see how
that can fit with the idea that one is attempting to characterise
(Chomskyan) mental *states* ('knowledge'), as opposed to *processes* ('use
of knowledge').

One might think that declarative frameworks would be better suited to
characterising static mental states, rather than mental activities, but
even with declarative approaches, one sees appeal (implicit or otherwise)
to the idea of processes (such as structure-building).

Philip Carr



Linguistic Field(s): Linguistic Theories; Syntax





-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-15-3318