Article published in:
Minimalism and Beyond: Radicalizing the interfaces
Edited by Peter Kosta, Steven L. Franks, Teodora Radeva-Bork and Lilia Schürcks
[Language Faculty and Beyond 11] 2014
► pp. 9–34

A program for the Minimalist Program

| University of Maryland
The paper reviews current understandings of the Minimalist enterprise and defends one version thereof. Our main departure from the norm involves substituting ‘cognitive generality’ (viz. non-linguistic-parochialism) for ‘computational efficiency’ as a minimalist regulative ideal. We argue that the former is important to realize minimalist ambitions. The latter, though welcome, is less vital.
Published online: 24 September 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.11.01hor
References

References

Aho, Alfred V., Ullman, Jeffrey D. and Hopcroft, John E.
1983 Data Structures and Algorithms. New York: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Baltin, Mark
2003 “The interaction of ellipsis and Binding: Implications for the sequencing of principle A.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 215–246. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 “The non-unity of VP preposing.” Language 734–736. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barton, G. Edward, Berwick, Robert C. and Ristad, Eric S.
1987 Computational Complexity and Natural Language. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brody, Michael
1993 “Θ-theory and arguments.” Linguistic Inquiry 24: 1–24.Google Scholar
Berwick, Robert Cregar
1980 “Computational analogues of constraints on grammars: A model of syntactic acquisition.” In 18th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics.Published in: Proceeding ACL ’80 Proceedings of the 18th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 49–53. Association for Computational Linguistics Stroudsburg, PA, USA.
Berwick, Robert Cregar and Weinberg, Amy
1982 “Parsing efficiency, computational complexity, and the evaluation of grammatical theories.” Linguistic Inquiry 13(2): 165–191.Google Scholar
1984 The Grammatical Basis of Linguistic Performance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Berwick, Robert Cregar, Pietroski, Paul, Yanakama, Beracah and Chomsky, Noam
2011 “Poverty of the stimulus revisited.” Cognitive Science 35: 1207–1242. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chaitin, Gregory
1969 “On the simplicity and speed of programs for computing infinite sets of natural numbers.” Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 16: 407. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1977 “On wh-movement.” In Formal Syntax, Peter Culicover, Thomas Wasow and Adrian Akmajian (eds), 71–132. Academic Press.Google Scholar
1981 Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
1993 “A minimalist program for linguistic theory.” In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Ken Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser (eds), 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1995 The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000 “Minimalist inquiries: The framework.” In Step by Step, Robert Martin, David Michaels and Juan Uriagereka (eds), 91–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2004 “Beyond explanatory adequacy.” In Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Adriana Belletti (ed.), 104–131. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2005 “Three factors in language design.” Linguistic Inquiry 36: 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collins, Chris
1997 Local Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Drummond, Alex
2010 “A note on the verb phrase constituency paradox.” MS, UMD.Google Scholar
Drummond, Alex, Kush, Dave and Hornstein, Norbert
2011 “Minimalist construal: Two approaches to A and B.” In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism. C. Boeckx (ed.), 396–426. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
In Progress. “A minimalist theory of binding.”
Embick, David and Poeppel, David
2005 “Mapping syntax using imaging: Prospects and problems for the study of neurolinguistic computation.” In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edition. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Gallistel, C.R. and King, Adam Philip
2009 Memory and the Computational Brain. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
1991 Introduction to Government & Binding Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hauser, Marc D., Chomsky, Noam and Fitch, W. Tecumseh
2002 “The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?” Science 298: 1569–1579. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heinz, Jeffrey and Idsardi, William
2011 “Sentence and word complexity.” Science 333: 295–297. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “What complexity differences reveal about domains in language.” Topics in Cognitive Science 5: 111–131.Google Scholar
Hicks, Glyn
2009 “‘Tough’ constructions and their derivation.” Linguistic Inquiry 40: 535–566. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert
2001 Move! A Minimalist Theory of Construal. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2009 A Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2013 “Three grades of grammatical involvement: Syntax from a minimalist perspective.” Mind and Language 28(4): 392–420. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Idsardi, William
1992 “The computation of prosody.” Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard S.
2002 “Pronouns and their antecedents.” In Samuel David Epstein and T. Daniel Seely (eds), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, 133–166. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kolmogoro, Andrey N.
1965 “Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information.” Problems in Information Transmission 1(1): 1–7.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard
1976 “Remarks on coreference.” Linguistic Analysis 2: 1–22.Google Scholar
Lechner, Winfried
2003 “Phrase structure paradoxes, movement and ellipsis.” In The Interfaces: Deriving and Interpreting Omitted Structures, Kerstin Schwabe and Susanne Winkler (eds), 187–203. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lees, Robert B. and Kilma, Edward S.
1963 “Rules for English pronominalization.” Language 39: 17–28. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Li, Ming and Vitányi, Paul
1997 An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and Its Applications. Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lidz, Jeffrey and Idsardi, William J.
1998 “Chains and phono-logical form.” In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium , Alexis Dimitriadis, Hikyoung Lee, Christine Moisset and Alexander Williams (ed.), 109–125.Philadelphia: Penn Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Marr, David
1982 Vision. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Ortega-Santos, Ivan
2008 “On the emergence of relativized minimality.” UMD. MS.
2011 “On relativized minimality, memory and cue-based parsing”. Iberia: International Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 3: 35–64.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan
1983 “Relating to the grid.” Linguistic Inquiry 14: 19–100.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya
1983 “Coreference and bound anaphora: A restatement of the anaphora questions.” Linguistics and Philosophy 6: 47–88. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Solomonoff, Ray J.
1964 “A formal theory of inductive inference Part I and Part II.” Information and Control 7: 1–22, 224–254. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zwart, C. Jan-Wouter
2002 “Issues relating to a derivational theory of binding.” In Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Samuel David Epstein and T. Daniel Seely (ed.), 269–304. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar