At 04:56 PM 7/25/2005 +0900, CeJ wrote:
..............
I guess one question for discussion is whether or not, formal
linguistics as it follows from Chomsky and Halle is really more about
logic than it is about psycholinguistics. Earlier I called it an
epistemologically naive psychologization of structuralism. Which then
brings us back to the ultimate question: is logic something that
results from human psychology or something that exists outside it?
(Which also seems to bring me back to one of the first things I posted
to this list).
There are a number of questions balled together. While I think that the
competence/performance distinction as originally conceived forestalled
working out the actual relation between the two (perhaps premature at the
time) and thus equated psychology (competence) with the linguistic
formalism, I fail to see how linguistics is merely logic. Would you call
generative phonology a form of logic?
On the broader question of logic, you wouldn't want to revert to the
psychologism of the late 19th century, would you? There have been attempts
to avoid both psychologism and Platonism--Popper, the Soviet notion of
ideality, etc.
_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
