Editor for this issue: Ann Dizdar <dizdar
tam2000.tamu.edu>
Thanks to all those who sent information in regard to my query for information regarding debates within linguistics over intuitionist vs. empirical approaches. I've snipped the pertinent passages below, provided some paraphrases were pertinent, and included the names to thank their authors publicly. Further, I've noted some contributions at the end that came via means other than e-mail. >There is an excellent and provocative discussion on this in a book by >Geoffrey Sampson called Schools of Linguistics 1980: Stanford >U. Press. There is another book -- less academic called Is the Native >Speaker Dead? -- I can't find the reference at the moment. In my >book Semiotics and Linguistics (Longman 1990) I have some discussion >on the issue (with references in footnotes). >Yishai Tobin Alan Huffman writes that: >Linguists of the Columbia School have written a great deal about this >topic. Among those writings that are most pertinent, he recommended: >Contini-Morava, Ellen, and Barbara Goldberg, editors >** 1995 Meaning as explanation: Advances in linguistic sign theory. ** Berlin: Mouton-De Gruyter. >Huffman, Alan >** 1997 The categories of grammar: French lui and le. Amsterdam: John > Benjamins. >Reid, Wallis > >** 1991 Verb and noun number in English : A functional explanation. > Long- man. Chad Nilep writes: In the Introduction to *The Minimalist Program*, Chomsky discusses the conflict between intuitive and empirical linguistics. I believe John Lyons also talks about the two approaches in the field of semantics. While I believe *Semantics 1* is out of print, *Semantics 2* is available. Perhaps you can close in on the problem by approaching it from these two (nearly opposite) directions.> >Chomsky, Noam. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. >Lyons, John. Semantics 2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1977. Juhani Jarvikivi suggested: Itkonen, Esa 1978: Grammatical theory and Metascience: Amsterdam: Benjamins Itkonen, Esa 1983: Causality in Linguistic Theory. London: Croom Helm John Coleman suggests looking at: Ohala, J. J. (1986) Consumer's guide to evidence in phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3, 3-26. Carson Schutze notably states that "within my field intuitive data is one kind of empirical data" and recommends I see his book "The empirical base of linguistics: Grammaticality judgments and linguistic methodology", U. of Chicago Press, 1996. Rene' Schneider suggested I take a look at the distinction between 'intuitive' and 'discursive' as presented in the Handbook of Philosphy since >(Discursive as it was used by the greeks has a lot to do with empirics) Matti Koponen also wrote to note that within applied linguistics the intuitive concept of "fluency" is not clearly empirically described in any consistent/clear manner (something I've noticed in my own students' description of conversations). Finally, Georgia Green of the Beckman Institute generously sent a copy of her paper "Assessing Techniques for Analysis of Natural Language Use" (Cognitive Science Technical Report UIUC-BI-CS-94-08 (Language Series). Thanks again, to everyone for the starting points for my research into this subject! Christian Nelson Dr. Christian Kjaer Nelson Dept. of Communication Purdue Univ. W. Lafayette, IN 47907 USA cnelsonMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuesla.purdue.edu phone: 317/494-3323 fax: 317/496-1394