Hi Ada,

Thank you for your reply.

I don't think it is possible to follow your advice to wean ourselves of the 
concept of a lemma and at the same time think of "a verb that can be 
conjugated", because that is precisely an example of what I would call a lemma.

I never claimed that anything exists beyond the reality of my mind. I only 
asked why I am not allowed to talk about things that can be conjugated / 
inflected etc. and to use the word "lemma" to refer to those things. You 
haven't answered that question.

Best,

Orhan



On 18 Oct 2023 17:49, Ada Wan <adawan...@gmail.com> wrote:
[To those who do not have shared interests on issues that pertain to 
Corpora-List matters, such as data/corpora and their handling which includes 
but is not limited to linguistic/NLP theories/methods (and the validity 
thereof): please disregard.]

Dear Orhan

Thanks for your interests in this discussion. I think it is high time that our 
community comes to a critical (re-)examination of (linguistic) morphology (and 
to address issues concerning reinterpretation and transition).

First of all, allow me to put my traditional grammarian hat on to get to your 
question more directly. You brought up an example of a morphological paradigm.
Now, as linguists or language professionals, we know that language is 
(re-)productive in nature. So, if you don't mind, we can do a thought 
experiment and go through this dialectically (pls note that I only check my 
emails about once a day on weekdays, however).

1. Let's think of a verb that does not yet exist (in any particular language(s) 
that you can think of or that you are used to). Would you mind conjugating it 
for me? How many patterns would you have? And what would the forms be like?
2. Where did you get the patterns/paradigm from? If you were able to come up 
with a "full paradigm" (whatever that should refer to (?) --- but let's 
suppose, you have 6 forms (as per some textbook paradigms from some 
"Indo-European languages" --- 1st/2nd/3rd person in sg/pl), you surely haven't 
seen any of these forms combined with the verb before, have you? So where is 
your evidence that these forms exist in reality beyond that of your mind? And 
if such "perfect/ideal paradigm" exists only in your mind (and minds of some of 
your friends as well), how do you justify that morphological paradigma (the 
form/"structure"/pattern) are a necessary or intrinsic part of language (may 
these be of any particular language (which "one"?) or or language in general)? 
Wouldn't morphology as well as the perpetual construction and reconstruction of 
morphological patterns be a self-fulfilling prophecy only? And how often do we 
impose our conceptual/perceptual habits/categories upon whatever "new" that we 
encounter?
3. If, however, you were not able to construct a "full paradigm" or any part 
thereof at all, or you claim you were not able to think of a hypothetical verb 
either, because to you morphology is solely based on what has been written and 
analyzed beforehand/historically, then what is there to claim about 
morphological analyses? Not only does such practice not generalize, but it 
would also just apply to calcified segments analyzed/interpreted in a certain 
way as part of philological pursuits in the past. One should bear in mind that 
philological methods can progress and update as well.

There are no limits as to how one can *use* (or some might even claim *define* 
here) "language", including how various modalities can combine/fuse with each 
other. Meaning has no fixed boundaries. When it comes to language or meaning, 
there is no "completeness" to "speak of" or to serve as basis of any 
science/study. And there are no fixed demarcations between any "particular 
languages" either.

Other perspectives on (the shortcomings of) morphology and "words" can be found 
on my rebuttal page here: https://openreview.net/forum?id=-llS6TiOew. Please 
also read the references cited therein.

I look forward to your reply, comments/remarks, or questions. (Actually, the 
floor can also be opened to anyone who would like to join.)

Thank you and best
Ada
_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list -- corpora@list.elra.info
https://list.elra.info/mailman3/postorius/lists/corpora.list.elra.info/
To unsubscribe send an email to corpora-le...@list.elra.info

Reply via email to