72
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Reviews

Reviews

, , &
Pages 463-493 | Published online: 16 Jun 2015

  • Noam Chomsky, Syntactic Structures (‘S-Gravenhage: Mouton and Co., 1957), hereafter referred to as SS
  • Robert B. Lees, The Grammar of English Nominalizations [= Publication 12 of the Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics] (Baltimore, 1960).
  • Hereafter referred to as ES.
  • Roberts has now completed for Harcourt, Brace an English Series: A Linguistics Program, Grades III-VI. Much of the matter of ES is sequentially developed in this series for elementary schools.
  • Lees, op. cit., p. xvi. In this sense ES is of greater concern than Manfred Bierwisch's Grammatik des Deutschen Verbs (Berlin, 1963), a transformational treatment made quite independently of MIT. See Erica C. Garcia's review in WW XXI (April, 1965), 102–117.
  • Dwight L. Bolinger, “Syntactic Blends and Other Matters,” Language XXXVII (July-Sept., 1961), 381. On the other hand, Chomsky maintains that the mainly creative process of production and understanding of original sentences is “the central fact to which any significant linguistic theory must address itself.” See Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (The Hague, 1964), p. 7.
  • For example, Dwight L. Bolinger, “Linguistic Science and Linguistic Engineering,” Word XVI (Dec., 1960), 374.
  • See Chomsky, Current Issues, pp. 53–55.
  • ES, p. xii. Perceptive work on the semantic component is being done by Jerrold Katz and Jerry Fodor, as in “The Structure of a Semantic Theory,” Language XXXIX (April-June, 1963), 170–210. Yet Chomsky's formulation above is hardly changed from that in SS: “We should like the syntactic framework of the language that is isolated and exhibited by the grammar to be able to support semantic description, and we shall naturally rate more highly a theory of formal structure that leads to grammars that meet this requirement more fully” (p. 102).
  • For example, A. A. Hill, in Introduction to Linguistic Structures (New York, 1958), p. 147.
  • SS, p. 71. See Robert P. Stockwell, “The Place of Intonation in a Generative Grammar of English,” Language XXXVI (July-Sept., 1960), 360–367. Instrumental work has been done by Philip Lieberman, in “On the Acoustic Basis of the Perception of Intonation by Linguists,” Word XXI (April, 1965), 40–54, who found that the TragerSmith phonemic pitch levels and terminal symbols often have no distinct physical basis.
  • For a fuller description, see Lila Gleitman, “Coordinating Conjunctions in English,” Language XLI (April-June, 1965), 260–293.
  • Roberts does suggest that noncount nouns might be made count nouns for purposes of a particular context like “Prime beef is an expensive meat” or “He had a courage such as I had never seen” (pp. 23–24), but the solution is ad hoc.
  • Implicitly, this raises the complex question of the generation of idioms. Would “black-eyed Susan” and “hammer and tongs,” for example, be best described as coming directly from storage, involving, as they do, definite transformational processes? Roberts’ approach would indicate that they would. This reviewer would think not. The specific question of origin of adverbials and complements needs to be comprehensively attacked. Prepositional phrases used as such might be analyzed according to Lees's suggestion, with nouns assumed to have certain prepositions associated with them, and with the actual preposition—e.g., by, for, and of—being introduced into the grammar transformationally (pp. 31–32).
  • The reviewer is indebted to Paul Postal for this observation.
  • Luis Michelena, Fonética histórica vasca (San Sebastián, 1961).
  • Luis Michelena, Apellidos vascos (San Sebastián, 1953).
  • Voir L. R. Zinder, Obščaja fonetika (Leningrad, 1960), p. 57.
  • Voir, par exemple, Roman Jakobson, C. Gunnar M. Fant, Morris Halle, Preliminaries to Speech Analysis: The Distinctive Features and Their Conelates (Second printing; Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1955), p. 43.
  • Daniel Jones, The History and Meaning of the Term “Phoneme” (Supplément au Maître Phonétique; Londres, Juillet-Decembre, 1957), p. 14.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.