Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics: Volume II: Case Studies PDF
Preview Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics: Volume II: Case Studies
FUNCTIONALISM AND FORMALISM IN LINGUISTICS STUDIES IN LANGUAGE COMPANION SERIES (SLCS) The SLCS series has been established as a companion series to STUDIES IN LANGUAGE, International Journal, sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of language”. Series Editors Werner Abraham Michael Noonan University of Groningen University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee The Netherlands USA Editorial Board Joan Bybee (University of New Mexico) Ulrike Claudi (University of Cologne) Bernard Comrie (Max Planck Institute, Leipzig) William Croft (University of Manchester) Östen Dahl (University of Stockholm) Gerrit Dimmendaal (University of Leiden) Martin Haspelmath (Max Planck Institute, Leipzig) Ekkehard König (Free University of Berlin) Christian Lehmann (University of Bielefeld) Robert Longacre (University of Texas, Arlington) Brian MacWhinney (Carnegie-Mellon University) Marianne Mithun (University of California, Santa Barbara) Edith Moravcsik (University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee) Masayoshi Shibatani (Kobe University) Russell Tomlin (University of Oregon) John Verhaar (The Hague) Volume 42 Michael Darnell, Edith Moravcsik, Frederick Newmeyer, Michael Noonan and Kathleen Wheatley (eds) Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics Volume II: Case Studies FUNCTIONALISM AND FORMALISM IN LINGUISTICS VOLUME II: CASE STUDIES Edited by MICHAEL DARNELL EDITH MORAVCSIK FREDERICK NEWMEYER MICHAEL NOONAN KATHLEEN WHEATLEY JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY AMSTERDAM/PHILADELPHIA TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements 8 of American National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48–1984. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Functionalism and formalism in linguistics / edited by Michael Darnell ... [et al.]. v. cm. -- (Studies in language companion series, ISSN 0165-7763 ; v. 41-42) Selected papers of the 23rd UWM Linguistics Symposium. Apr. 18-20, 1996, at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, sponsored by the Department of English and Comparative Literature and the Department of Linguistics at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Includes examples in various languages. Includes bibliographical references and index. Contents: v. 1. General papers -- v. 2. Case studies. Spine title: Functionalism and formalism. 1. Functionalism (Linguistics)--Congresses. 2. Formalization (Linguistics)--Congresses. I. Darnell, Mike. II. Linguistics Symposium of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (23rd : 1996) III. Title: Functionalism and formalism IV. Series. P147.F8627 1998 410--dc21 98-5867 ISBN 90 272 3044 7 (Eur.) / 1 55619 927 9 (US) (vol. 1 : alk. paper) CIP ISBN 90 272 3045 5 (Eur.) / 1 55619 928 7 (US) (vol. 2 : alk. paper) © 1999 – John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Co. • P.O.Box 75577 • 1070 AN Amsterdam • The Netherlands John Benjamins North America • P.O.Box 27519 • Philadelphia PA 19118-0519 • USA Table of Contents Introduction: Syntax, Morphology, and Morphological Alternation 1 EdithA.MoravcsikandKathleenM.Wheatley PartI:Syntax,Morphology,andMorphologicalAlternation Mapping So-called “Pragmatic” Phenomena According to a “Linguistic–Extralinguistic” Distinction: The case of propositions marked “accessible” 11 MiraAriel Lexis, Grammar, and Grammatical Change: The Koyukon classifier prefixes 39 MelissaAxelrod The Limits of Formal Analysis: Pragmatic motivation in Oromo grammar 59 RobbinClamons,AnnE.Mulkern,GeraldSandersandNancy Stenson Form and Function in Syntax: Relative clauses in Tsez 77 BernardComrieandMariaPolinsky Formalizing Functionally 93 KeesHengeveld Representing the Structure-Discourse Iconicity of the Japanese Post-Verbal Cons truction 107 LizanneKaiser Between Irregular and Regular: “Imperfect generalizations” in Istanbul Turkish and the status of phonological rules 131 NicholasKibre vi TABLEOFCONTENTS Constraints on Constraints, or the Limits of Functional Adaptation 151 SimonKirby Structure-preservation and Transitivity: The case of Chinese ba sentences 175 Feng-hsiLiu Topicality and Agreement 203 AndréMeinunger Explanatory Power of Functional and Formal Approaches to Language Change: The evolution of the passive structure ser+ past participle in colonial Spanish 221 ViolaG.Miglio Functional Optimality Theory: Evidence from split Case systems 253 WataruNakamura Welsh Soft Mutation and Marked Word Order 277 MaggieTallerman A Functional Journey with a Formal Ending: What do brow raises do in American Sign Language? 295 RonnieWilbur PartII:FirstLanguageAcquisition Formalism or Functionalism?: Evidence from the study of language development 317 ErikaHoV-Ginsberg Functional Innateness: Explaining the critical period for language acquisition 341 JamesR.Hurford The Holophrastic Hypothesis Revisited: Structural and functional approaches 365 ElizabethPurnell Introduction Edith A. Moravcsik Kathleen M. Wheatley The papers in this two-volume set were originally presented at the 23rd UWM Linguistics Symposium, held at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, April 18–20, l996.Entitled “Functionalismand Formalism in Linguistics”,the goal of the conference was to bring together linguists of opposing approaches to linguistic inquiry — functionalists and formalists — and determine exactly to whatextenttheseapproachesdiVerandhowtheymight complementeachother. The program consisted of 87 papers: some were invited and others were selected from abstracts; some were presented orally while others in poster form. Of the 87 contributions, these volumes include 35: 18 in the first volume and l7 in the second. The first volume includes general papers regarding the two basic approaches; the second volume consists of case studies, many of which draw upon the strengths of both approaches and thus help bridge the gap between the two camps. With two exceptions, the papers in Volume I come from the plenary sessions of the conference. Their authors were invited to respond to general issues raised by the conference organizers. The program of the plenary sessions is given below to show how these papers fit into an overall scheme. Introduction, by EdithMoravcsik Syntax – position papers: – functionalist paper, by MichaelNoonan – formalist paper, by HowardLasnik – discussion of the syntax position papers, by WernerAbraham 2 EDITHA.MORAVCSIKANDKATHLEENM.WHEATLEY – mutual benefits: – what can functionalists learn from formalists in syntax? by William Croft – what can formalists learn from functionalists in syntax? by Stephen Anderson – ergativity: – from a functionalist perspective, by JohnDuBois – from a formalist perspective, by AlecMarantz – discussion of the papers on ergativity, by AliceDavison – word order: – from a functionalist perspective, by DorisPayne – from a formalist perspective, by DavidPesetsky – discussion of the papers on word order, by KennethHale Phonology – position papers: – functionalist paper, by JoanBybee – formalist paper, by BruceHayes – discussionofthephonologypositionpapers,byJanetPierrehumbert – mutual benefits: – what can functionalists learn from formalists in phonology? by GeoVreyNathan – what can formalists learn from functionalists in phonology? by MichaelHammond First language acquisition – position papers: – functionalist paper, by BrianMacWhinney – formalist paper, by NinaHyams – discussion, by MelissaBowerman Concluding pape r, by FritzNewmeyer Allofthesepapersarepublishedinthefirstvolume,withtheexceptionofthose by MelissaBowerman,JohnDuBois,AlecMarantz,EdithMoravcsik, and David Pesetsky,whodecidednottosubmittheircontributionsforpublication.Because of their general nature, this volume also includes Mark Durie’s and Daniel Nettle’s paper from the parallel sessions. INTRODUCTION 3 Here is a summary run-down on the contents of the papers. Thereare eightpapers in thefirstsectionof thefirstvolume on syntax, by Abraham,Anderson,Croft,Davison,Hale,Lasnik,Noonan,andPayne.Thetwo position papers on syntax are by Lasnik and Noonan. HowardLasnik sees the functionalism-formalismdichotomyasholdingbetweenthecategoricalbeliefthat all formis functionally motivatedand the agnostic stand that some ofform may be.Heproposesaformalaccount oflocalityconstraints onmovement processes but concludes that this account does not preclude a functional explanation. MichaelNoonanprovidesanexplicitlistofattributesofstructuralistsyntax(such askeepingknowledgeanduseapart,andassumingdiscretecategories)whichhe then contrasts with opposing attributes of a functionalist model and he notes a recent convergence between the assumptions of functionalists and formalists. In his discussion of the two position papers, WernerAbraham criticizes both Lasnik’sandNoonan’swayofrepresentingtheirrespectivepositions.Hefurther proposes that the choice between the two orientations is a subjective matter and thus best left to the temperament of the individual researcher. Croft and Anderson address the question of what each approach can learn from the other in syntax. WilliamCroft discusses certain constructs of formalist syntax which need to be taken into account by functionalists as well (such as grammatical dependence and constituency) and then highlights points that both approaches must take to heart, such as the responsible use of the notion of psycholinguistic explanations and the need to consider a broad range of cross- linguistic data. StephenAnderson thinks the most important diVerence between functionalism and formalism is that what is seen as interacting but distinct systems in the latter are viewed as a unified domain in the former. According to him, the prime lesson to be derived by formalists from functionalist work is the recognition of the weaknesses of functionalism. The two special syntactic topics discussed both from a functional and a formalistpointofviewarewordorderandergativity.Comingfromthefunction- alist side, Doris Payne uses mostly data from Wayampi (Brazil) and Panare (Venezuela)toargueforafunctionalistapproachtowordorderandproposesthat formalism and functionalism are not complementary and that their diVerences are philosophical in nature. Kenneth Hale takes issue with Payne’s contention that “all truth converges” by presenting an example from Navajo morphosyntax —thirdpersonobjectagreementinclauseswhosesubjectisalsothirdperson— and demonstrating that two equally true accounts, one functional and the other formal, can be in conflict. Relying mostly on data from the split-ergative Hindi/Urdu system, AliceDavison presents both formal and functional accounts 4 EDITHA.MORAVCSIKANDKATHLEENM.WHEATLEY of ergativity (those of Du Bois and Marantz) and she sees them as equally contributive to a unified account of ergativity yet to be achieved. Fivepaperspertaintophonology(section2):thosebyBybee,Hammond, Hayes, Nathan, and Pierrehumbert. Bybee and Hayes are the authors of the two positionpapers,withPierrehumbertdiscussingthem.Inherfunctionalistposition paper, JoanBybee describes how usage-based functionalism can reveal ways in which language use shapes structure. She proposes six basic principles of functionalist theory and shows how they apply to phonological analysis. From the formalist side, BruceHayes points at two formal mechanisms that facilitate the link-up of formal and functional work in phonology. One is markedness principles as incorporated in Optimality Theory, the other is an algorithm for inductivegroundingproposedinthepaper.JanetPierrehumbertseesbothBybee and Hayes as functionalists and welcomes Bybee’s emphasis on the role of the lexicon in phonology and both Bybee’s and Hayes’s eVorts to explore how phonetics projects into phonology. Hammond and Nathan draw attention to the lessons each camp can draw from the other’s work in phonology. Based on an experiment he conducted on rhythmic stress shift in English, Michael Hammond suggests that functional explanations, such as one making crucial use of lexical frequency, can be incorporated into formal models of phonology. GeoVrey Nathan proposes two ways in which functionalism can benefit from formal theories: by retaining the phonemic-phoneticdistinction,andbyexploringthepsychologicalplausibilityof sequential rules application, such as assumed in Optimality Theory. Thethirdsectionofvolumeone,onfirstlanguageacquisition,contains two papers, by Hyams and MacWhinney. In his functionalist paper, Brian MacWhinney examines how linguistic form — such as inflections — emerges from the interaction of diVerent levels of neurolinguistic processing. Formalist NinaHyams uses cross-linguistic data on children’s telegraphic speech to argue against a functional account and for a modular approach which separates grammar from pragmatics and form from function. The fourth and last section of this volume, global issues, contains papers byDurie,Nettle,andNewmeyer.MarkDuriedrawsattentiontothefactthatthe form-function relation is mediated by temporal processes, such as in real-time language use, language acquisition, diachrony, and phylogeny. He shows how these relations exhibit both transparency (form-function match) and opacity (mismatch of form and function), and contends that structural models are not equipped to do justice to the temporal nature of the form-function relationship. DanielNettledrawsaparallelbetweenfunctionalexplanationsinlinguisticsand
The list of books you might like
