The aim of this study is to discover the relationship
between the ability of a human being to use language to express
ever new thoughts, on the one hand, and the presence in natural
languages of devices for the derivation of an infinity of
deep structure types for sentences, on the other. The conclusion
reached is that the full expression of thought can be carried
on in a language with a finite and small number of deep structure
types for sentences. This apparently conflicts with the claims
of Noam Chomsky and other contemporary linguists to the reverse
effect. The significance of this result is further explored
within the overall context of generative linguistic theory.
The material is organized in the following way. The first
chapter begins with an exposition of the basic elements of
generative transformational theory, and focuses on the definition
of recursive sets of rules and recursive derivations of sentences.
It continues with an exposition of the theory of generative
linguistics as a branch of human psychology, and raises, and
briefly discusses/ the question of the extent to which progress
in descriptive linguistics automatically constitutes progress
in that portion of explanatory linguistics which attempts to
explain the possibility of there being rational as opposed to non-rational creatures, creatures who use language creatively
as opposed to creatures which are incapable of such a use of
language. The question is not pursued very far, but it is
clear that Chomsky and other generative transformational
linguists such as Fodor and Katz take it that the recursive
generation of sentences is a necessary feature of the language
of a rational creature, or a creature whose thought processes
and whose expressive capacities are on a par with those of
humans. This claim is an interesting one, but it is never
supported by analysis. Accordingly the chapter closes with a
discussion of the means whereby the claim may be checked.
The second chapter performs a test on a crucial portion
of the claim, and yields the following negative result: the
recursive generation of deep structure types for sentences is
not necessary for the full expression of thought. The chapter
is long and tangled, but unified around the demonstration of
this point.
In the third chapter, the significance of this result is
explored. I argue that the lexicon contains some underlying
recursions — a point which is apparently denied by Chomsky,
Fodor, Katz and Postal. I argue further than an extended
study would be required to determine, whether or not these
recursions are necessary for thought expression. The question
of recursive generation of paragraphs is also raised, and some considerations are brought forth suggesting that regardless
of whether or not lexical recursions are necessary for thought
expression, a claim that they are, and a claim that the
recursive generation of paragraphs is necessary for thought
expression would have quite different implications for semantic
theory and psycholinguistics as compared with the claim that
the recursive generation of deep structure types for sentences
is necessary for thought expression. Finally, the relationship
between the analysis of Chapter Two and the assumption
in semantic theory that the semantic content of a complex
sentence is a function of the semantic content of its elementary
propositions and their structural relations is touched upon.
It is suggested that a demonstration of the non-necessity of
recursive generation of deep structure types, supplemented
in certain ways, provides a justification for what is now
often assumed but not justified -- that the semantic content
of complex propositions can be recursively specified in terms
of the semantic content of its elementary propositions and
their structural relations. / Arts, Faculty of / Philosophy, Department of / Graduate
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UBC/oai:circle.library.ubc.ca:2429/41287 |
| Date | January 1974 |
| Creators | Angel, Jay Leonard |
| Publisher | University of British Columbia |
| Source Sets | University of British Columbia |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text, Thesis/Dissertation |
| Rights | For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use. |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds