Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Categorial Grammar: Categorial Grammar is a linguistic theory that analyzes sentence structure based on the syntactic categories of words and how they combine. It emphasizes the relationships between words rather than transformations or underlying structures._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
John Lyons on Categorial Grammar - Dictionary of Arguments
I 230 Categorical Grammar/Lyons: Categorical grammars go back to Adjukiewicz. Have been further developed by Bar-Hillel, Lambek and other logicians. >J. Bar-Hillel, >Grammar, >Universal grammar, >Generative grammar, >Transformational grammar. Fundamental categories/Grammar: Sentence and nouns. Derived categories: are all lexical units that are not nouns. They are complex in that they simultaneously specify 1. with which other category the element can combine to form a sentence constituent, and 2. how the constituent can be categorically classified. Example: An element like run can connect to a noun to form a sentence. I 233 Categorical Grammar/constituent structure grammar/(creational grammar)/Lyons: constituent grammar: = replacement grammar the two types of grammar are more than slightly equivalent (they generate the same amount of sentences), and they break sentences like Poor John ran away into the same components. I 234 But they are not equivalent in every respect: because The system of substitution rules contains two auxiliary symbols (NP and VP) in addition to the four end symbols denoting the lexical classes (N, V intr, V tr A and Adv). Example Categorical analysis: so it specifies that poor John belongs to the same category as John and ran away to the same as ran, Replacement system: does not establish this relationship. Equivalence: but we can create equivalence between the two systems by using N for NP and V intr for VP in the replacement rules. Dependence/Grammar/Lyons: the two systems differ mainly in that the categorical grammar regards one constituent in each construction as dependent on the other. The categorical sign (see arrow above) makes clear which is the dependent constituent, namely the one with the more complex classification. Replacement rules: represent the dependency of the constituents only partially and indirectly: For example, from a rule of the form N > A + N it can be concluded that A is dependent on N. However, this is not possible in the case of example N > NP + VP. The two systems are not strongly equivalent. A system is preferable if it is more appropriate. I 238 Categorical Grammar/tradition/Lyons: here the term dependency (depndency, almost the same as subordination) is fundamental._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Ly II John Lyons Semantics Cambridge, MA 1977 Lyons I John Lyons Introduction to Theoretical Lingustics, Cambridge/MA 1968 German Edition: Einführung in die moderne Linguistik München 1995 |
||
> Counter arguments against Lyons
> Counter arguments in relation to Categorial Grammar
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-25