Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Wiley-Blackwell Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

The Social Origins of Language

By Daniel Dor

Presents a new theoretical framework for the origins of human language and sets key issues in language evolution in their wider context within biological and cultural evolution


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

Preposition Placement in English: A Usage-Based Approach

By Thomas Hoffmann

This is the first study that empirically investigates preposition placement across all clause types. The study compares first-language (British English) and second-language (Kenyan English) data and will therefore appeal to readers interested in world Englishes. Over 100 authentic corpus examples are discussed in the text, which will appeal to those who want to see 'real data'


New from Brill!

ad

Free Access 4 You

Free access to several Brill linguistics journals, such as Journal of Jewish Languages, Language Dynamics and Change, and Brill’s Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics.


Academic Paper


Title: A Dialogue on Linguistic Creativity
Paper URL: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2025514
Author: Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay
Email: click here to access email
Homepage: http://isid.academia.edu/DebaprasadBandyopadhyay
Institution: Indian Statistical Institute
Linguistic Field: Discipline of Linguistics; Discourse Analysis; Linguistic Theories; Philosophy of Language; Psycholinguistics
Abstract: This paper is an abridged transcript of an imagined dialogue between Prof. Pro-Chomsky (PC) and Mr. Anti- Chomsky (AC). AC’s point of departure from Chomskian innateness hypothesis was mainly guided by Rolland Barthes, M. Foucault, and J. Kristeva. AC has risen following points in connection with the Chomskian innateness hypothesis: /L//L/1. From where does the ideal speaking subject speak? Where is the locus of ideal speaking subject? What is about the history of such ideal speaking subject? Does the outside influence in formation of inside LAD? What happens to transcendental Cogito (as postulated in Cartesian Linguistics), when it is subjected to the outside sociality? (Here I am inkling towards Psychoanalysis — to the construct of “psyche” rather than that of cogito as I am emphasizing on the society-psyche interface). /L//L/2. PC, out of his Cartesian anxiety, considers body as a machine. He deploys technical metaphors (e.g., The terms like “Computation’, “array” “interface”, “parser “etc or operations like “COMMAND”, “SATISFY”, “SPELL OUT”) for explaining human body. These are not metaphors or case of displacement only, but a case of metonymic transformation of human body as these technical metaphors condense the scope of human potentiality. Does human body follow algorithm only? Do we not have extra-/non-algorithmic cognitive ability? (AC’s point is that Cognitive Domain is not algorithmic only.) /L//L/3. Chomskian syntax analyzes the algorithm of “normal” “well-formed” sentences only. Apart from the exclusion of institution-body correlation in the Chomskian hypothesis, this very construction of “natural language” (e.g., the well-constructed written sentences) mercilessly marginalizes the language of so-called non-“natural” madness or folly. How do we know the differences between normal way of speaking and abnormal way of speaking? This question was initiated by Foucault (1968) to beg the premise of Cartesian cogito. Chomsky, who is like an old-fashioned physicist, is interested in VIBGYOR. However, in the domain of Art (where infinite sets of colors are illuminating) and literature, there is a proliferation of “deviations” from “normal standard” (as constructed by the Ideological State Apparatuses) and without such “deviations” no work of art or literature is possible. Is this domain of Art and Literature, a domain of unreason or madness or is it un-scientific? /L//L/4. According to AC, Chomskian syntax is an anotomo-bio-political tool for knowing the docile body of the speaking subject. The will to know the body(especially cognitive domain) of the speaking subject leads to the will to power over the docile body of the stable subject, who is objectified at the moment of deployment of syntactic tools. Thus, the subjectification of discipline of Linguistics (an enlightenment project) is possible.
Type: Individual Paper
Status: Completed
Publication Info: Aligarh Journal of Linguistics, Vol. V, No.1, pp. 72-84, January 1996
URL: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2025514


Back
Add a new paper
Return to Academic Papers main page
Return to Directory of Linguists main page