DOCSLIB.ORG

A Thesis Entitled Sensory Input and Mental Imagery in Second

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Thesis Entitled Sensory Input and Mental Imagery in Second A Thesis entitled Sensory Input and Mental Imagery in Second Language Acquisition by Sultana Mahbuba Nargis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts Degree in English with a Concentration in ESL _________________________________________ Dr. Douglas W. Coleman, Committee Chair _________________________________________ Dr. Stephen Christman, Committee Member _________________________________________ Dr. Gaby Semaan, Committee Member _________________________________________ Dr. Patricia R. Komuniecki, Dean College of Graduate Studies The University of Toledo December 2014 Copyright 2014, Sultana Mahbuba Nargis This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author. An Abstract of Sensory Input and Mental Imagery in Second Language Acquisition by Sultana Mahbuba Nargis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts Degree in English with a Concentration in ESL The University of Toledo December 2014 In the field of second language acquisition, there is a dominant theory of language learning, specifically, the claims that the input for language learning consists of language by famous linguist Noam Chomsky (1964) and his followers. However, Douglas W Coleman (Thesis adviser), Samuel Johnston, Yifei Xin, and the author hypothesized in ENGL 6150, a master’s course in Fall 2011, that a person cannot learn a target language from the speech input alone. The findings of that study were published in Xin’s (2012) study which showed that the relevant input for language learning consists of the sound of speech in parallel with other sensory experiences, and what people learn is the ability to communicate. An even earlier study by Postica and Coleman (2006) indicated that mental imagery, the capacity of human brain to recreate sensory experience without external stimuli, could be a substitute to the required ‘parallel sensory input’ in Second Language Acquisition. Implementing a variation of Postica (2006) and Xin (2012) experiments, this study aimed to further investigate the role of mental imagery in generating sensory input for communication learning. Thus, the study set out to explore if mental imagery could be a substitute to the sensory input required for learning to communicate in a target iii language. The findings of the study differ from the findings of Postica’s (2006). The variation in instrument design of this study from Postica’s (2006) design might have contributed to the different outcome of this study. iv To my husband without whose support, sacrifice, and inspiration, I could not complete this thesis and the master’s study at the University of Toledo. Acknowledgements My greatest gratitude goes to my thesis and graduate advisor, Dr. Coleman, without whose guidance, advice, support, and concern I would not be able to overcome the mental challenges I went through, and finally complete this study. He opened my eyes to see people interacting from a scientific point of view and better understand how humans communicate. I specially need to thank my thesis committee members, Dr. Coleman, Dr. Christman, and Dr. Semaan for their valuable time and support by providing their constructive feedback throughout the thesis process and report writing. I am grateful to my parents who inspire me in my academic endeavor, support me unconditionally in my good times and difficult times. I would also like to acknowledge my following classmates of Applied Linguistics class, Department of English, University of Toledo, who took part in conducting the experiments: Yifei Xin, Samuel Johnston, Rosemary Song, Timothy Escondo, Jeremy Holloway, and Yifan Zhao. Above all, I express my deepest gratitude to Almighty God for everything I achieved in my life, including the knowledge I gained from this study. v Table of Contents Abstract iii Acknowledgements v Table of Contents vi List of Tables viii List of Figures ix I. Input in Second Language Learning: from a traditional view to a scientific view 1 A. What is language? 1 a. Traditional view of language learning 1 B. A device for language learning – how realistic is it? 6 C. Input is still the focus 8 D. Problems surrounding the assumed “input” in language learning 9 E. The true nature of input: viewing input from a real world perspective 12 F. An alternate view of language learning: shifting focus from language learning to learning to communicate 13 G. Building a case for mental imagery – historical background 16 H. Mental imagery: from the perspectives of behaviorists to neuroscientists 16 I. Recent studies on mental imagery and its usefulness 23 J. Research questions 25 II. Methodology 26 A. Design 26 a. Study Selection of a target language 26 b. Participants 27 vi B. Instrument 27 C. Procedure 28 a. Study sheet 29 b. The assessment test 29 D. Hypotheses 32 III. Data Analysis 33 IV. Discussion 38 A. How the results of this study differ from previous studies 38 B. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research 39 C. Concluding Remarks 42 References 43 Appendices A. Participant’s Consent Form 53 B. Instructions to Participants 55 C. Mini-dialogs 58 D. Study Sheet 64 E. Comprehension Test 65 F. Answer Sheet and Questionnaire 66 G. Recoding Sheet 68 vii List of Tables Table 1 Recoding (scoring) guide .................................................................................31 Table 2 Example recoding of test answers....................................................................32 Table 3 Possible predictors of learning ........................................................................37 viii List of Figures Figure 1 Chomsky’s (1964, p. 26) assumed devices for (a) language processing, and (b) language acquisition. ...................................................................................4 Figure 2 Functional areas of the human brain (Curtesy: Mayfield Clinic). ..................20 Figure 3 Sample mini-dialog used in the experiment. ...................................................28 ix Chapter One Input in Second Language Learning: from a traditional view to a scientific view What is language? The definition of language changed from time to time to serve the intellectual need of the time. Plato introduced a debate on the origin of language through his dialogue Cratylus which is considered to be the first linguistic text in Western linguistics (Seuren, 1998, p. 5). The center of the Cratylus debate is the difference between the two competing perspectives of language. According to one of the perspectives, language is “inherently ‘true to life’, since words are given by nature, and not by convention” (Seuren, 1998, p. 6); and according to the alternative perspective, “word forms are arbitrary and conventional” (Seuren, 1998, p. 7). At times, language is seen as something abstract, something social or cultural, something behavioral, something mental (Botha, 1992, p. xii), and at other times language is seen something material, a natural phenomenon, the object of a science, a type of a system, as something used, as something processed, as something organic, as something structural, as something produced and comprehended, and as data (Yngve, 1996, p. 10). However, this study is based on the premises of scientific study of learning to communicate. Traditional view of language learning. Since early ages, humans developed communicative behavior. Humans communicate in numerous ways. According to a traditional view, the most common and distinct way humans communicate is called the use of language; in other words, humans can exchange messages and convey meaning through language. Nowadays, the term “language” applies to a wide variety of perspectives and conceptions (Botha, 1992, p. xii; Yngve, 1996, pp. 10-11) not only in 1 linguistics but also in other fields of study that are concerned with the human ability to communicate (psycholinguistics: Miller, 1967, Macphail, 1998; neuroscience: Bloom 2001, Lieberman, 2002; sociolinguistics: Mesthrie, 2000; second language acquisition: Cairns, 1996, Rosenthal, 2000; second language teaching: Johnson, 1997, Danesi, 2003, Mackey, 2005; multidisciplinary studies: Banich, 2003). The ability to communicate beyond one’s own community gained importance as the early human communities came in contact with each other and engaged in trade, commerce, and exchange of knowledge. The emergence in the ancient world of grammar as part of an explanation of speaking and writing made it possible to encode human communicative behaviors on a large scale (Postica, 2006, p. 5), and eventually helped natives of different cultures learn how to communicate with each other, and to establish relationships. Merchants quickly understood the advantages of being able to manifest culturally appropriate communicative behaviors to their customers and trade partners: “even a smattering of your client’s mother tongue works wonders in business. It also helps to safeguard against sharp practice” (Howatt, 1984, p. 6). The invention of the printing machine helped develop a medium which could dispatch information to a wider mass. William Caxton printed the first ever text book for teaching English to non-English natives. The objective of the book was to satisfy merchants’ communicative needs: “Who this booke shall wylle lerne may well enterprise or take on honed merchandises from one land to another” (Howatt, 1984, p. 7). During the nineteenth century, the study and research in philosophy
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Essential Chomsky
    CURRENT AFFAIRS $19.95 U.S. CHOMSKY IS ONE OF A SMALL BAND OF NOAM INDIVIDUALS FIGHTING A WHOLE INDUSTRY. AND CHOMSKY THAT MAKES HIM NOT ONLY BRILLIANT, BUT HEROIC. NOAM CHOMSKY —ARUNDHATI ROY EDITED BY ANTHONY ARNOVE THEESSENTIAL C Noam Chomsky is one of the most significant Better than anyone else now writing, challengers of unjust power and delusions; Chomsky combines indignation with he goes against every assumption about insight, erudition with moral passion. American altruism and humanitarianism. That is a difficult achievement, —EDWARD W. SAID and an encouraging one. THE —IN THESE TIMES For nearly thirty years now, Noam Chomsky has parsed the main proposition One of the West’s most influential of American power—what they do is intellectuals in the cause of peace. aggression, what we do upholds freedom— —THE INDEPENDENT with encyclopedic attention to detail and an unflagging sense of outrage. Chomsky is a global phenomenon . —UTNE READER perhaps the most widely read voice on foreign policy on the planet. ESSENTIAL [Chomsky] continues to challenge our —THE NEW YORK TIMES BOOK REVIEW assumptions long after other critics have gone to bed. He has become the foremost Chomsky’s fierce talent proves once gadfly of our national conscience. more that human beings are not —CHRISTOPHER LEHMANN-HAUPT, condemned to become commodities. THE NEW YORK TIMES —EDUARDO GALEANO HO NE OF THE WORLD’S most prominent NOAM CHOMSKY is Institute Professor of lin- Opublic intellectuals, Noam Chomsky has, in guistics at MIT and the author of numerous more than fifty years of writing on politics, phi- books, including For Reasons of State, American losophy, and language, revolutionized modern Power and the New Mandarins, Understanding linguistics and established himself as one of Power, The Chomsky-Foucault Debate: On Human the most original and wide-ranging political and Nature, On Language, Objectivity and Liberal social critics of our time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Language Faculty – Mind Or Brain?
    The Language Faculty – Mind or Brain? TORBEN THRANE Aarhus University, School of Business, Denmark Artiklens sigte er at underkaste Chomskys nyskabende nominale sammensætning – “the mind/brain” – en nøjere undersøgelse. Hovedargumentet er at den skaber en glidebane, således at det der burde være en funktionel diskussion – hvad er det hjernen gør når den behandler sprog? – i stedet bliver en systemdiskussion – hvad er den interne struktur af den menneskelige sprogevne? Argumentet søges ført igennem under streng iagttagelse af de kognitive videnskabers opfattelse af information og repræsentation, specielt som forstået af den amerikanske filosof Frederick I. Dretske. 1. INTRODUCTION Cartesian dualism is dead, but the central problems it was supposed to solve persist: What kinds of substances exist? Are bodily things (only) physical, mental ‘things’ (only) metaphysical? How is the mental related to the physical? Although “we are all materialists now”, such questions still need answers, and they still need answers from within realist and naturalist bounds to count as scientific. Linguistics is a discipline that may be expected to contribute with answers to such questions. No one in their right mind would deny that our ability to acquire and use human language is lodged between our ears – inside our heads. That is, in our brains and/or minds. In some quarters it has been customary for the past 50 odd years or so to regard this ability as a distinct and dedicated cognitive ability on a par with our abilities to see (vision) or to keep our balance (equilibrioception), and to refer to it as the Human Language Faculty (HLF). This has been the axiomatic starting point for the development of main stream generative linguistics as founded by Chomsky in 1955 in what I shall refer to as ‘Chomsky’s programme’.
    [Show full text]
  • New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind Noam Chomsky Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 0521651476 - New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind Noam Chomsky Frontmatter More information New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind This book is an outstanding contribution to the philosophical study of language and mind, by one of the most influential thinkers of our time. In a series of penetrating essays, Noam Chomsky cuts through the confusion and prejudice which has infected the study of language and mind, bringing new solutions to traditional philosophical puzzles and fresh perspectives on issues of general interest, ranging from the mind–body problem to the unification of science. Using a range of imaginative and deceptively simple linguistic ana- lyses, Chomsky argues that there is no coherent notion of “language” external to the human mind, and that the study of language should take as its focus the mental construct which constitutes our knowledge of language. Human language is therefore a psychological, ultimately a “biological object,” and should be analysed using the methodology of the natural sciences. His examples and analyses come together in this book to give a unique and compelling perspective on language and the mind. is Institute Professor at the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Professor Chomsky has written and lectured extensively on a wide range of topics, including linguistics, philosophy, and intellectual history. His main works on linguistics include: Syntactic Structures; Current Issues in Linguistic Theory; Aspects of the Theory of Syntax; Cartesian Linguistics; Sound Pattern of English (with Morris Halle); Language and Mind; Reflections on Language; The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory; Lec- tures on Government and Binding; Modular Approaches to the Study of the Mind; Knowledge of Language: its Nature, Origins and Use; Language and Problems of Knowledge; Generative Grammar: its Basis, Development and Prospects; Language in a Psychological Setting; Language and Prob- lems of Knowledge; and The Minimalist Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Noam Chomsky Written by E-International Relations
    Interview - Noam Chomsky Written by E-International Relations This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. Interview - Noam Chomsky https://www.e-ir.info/2014/02/03/interview-noam-chomsky/ E-INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, FEB 3 2014 Noam Chomsky was born on December 7, 1928, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He received his PhD in linguistics in 1955 from the University of Pennsylvania. From 1951 to 1955, Chomsky was a Junior Fellow of the Harvard University Society of Fellows. The major theoretical viewpoints of his doctoral dissertation appeared in the monographSyntactic Structure in 1957. This formed part of a more extensive work,The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory, circulated in mimeograph in 1955 and published in 1975. Chomsky joined the staff of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1955 and in 1961 was appointed full professor. In 1976 he was appointed Institute Professor in the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy. Chomsky has lectured at many universities in the US and abroad, and is the recipient of numerous honorary degrees and awards. He has written and lectured widely on linguistics, philosophy, intellectual history, contemporary issues, international affairs, and U.S. foreign policy. Among his more recent books are,New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind; On Nature and Language; The Essential Chomsky; Hopes and Prospects; Gaza in Crisis; How the World Works;9-11: Was There an Alternative; Making the Future: Occupations, Interventions, Empire, and Resistance; The Science of Language; Peace with Justice: Noam Chomsky in Australia; Power Systems; and On Western Terrorism: From Hiroshima to Drone Warfare (with Andre Vltchek).
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Language and Mind: 1950-1990 Author(S): Tyler Burge Source: the Philosophical Review, Vol
    Philosophical Review Philosophy of Language and Mind: 1950-1990 Author(s): Tyler Burge Source: The Philosophical Review, Vol. 101, No. 1, Philosophy in Review: Essays on Contemporary Philosophy (Jan., 1992), pp. 3-51 Published by: Duke University Press on behalf of Philosophical Review Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2185043 Accessed: 11-04-2017 02:19 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2185043?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Philosophical Review, Duke University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Philosophical Review This content downloaded from 128.97.244.236 on Tue, 11 Apr 2017 02:19:01 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms The Philosophical Review, Vol. 101, No. 1 January 1992) Philosophy of Language and Mind: 1950-1990 Tyler Burge The last forty years in philosophy of language and philosophy of mind have seen, I hazard to say, some of the most intense and intellectually powerful discussion in any academic field during the period.' Yet the achievements in these areas have not been widely appreciated by the general intellectual public.
    [Show full text]
  • The Responsibility of Intellectuals
    The Responsibility of Intellectuals EthicsTheCanada Responsibility and in the FrameAesthetics ofofCopyright, TranslationIntellectuals Collections and the Image of Canada, 1895– 1924 ExploringReflections the by Work Noam of ChomskyAtxaga, Kundera and others and Semprún after 50 years HarrietPhilip J. Hatfield Hulme Edited by Nicholas Allott, Chris Knight and Neil Smith 00-UCL_ETHICS&AESTHETICS_i-278.indd9781787353008_Canada-in-the-Frame_pi-208.indd 3 3 11-Jun-1819/10/2018 4:56:18 09:50PM First published in 2019 by UCL Press University College London Gower Street London WC1E 6BT Available to download free: www.ucl.ac.uk/ucl-press Text © Contributors, 2019 Images © Copyright holders named in captions, 2019 The authors have asserted their rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as authors of this work. A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from The British Library. This book is published under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Non-derivative 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license allows you to share, copy, distribute and transmit the work for personal and non-commercial use providing author and publisher attribution is clearly stated. Attribution should include the following information: Allott, N., Knight, C. and Smith, N. (eds). The Responsibility of Intellectuals: Reflections by Noam Chomsky and others after 50 years. London: UCL Press, 2019. https://doi.org/10.14324/ 111.9781787355514 Further details about CC BY licenses are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Any third-party material in this book is published under the book’s Creative Commons license unless indicated otherwise in the credit line to the material.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Minds and Language
    Of Minds and Language Noam Chomsky This article reviews, and rethinks, a few leading themes of the biolinguistic program since its inception in the early 1950s, at each stage influenced by developments in the biological sciences. The following also discusses how the questions now entering the research agenda develop in a natural way from some of the earliest concerns of these inquiries. Keywords: biolinguistics; I-language; mind; minimalism I have been thinking about various ways to approach this opportunity,1 and on balance, it seemed that the most constructive tack would be to review, and rethink, a few leading themes of the biolinguistic program since its inception in the early 1950s, at each stage influenced by developments in the biological sciences. And to try to indicate how the questions now entering the research agenda develop in a natural way from some of the earliest concerns of these inquiries. Needless to say, this is from a personal perspective. The term “biolinguistics” itself was coined by Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini as the topic for an international conference in 1974 (Piattelli-Palmarini 1974) that brought together evolutionary biologists, neuroscientists, linguists, and others concerned with language and biology, one of many such initiatives, including the Royaumont conference that Massimo brought up (Piattelli-Palmarini 1980). As you know, the 1950s was the heyday of the behavioral sciences. B.F. Skinner’s William James lectures, which later appeared as Verbal Behavior (Skinner 1957), were widely circulated by 1950, at least in Cambridge, Mass., and soon became close to orthodoxy, particularly as the ideas were taken up by W.V.
    [Show full text]
  • The Concept of Explanatory Adequacy
    Luigi Rizzi University of Geneva, University of Siena The concept of explanatory adequacy. “From the point of view that I adopt here, the fundamental empirical problem of linguistics is to explain how a person can acquire knowledge of language” Chomsky 1973 (republished 1977, 81) 1. Introduction. The quote that introduces this chapter underscores the central role that the problem of language acquisition has had throughout the history of generative grammar. Chomsky felt it was appropriate to start his foundational paper “Conditions on Transformations” (Chomsky 1973), the first systematic attempt to structure a theory of Universal Grammar, by highlighting the importance of the acquisition issue. A few years earlier the central role of acquisition had been expressed in an even more fundamental, if programmatic, way: a particular, technical specification of the intuitive notion of explanation, “explanatory adequacy”, was linked to the acquisition issue. An analysis of a linguistic phenomenon was said to meet “explanatory adequacy” when it came with a reasonable account of how the phenomenon is acquired by the language learner (Chomsky 1964). In this chapter, I would like to first illustrate the technical notion of “explanatory adequacy” in the context of the other forms of empirical adequacy envisaged in the history of generative grammar. I will then discuss the relevance of arguments from the poverty of the stimulus, which support the view that the adult knowledge of language cannot be achieved via unstructured procedures of induction and analogy recording and organizing knowledge in a tabula which is rasa initially. These arguments bear on the complexity of the task that every language learner successfully accomplishes, hence they define critical cases for evaluating the explanatory adequacy of a linguistic analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Unmaking of a Modern Synthesis: Noam Chomsky, Charles Hockett, and the Politics of Behaviorism, 1955–1965
    The Unmaking of a Modern Synthesis: Noam Chomsky, Charles Hockett, and the Politics of Behaviorism, 1955–1965 Gregory Radick, University of Leeds Abstract: A familiar story about mid-twentieth-century American psychology tells of the abandonment of behaviorism for cognitive science. Between these two, however, lay a scientific borderland, muddy and much traveled. This essay relocates the origins of the Chomskyan program in linguistics there. Follow- ing his introduction of transformational generative grammar, Noam Chomsky (b. 1928) mounted a highly publicized attack on behaviorist psychology. Yet when he first developed that approach to grammar, he was a defender of be- haviorism. His antibehaviorism emerged only in the course of what became a systematic repudiation of the work of the Cornell linguist C. F. Hockett (1916– 2000). In the name of the positivist Unity of Science movement, Hockett had synthesized an approach to grammar based on statistical communication the- ory; a behaviorist view of language acquisition in children as a process of as- sociation and analogy; and an interest in uncovering the Darwinian origins of language. In criticizing Hockett on grammar, Chomsky came to engage gradu- ally and critically with the whole Hockettian synthesis. Situating Chomsky thus within his own disciplinary matrix suggests lessons for students of disciplinary politics generally and—famously with Chomsky—the place of political discipline within a scientific life. WHY ANTIBEHAVIORISM? WHY CHOMSKY’S? Anyone inclined to organize the history of science around “revolutions” has long had to hand a tidy scheme for dividing up American psychology in the twentieth century. Before World War II there was the behaviorist revolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Language and Problems of Knowledge
    Teorema Vol. XVI/2, 1997, pp. 5-33 Language and Problems of Knowledge Noam Chomsky RESUMEN Cualquier enfoque serio del estudio del lenguaje parte del uso de sentido común, reemplazándolo por algún concepto técnico. La práctica general ha sido definir “lenguaje” como extensional y externalizado (lenguaje-E). Sin embargo, tal concepto de lenguaje y sus variantes plantea numerosos problemas , y en este artículo se argumenta que el lengua- je-E es un término artificial sin estatus alguno en una teoría del lenguaje. Una táctica me- jor sería considerar el “lenguaje” como intensional e internalizado (lenguaje-I). Teniendo presente esta concepción, el enfoque del lenguaje como conocimiento de una capacidad – algo muy común entre los filósofos influenciados por Wittgenstein– se rechaza como pura fantasía. Por otra parte, el abandono de las reglas en favor de principios generales hace que la cuestión de por qué elegimos unas reglas en vez de otras, simplemente no se plan- tea. Todo esto parece forzarnos a abandonar muchas doctrinas comúnmente aceptadas so- bre el lenguaje y el conocimiento. Hay una estructura innata que determina el armazón dentro del cual se desarrollan el pensamiento y el lenguaje, llegando hasta detalles muy precisos e intrincados. El lenguaje y el pensamiento se despiertan en la mente y siguen un curso en gran medida predeterminado, del mismo modo que muchas otras propiedades biológicas. ABSTRACT Every serious approach to the study of language departs from common sense us- age, replacing it by some technical concept. The general practice has been to define “language” as extensional and externalized (E-language). However, such a concept of language and its variants raises numerous problems and it is argued in this paper that E- language is an artifact with no status in a theory of language.
    [Show full text]
  • The Minimalist Program JAN-WOUTER ZWART NWO\University of Groningen (Received  August ; Revised  October )
    J. Linguistics (), –. Printed in the United Kingdom # Cambridge University Press REVIEW ARTICLE The Minimalist Program JAN-WOUTER ZWART NWO}University of Groningen (Received August ; revised October ) Noam Chomsky, The Minimalist Program. (Current Studies in Linguistics .) Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, . Pp. .I The Minimalist Program, by Noam Chomsky, is a collection of four articles, ‘The Theory of Principles and Parameters’ (written with Howard Lasnik, –), ‘Some notes on Economy of Derivation and representation’ (–), ‘A Minimalist Program for linguistic theory’ (–), and ‘Categories and transformations’ (–). The first three articles have " appeared elsewhere, and are reprinted here with minor revisions. The fourth was circulated in manuscript form earlier in and is commonly referred # to as ‘Chapter four’. The volume opens with an ‘Introduction’ (–) and closes with a general bibliography and an index (–). The work collected here is based on material presented by Chomsky, and discussed by participating students, faculty, and visitors, in Chomsky’s fall $ term lecture-seminars at MIT in the period of through . For those who have ever wanted to attend these class lectures, but were never in the [] ‘The theory of principles and parameters’, written in , appeared as chapter of Syntax: an international handbook of contemporary research (Volume ), edited by Joachim Jacobs, Arnim von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld & Theo Vennemann, Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter, (pp. –). ‘Some notes on Economy of Derivation and representation’ appeared in MIT Working Papers in Linguistics , (pp. –), and in Principles and parameters in comparative grammar, edited by Robert Freidin, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, (pp. –). ‘A Minimalist Program for linguistic theory’ appeared as MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics , , and in The view from Building : essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, edited by Kenneth Hale & Samuel J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Goals of the Generative Enterprise ROBERT FREIDIN Princeton
    REVIEW ARTICLE Chomsky’s linguistics: The goals of the generative enterprise Robert Freidin Princeton University Chomsky’s linguistics. Ed. by Peter Graff and Coppe van Urk. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 2012. Pp. viii, 692. ISBN 9780615567129. $98.95 (Hb). In order to provide a framework for evaluating the generative enterprise as discussed in Chom - sky’s linguistics , which spans almost four decades—what has been and what remains to be accom - plished —this essay examines the evolution of the goals of Chomsky’s research program into the nature, origin , and use of language. It compares the early goals, first formulated in the 1950s and revised less than a decade later in Chomsky 1965 and summarized in Chomsky & Lasnik 1977, with the reformulation under the minimalist program , focusing on the strong minimalist the - sis , which motivates a search for principled explanation in terms of interface conditions and gen - eral principles of computational efficiency, the latter based on the operation Merge and a theory of phases. This evaluation develops some alternative proposals to the formulations in the volume under review. * Keywords : generative enterprise, faculty of language, I-language, Merge, phases, Spell-out, Trans - fer, strong minimalist thesis, principled explanation, efficient computation, full interpretation, no tampering condition, inclusiveness 1. CHOMSKY ’S LINGUISTICS and chomsky’s linguistics . Chomsky’s linguistics spans almost four decades of work on generative grammar —eleven published papers, starting with ‘Remarks on nominalization ’ (1970) and ending with ‘On phases ’ (2008). The sec - ond and third papers, ‘Filters and control ’ (1977) and ‘A remark on contraction ’ (1978), are coauthored with Howard Lasnik, demonstrating in part that Noam Chomsky’s work in linguistics ‘reflects a collective effort ’, as he notes in the first paragraph of ‘Mini - malist inquiries: The framework ’ ( 2000a; the seventh paper ), first published in a festschrift for Lasnik (Martin et al.
    [Show full text]