Syntactic concepts and terminology in mid-20th century American Linguistics

James D. McCawley
Summary

This paper deals with the notions and terminology that figure in the syntactic works of Bloomfield, Fries, Hockett, Gleason, and early Chomsky. Notwithstanding Bloomfield’s commitment to constituent structure and his profound influence on syntactic research in the United States, constituency had a surprisingly peripheral role in such works as Fries (1952) “Immediate constituents” (is the last of its syntactic chapters) and notions of dependency structure a much more central role. Many false generalizations by descriptivists (e.g., treatments of Therer-insertion as inversion) result from a failure to consider complex expressions as constituents of the various constructions. Notwithstanding descriptivists’ denunciations and generativists’ endorsements of traditional grammar, it is the descriptivists whose syntactic category notions came closer to those of traditional grammar. The unusual category scheme of Fries did not deviate all that much from traditional schemes, and its innovations were not applied consistently. 1960s generative syntax shared with Fries’s approach a conception of gender features and referential indices in English as borne by Ns rather than by NPs, and a failure to treat inter- and intra-saentential anaphora uniformly. Gleason (1965) is the most honorable exception to the dismal quality of this era’s literature on parts of speech.

Quick links
Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

References

Bloch, Bernard & George L. Trager
1942Outline of Linguistic Analysis. Balti-more, Md.: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard
1933Language. New York: Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
1942 [All but first section of Chapter 5 (Syntax)]. Bloch & Trager 1942.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam A.
1957Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1965Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge. Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fries, Charles C.
1952The Structure of English. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Gleason, Henry A. Jr.
1965Linguistics and English Grammar. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F.
1958A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janda, Richard & David Kathman
1992 “Shielding Morphology from Exploded INFL”. Papers from the 28th Meetimg of the Chicago Linguistics Society, vol.II, 141–157. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
1924The Philosophy of Grammar. London: Allen & Unwin; New York: Henry Holt & Co. (Repr., with an Introduction by James D. McCawley, Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1992.)Google Scholar
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki
1970 “Some Remarks on English Manner Adverbials”. Studies in General and Oriental Linguistics ed. by Roman Jakobson & Shigeo Kawamoto, 378–396. Tokyo: TEC.Google Scholar
Lees, Robert B.
1960The Grammar of English Nominalizations. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D.
1968 “Concerning the Base Component of a Transformational Grammar”. Foundations of Language 4.243–269.Google Scholar
1981 “An Un-Syntax”. Current Approaches to Syntax ed. by Edith Mo-ravcsik & Jessica Wirth (= Syntax and Semantics, 13), 167–193. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1991 “Contrastive Negation and Metalinguistic Negation”. Papers from the 27th Meetimg of the Chicago Linguistics Society, vol.II, 189–206. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
1992 “Modifiers Hosted by Indefinite and Interrogative Pronouns”. Lin-guistic Inquiry 23.663–637.Google Scholar
Percival, Keith
1976 “On the Historical Sources of Immediate Constituent Struc-ture”. Notes from the Linguistic Underground ed. by James D. McCawley (= Syn-tax and Semantics, 7), 229–242. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Postal, Paul M.
1964Constituent Structure. (= Supplement to IJAL .) Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
1970 “Anaphoric Islands”. Papers from the 5th Meetimg of the Chicago Linguistics Society, 205–239. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar