Article published in:Exploring Crash-Proof Grammars
Edited by Michael T. Putnam
[Language Faculty and Beyond 3] 2010
► pp. 89–104
Grammaticality, interfaces, and UG
It is argued that the notions “well-formedness” and “grammaticality,” inspired by formal-language theory, are not necessarily relevant for the study of natural language. The assumption that a [± grammatical] distinction exists, i.e. that I-language generates only certain structures but not others, is empirically questionable and presumably requires a richly structured UG. Some aspects of “crash-proof” models of syntax that assume such a distinction are discussed and contrasted with an alternative proposal (the Minimalist Program as pursued by Chomsky), which dispenses entirely with grammaticality, allowing syntax to generate freely. The latter program aims not at distinguishing “grammatical” from “ungrammatical” sentences, but at providing a true theory of the mechanisms that assign interpretations to structures at the interfaces.
Published online: 15 September 2010
Cited by 4 other publications
No author info given
Epstein, Samuel David, Hisatsugu Kitahara & T. Daniel Seely
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 may 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.