Book section Open Access

Framework-free grammatical theory

Haspelmath, Martin


DataCite XML Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<resource xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://datacite.org/schema/kernel-3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://datacite.org/schema/kernel-3 http://schema.datacite.org/meta/kernel-3/metadata.xsd">
  <identifier identifierType="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.814947</identifier>
  <creators>
    <creator>
      <creatorName>Haspelmath, Martin</creatorName>
      <affiliation>Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology</affiliation>
    </creator>
  </creators>
  <titles>
    <title>Framework-Free Grammatical Theory</title>
  </titles>
  <publisher>Zenodo</publisher>
  <publicationYear>2010</publicationYear>
  <subjects>
    <subject>grammar, theoretical linguistics, linguistic framework, generative grammar</subject>
  </subjects>
  <dates>
    <date dateType="Issued">2010-01-01</date>
  </dates>
  <resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Text">Book section</resourceType>
  <alternateIdentifiers>
    <alternateIdentifier alternateIdentifierType="url">https://zenodo.org/record/814947</alternateIdentifier>
  </alternateIdentifiers>
  <relatedIdentifiers>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="DOI" relationType="IsPartOf">10.5281/zenodo.814946</relatedIdentifier>
  </relatedIdentifiers>
  <rightsList>
    <rights rightsURI="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0</rights>
    <rights rightsURI="info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess">Open Access</rights>
  </rightsList>
  <descriptions>
    <description descriptionType="Abstract">&lt;p&gt;Framework-free grammatical description/analysis and explanation is argued here to be superior to framework-bound analysis because all languages have different catgeories, and languages should be described in their own terms. Frameworks represent aprioristic assumptions that are likely to lead to a distorted description of a language. I argue against restrictive theoretical frameworks of the generative type, against frameworks of functional approaches such as Functional Grammar and Role and Reference Grammar, and against Basic Linguistic Theory.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
  </descriptions>
</resource>

Share

Cite as