On the Distinction between Model-Theoretic and Generative-Enumerative Syntactic Frameworks

Pullum, Geoffrey K.; Scholz, Barbara C.

doi:10.1007/3-540-48199-0_2

Cited by 121 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, a large research paradigm in linguistics should be abandoned. Non-constructive grammars would have to supplant the generative methods (see Pullum and Scholz (2001) for a discussion of the cardinality neutrality of modeltheoretic approaches to grammar). In addition, grammars cannot be about physical brain-states as per the biolinguistic paradigm since this would be mathematically impossible.…”

Section: Just How Big Is Nl?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Infinity and the foundations of linguistics

Nefdt

2017

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of linguistic infinity has had a central role to play in foundational debates within theoretical linguistics since its more formal inception in the mid-twentieth century. The Conceptualist tradition, marshalled in by Chomsky and others, holds that infinity is a core explanandum and a link to the formal sciences. Realism/Platonism takes this further to argue that linguistics is in fact a formal science with an abstract ontology. In this paper, I argue that a central misconstrual of formal apparatus of recursive operations such as the set-theoretic operation merge has led to a mathematisation of the object of inquiry, producing a strong analogy with discrete mathematics and especially arithmetic. The main product of this error has been the assumption that natural, like some formal, languages are discretely infinite. I will offer an alternative means of capturing the insights and observations related to this posit in terms of scientific modelling. My chief aim will be to draw from the larger philosophy of science literature in order to offer a position of grammars as models compatible with various foundational interpretations of linguistics while being informed by contemporary ideas on scientific modelling for the natural and social sciences.

show abstract

Section: Just How Big Is Nl?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Infinity and the foundations of linguistics

Nefdt

2017

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Pullum and Scholz (2001) and Pullum (2013), the notions of generative-enumerative versus model-theoretic syntactic formalisms are discussed and teased apart. The former are related to the formalisms discussed in the previous sections (with the exception of DS which has elements of both).…”

Section: Model-theoretic Syntax and Overgeneralisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, expression fragments can more readily be treated under this framework. These could be fragments with syntactic structure or information (and semantic or phonological as well) that are not strictly grammatical [such as and of the example in Pullum and Scholz (2001)] and thus would not be generated by a generative grammar. By focusing on individual expressions we can also capture the use and proliferation of neologisms and the lexically creative aspect of natural languages.…”

Section: Model-theoretic Syntax and Overgeneralisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Scientific modelling in generative grammar and the dynamic turn in syntax

Nefdt

2016

Linguist and Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I address the issue of scientific modelling in contemporary linguistics, focusing on the generative tradition. In so doing, I identify two common varieties of linguistic idealisation, which I call determination and isolation respectively. I argue that these distinct types of idealisation can both be described within the remit of Weisberg's (J Philos 104 (12) erative tradition, along scientific modelling lines. Thus, I offer a lens through which to appreciate the scientific contribution of generative grammar, amid an increased resistance to some of its core theoretical posits, in terms of a brand of structural realism in the philosophy of science and specifically scientific modelling.

show abstract

“…Model-Theoretic Syntax (MTS) fundamentally differs from proof-theoretic syntax (or Generative-Enumerative Syntax-GES-as coined by Pullum and Scholz [1]) in the way of representing language: while GES focuses on describing a procedure to generate by enumeration the set of all the legal strings in the language, MTS abstracts away from any specific procedure and focuses on describing individual syntactic properties of language. While the syntactic representation of a string is, in GES, the mere trace of the generative procedure, in MTS it is a model for the grammar, with no information as to how such a model might be obtained.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Model-Theoretic Framework for Grammaticality Judgements

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Although the observation of grammaticality judgements is well acknowledged, their formal representation faces problems of different kinds: linguistic, psycholinguistic, logical, computational. In this paper we focus on addressing some of the logical and computational aspects, relegating the linguistic and psycholinguistic ones in the parameter space. We introduce a model-theoretic interpretation of Property Grammars, which lets us formulate numerical accounts of grammaticality judgements. Such a representation allows for both clear-cut binary judgements, and graded judgements. We discriminate between problems of Intersective Gradience (i.e., concerned with choosing the syntactic category of a model among a set of candidates) and problems of Subsective Gradience (i.e., concerned with estimating the degree of grammatical acceptability of a model). Intersective Gradience is addressed as an optimisation problem, while Subsective Gradience is addressed as an approximation problem.

show abstract

On the Distinction between Model-Theoretic and Generative-Enumerative Syntactic Frameworks

Cited by 121 publications

References 24 publications

Infinity and the foundations of linguistics

Infinity and the foundations of linguistics

Scientific modelling in generative grammar and the dynamic turn in syntax

A Model-Theoretic Framework for Grammaticality Judgements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About