creators_name: Lotfi, Ahmad Reza type: preprint datestamp: 2001-07-04 lastmod: 2011-03-11 08:54:44 metadata_visibility: show title: Semantico-Phonetic Form: A Unitarianist Grammar subjects: ling-syntax full_text_status: public keywords: semantico-phonetic form, LF, interface levels, minimalism, minimalist program, interpretation, generative linguistics abstract: Semantico-Phonetic Form: A Unitarianist Grammar Ahmad R. Lotfi Azad University at Esfahan (IRAN) ABSTRACT Semantico-Phonetic Form is a unitarianist theory of language in two different but inter-related senses: first, it assumes that the Conceptual-Intentional and Articulatory-Perceptual systems (responsible for semantic and phonetic interpretations respectively) access the data at one and the same level of inter- pretation; hence a single interface level--Semantico-Phonetic Form, SPF. Second, it is unitarianist in that (although it is still a formalist theory of language) it potentially permits the incorporation of both formalist and functionalist explana- tions in its formulation of the architecture of language. Within the framework of Semantico-Phonetic Form, and as an alternative proposal to Chomsky's minimalist thesis of movement, the Pooled Features Hypothesis pro- poses that "movement" is the consequence of the way in which the language faculty is organised (rather than a simple "imperfection" of language). The computational system CHL for human language is considered to be economical in its selection of formal features from the lexicon so that if two LIs (to be introduced in the same derivation) happen to have some identical formal feature in common, the feature is selected only once but shared by the syntactic objects in the derivation. It follows that the objects in question must be as local in their relations as possible. The local- ity of relations as such, which is due to economy considerations, results in some kind of (bare) phrase structure with pooled features labelling the structural tree nodes that dominate the syntactic objects. Pooled features, in a sense, are structurally interpreted. Other features, i.e. those not pooled, will be interpreted at SPF. KEY WORDS: bare phrase structure, economy, faculty of language, feature checking, feature sharing, formal features, imperfections, lexicon, logical forms, minimalist syntax, Semantico-Phonetic Form, strength, unitarianist theory date: 2000 date_type: published refereed: FALSE referencetext: References Aarons, D., B. Bahan, J. Kegl, and C. Neidle. (1992). Clausal Struc- ture and a Tier for Grammatical Marking in ASL. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 15:103-142. Allott, R. (1994). Gestural Equivalence (Equivalents) of Language. Berkeley, [http://www.percep.demon.co.uk/index.htm]. Barss, A. (1986). Chains and Anaphoric Dependence: On Reconstruction and its Implications. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Boskovic, Z. (1998). On the Interpretation of Multiple Questions. Chomsky Celebration Website, [http://mitpress.mit.edu/\ celebration]. Brody, M. (1995). Lexico-Logical Form: A Radically Minimalist Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Brody, M. (1997). Perfect Chains. In Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, ed. L. Haegeman. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Browne, W. (1970). More on Definiteness Markers: Interrogatives in Persian. Linguistic Inquiry 1:359-363. Browman, C. and L. Goldstein. (1989). Gestural Structures and Phonolo- gical Patterns. Status Report on Speech Research SR-97/98 pp. 1-23. NewHaven, Conn.:Haskins Laboratories. Browman, C. and L. Goldstein. (1991). Gestural Structures: Distinctive- ness, Phonological Processes, and Historical Change. In Modu- larity and the Motor Theory of Speech Perception eds. Mattingly, I. M. and M. Studdert-Kennedy. Browman, C. and L. Goldstein. (1992). Articulatory Phonology: An over- view. Phonetica 49:155-180. Bybee, J. (1985). Morphology: A Study of the Relation Between Meaning and Form. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Calvin, W. and D. Bickerton. (2000). Lingua ex Machina: Reconciling Darwin and Chomsky with the Human Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris. Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, N. (1998). Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 15, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, N. (1999). Derivation by Phase. MIT Occasional Papers in Lin- guistics 18, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Collins, A. M.& M. R. Quillian (1969). Retrieval Time from Semantic Memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8. 240-247. Conrad, C. (1972). Cognitive Economy in Semantic Memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology 92 . 149-154. Estes, W. K. (1986). Array Models for Category Learning. Cognitive Psychology 18. 500-549. Fox, D. and U. Sauerland. (1997). Illusive Scope of Universal Quantifiers, [http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/user/s\ /a/sauerlan/www/Scope_Illusions.html]. Givon, T. (1979). On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press. Givon, T. (1984). Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction. Amesterdam: Benjamins. Givon, T. (1995). Functionalism and Grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Gluck, M. A. (1991). Stimulus Generalization and Representation in Adaptive Network Models of Category Learning. Psychological Science 2. 50-55. Gould, S.J. (1991). Exaptation: A Crucial Tool for Evolutionary Psycho- logy. Journal of Social Issues 47, 43-65. Grohmann, K. (1999). German is a Multiple Wh-Fronting Language! Colloque de syntaxe et semantique a Paris 3. Haegeman, L. (1991). Introduction to Government and Binding Theory. Basil Blackwell. Hagstrom, P. (1998). Decomposing Questions. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Haiman, J. (1985). Natural Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hale, K. (1998). Conflicting Truths. In Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, eds. M. Darnell, E. Moravcsik, F. Newmeyer, M. Noonan, and K. Wheatley. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). Language Structure and Language Function. In New Horizons in Linguistics, ed. J. Lyons. Baltimore: Penguin Books. Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnolds. Hawkins, J. A. (1989). Competence and Performance in the Explanation of Language Universals. In Essays on Grammatical Theory and Universal Grammar, eds. D. Arnold, M. Atkinson, J. Durand, C. Grover, and L. Sadler. Oxford University Press. Hawkins, J. A. (1994). A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jesperson, O. (1993). Progress in Language with Special Reference to English. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Kaiser, L. (1998). Representing the Structure-Discourse Iconicity of the Japanese Post-Verbal Construction. In Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, eds. M. Darnell, E. Moravcsik, F. Newmeyer, M. Noonan, and K. Wheatley. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Karimi, S. (1989). Aspects of Persian Syntax, Specificity, and the Theory of Grammar. Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington. Karimi, S. (1990). Obliqueness, Specificity, and Discourse Functions: Ra in Persian. Linguistic Analysis 20:139-191. Kendon, A. (1972). Some Relationships between Body Motion and Speech: An Analysis of one example. In Siegman, Aron Wolfe and Benjamin Pope eds. Studies in Dyadic Communication. New York: Pergamon. Kendon, A. (1991). Revisiting the Gesture Theory of Language Origins. Paper for LOS Meeting, De Kalb, Illinois. Komatsu, L. K. (1994). Experimenting with the Mind: Readings in Cognitive Psychology. California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. Kruschke, J. K. (1992). ALCOVE: An Exemplar-Based Connectionist Model of Category Learning. Psychological Review 99. 22-44. Kuno, S. (1973). The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kuno, S. (1978). Japanese: A Characteristic OV Language. In Syntactic Typology, ed. W. Lehmann. Austin: University of Texas Press. Liberman, A. M. (1993). Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research 113:1-32. Lindblom, B., S. Guion, S. Hura, S. Moon, and R. Willerman. (1995). Is Sound Change Adaptive? Revista di Linguistica 7:5-37. Lotfi, A. R. (to appear). Minimalist Program Revisited: Chomsky's Strength to Trigger Movement. Proceedings of the 34th Col- loquium of Linguistics. May, R. (1985). Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. May, R. (1991). Syntax, Semantics, and Logical Form. In The Chomskyan Turn, ed. A. Kasher. Oxford: Blackwell. McClelland, J. L. & D. E. Rumelhart (1985). Distributed Memory and the Representation of General and Specific Information. Journal of Experimental Psychology 114. 159-188. McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Meinunger, A. (1998). Topicality and Agreement. In Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, eds. M. Darnell, E. Moravcsik, F. Newmeyer, M. Noonan, and K. Wheatley. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Nettle, D. (1998). Functionalism and Its Difficulties in Biology and Linguistics. In Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, eds. M. Darnell, E. Moravcsik, F. Newmeyer, M. Noonan, and K. Wheatley. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Newmeyer, F. (1998a). Language Form and Language Function. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Newmeyer, F. (1998b). Some Remarks on the Functionalist-Formalist Controversy in Linguistics. In Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, eds. M. Darnell, E. Moravcsik, F. Newmeyer, M. Noonan, and K. Wheatley. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Pesetsky, D. (1989). Language-Particular Processes and the Earliness Principle. Ms. MIT. Place, U. T. (2000). The role of the hand in the evolution of language. Psycoloquy 11(007), [http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/n\ ewpsy?11.007]. Rips, L. J., E. J. Shoben, & E. E. Smith (1973). Semantic Distance and the Verification of Semantic Relations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12. 1-20. Roberts, I. and A. Roussou. ms. Interface Interpretation. University of Stuttgart. Schyns, P. G. (1991). A Modular Neural Network Model of Concept Acquisition. Cognitive Science 15 . 461-508. Shanks, D. R. (1991). Categorization by a Connectionist Network. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 17. 433-443. Uriagereka, J. (1998). Rhyme and Reason: An Introduction to Minimalist Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Vallduvi, E. (1992). The Informational Component. New York: Garland. Wilbur, R. (1998). A Functional Journey with a Formal Ending: What do Brow Raises Do in American Sign Language? In Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, eds. M. Darnell, E. Moravcsik, F. Newmeyer, M. Noonan, and K. Wheatley. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Zubizarreta, M.L. (1998). Prosody, Focus, and Word Order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. citation: Lotfi, Ahmad Reza (2000) Semantico-Phonetic Form: A Unitarianist Grammar. [Preprint] document_url: http://cogprints.org/1669/1/spf.txt document_url: http://cogprints.org/1669/2/Semant.DOC