831412
doi
10.1075/sl.28.3.06has
oai:zenodo.org:831412
Does linguistic explanation presuppose linguistic description?
Haspelmath, Martin
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
language universals, linguistic typology, Universal Grammar, functional explanation
<p>I argue that the following two assumptions are incorrect: (i) The properties of the innate Universal Grammar can be discovered by comparing language systems, and (ii) functional explanation of language structure presupposes a “correct”, i.e. cognitively realistic, description. Thus, there are two ways in which linguistic explanation does not presuppose linguistic description.</p>
<p>The generative program of building cross-linguistic generalizations into the hypothesized Universal Grammar cannot succeed because the actually observed generalizations are typically one-way implications or implicational scales, and because they typically have exceptions. The cross-linguistic generalizations are much more plausibly due to functional factors.</p>
<p>I distinguish sharply between “phenomenological description” (which makes no claims about mental reality) and “cognitively realistic descrip- tion”, and I show that for functional explanation, phenomenological description is sufficient.</p>
Zenodo
2004-07-18
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
831411
1579537503.455431
248437
md5:74ea692c15b628dae921218781154196
https://zenodo.org/records/831412/files/Haspelmath2004.pdf
public
Studies in Language
28
3
554-579
2004-07-18