Linguistics 539
Japanese/Korean Syntax and Theoretical Implications:
Fall 2008, Time: W 2:00-4:30, Room: GFS 210
Hajime Hoji (), Office: GFS 301T, Phone: 0-3882
Office Hours: M 2:00-5:00[1]
[You need a password to have access to the web site for this course. As in my other graduate courses, the handouts, discussion, papers, assignments, and various other materials will be placed there. You should check the site and post your questions/comments regularly at the web site.]
1.A Foundation of Generative Grammar as an Empirical Science
The primary goal of generative grammar is as stated in (1).
(1)The primary goal of generative grammar:
To discover the properties of the Computational System (CS) that is hypothesized to be at the center of the language faculty.
The concern with (2) leads us to consider a fundamental question in (3).
(2)A fundamental concern:
How could we proceed to make progress toward achieving the goal in (1)?
(3)A fundamental empirical question:
What should count as data for a theory of the CS to explain and could serve as evidence for or against a hypothesis about the CS?
We adopt the model of judgment making by the informant as in (4) and address (2) and (3) in relation to empirical paradigms in Japanese and Korean, on the basis of this model.
(4)The Model of Judgment Making by the Informant on theacceptability of sentence with interpretation (a, b):
Lexicon / a, b) /
/ => / Parser / ≈≈> / / => / CS / => / LF() / => / SR() / ≈≈> /
/
/ PF()
/
/ / / / / pf()
(5)a.: presented sentence
b.: numeration
c.(a, b): the interpretation intended to be included in the 'meaning' of involving expressions a and b
d.LF(): the LF representation that obtains on the basis of
e.SR(): the information that obtains in part on the basis of LF()
f.PF(): the PF representation that obtains on the basis of
g.pf(): the surface phonetic string that obtains on the basis of PF()
h.the informant judgment on the acceptability of under (a, b)
2.Empirical discussion
2.1.Japanese paradigms
Some Japanese paradigms will be discussed as an illustration of the methodological points in Part 1, including those pertaining to so-called Binding Principle A effects in Japanese, such as 'zibunzisin-binding', 'otagai-binding'[2] the structural and lexical conditions for bound variable construal of an NP/DP, and so-called Binding Principle B effects. We will also consider the implications of the results of on-line experiments that have been conducted in relation to these issues and assess the quality of the experiments in light of the discussion in the first part of the semester.
2.2.Korean paradigms
Some Korean analogues of the Japanese paradigms will be discussed. We will try to design and run on-line experiments, following the suggestions made in the first part of the semester, evaluate their results and discuss their implications for the relevant hypotheses about the CS and about the specific lexical items in the Korean Lexicon.
3.Application
We will assess some syntax papers dealing with Japanese and Korean in light of the discussion above. The choice of the papers will be made on the basis of the suggestions from the students. The students' own papers can be a candidate. The papers will be evaluated in terms of the following among other issues.
(6)a.Whether or not they put forth a hypothesis about the CS, if yes, what it is.
b.Whether or not they put forth a hypothesis about (some items(s) of) the specific Lexicon, if yes, what it is.
c.How the hypotheses can be tested and what additional assumption(s) and stipulation(s) would be needed in order to make them testable.
d.The results of single-informant research (and those of multiple-informant research) in regard to the experiments addressing the hypotheses in question.
4.Implications
We will address implications (and related issues) of what will have been discussed in the first 3 parts of the course in regard to questions such as the following, among others.
(7)a.What is the relation between the model of judgment making and the model of comprehension in general?
b.What is the model of production?
c.Given that the goal, as stated in (1), is the discovery of the Computational System, not the discovery of the 'properties of a particular language', would it not be more profitable to discuss empirical issue of various other languages?
d.What would be some implications of the present proposal for research that deals with cross-linguistic generalizations, so-called comparative syntax, for example?
e.Is the research as proposed here meant to be a 'scientific research program' in the sense of Lakatos 1970/1978?
f.Could the methodological point have been made and motivated equally well by using empirical materials in English?
5.The students' responsibilities
(8)For each session, post the following in the Discuss board in 539 Lab, two days before the next session.
a.How your understanding has advanced as the result of the lecture and the discussion, as well as on the basis of your own thinking. "No advancement." is a possible answer. You may want to add remarks speculating why, but that is not necessary.
b.What need to be clarified before you can proceed to evaluate or apply what is suggested in the lecture.
(9)Make appointments with me as suggested below and go over your understanding of the lectures, discuss your own research, general concerns regarding linguistic research, etc.[3]
a.The first appointment should be made by the end of the 3rd week.
b.The second appointment should be made by the end of the 7th week.
c.The third appointment should be made by the end of the 11th week.
d.The fourth appointment should be made by the end of the 14th week and you should bring to the meeting an outline of your term paper for discussion.
(10)Grading
Your course grade will be determined how you will have fulfilled your responsibilities noted in (8) and (9) as well as the quality of your term paper.
6.Weekly Schedule (subject to revision)
(CFJ# refers to Experiment#.)
Weeks / Topics / Contents / CFJ# / Readings1 / Introduction / An overview of the course, the fundamental issues, the essentials of the proposal, the hypotheses in the hard core, some examples of auxiliary hypotheses, heuristics / Lakatos 1970 or Lakatos 1973 (audio)
2 / The model of judgment making / The model of judgment making by the informantand its 'relation' with the Computational System, The sense of acceptability judgment by the informant / Ueyama to appear
3 / Judgments on theacceptability of sentence with interpretation(a, b) / The minimal constitution of an empirical paradigm in the context of (4); one *Example and two okExamples
4 / Judgments on the acceptability of sentence / Why we work on theacceptability of sentence with interpretation(a, b) rather than just theacceptability of sentence
5 / Heuristics / Negative and positive heuristics, the heuristics for GGES, the Reinhartian heuristic
6a / A-NPs vs. so-NPs / Lexical properties and BVA / 53
6b / Zibun-zisin and otagai / Lexical properties and the locality of anaphor binding / 37, 68, 71 / Hoji 2006b
7a / BVA paradigms / the 'binder' types and the 'bindee' types / 55
(7b) / Principle B and BVA / The major subject, the SO and the OS constructions / 92
(7c) / Principle B for coreference / Coreference based on FD / 108
8 / The Korean version of A-NPs vs. so-NPs
9 / The Korean version of Zibun-zisin
10 / The Korean version of the BVA paradigms
11 / TBA / Discussion of the papers selected by the students
12 / TBA / Discussion of the papers selected by the students
13 / TBA / Discussion of the papers selected by the students
14 / Implications
15 / Review
7.References
Boeckx, Cedric.(2006) Linguistic Minimalism: Origins, Concepts, Methods, and Aims, Oxford University Press.
Feyerabend, Paul. (1975) Against Method, New Left Books. (The third edition published by Verso 1993.)
Hoji, Hajime (2006a) "Assessing Competing Analyses: Two Hypotheses about 'Scrambling' in Japanese," in Ayumi Ueyama, ed., Theoretical and Empirical Studies of Reference and Anaphora—Toward the establishment of generative grammar as an empirical science, a report of the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B), Project No. 15320052, Supported by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Kyushu University, pp. 139-185.
Hoji, Hajime (2006b) "Otagai," in Ayumi Ueyama, ed., Theoretical and Empirical Studies of Reference and Anaphora—Toward the establishment of generative grammar as an empirical science, a report of the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B), Project No. 15320052, Supported by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Kyushu University, pp. 126-138.
Kuhn, Thomas. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The ChicagoUniversity Press.
Lakatos, Imre. (1970) "Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes," in Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, edited by Lakatos and Musgrave, 1970, Cambridge University Press. pp. 91-195.
Lakatos, Imre. (1973) "Science and Pseudocience," a radio lecture, printed in Lakatos 1978, pp. 1-7 as "Introduction: Science and Pseudoscience," available at:
Lakatos, Imre. (1978) The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes: Philosophical Papers Volume 1, edited by John Worrall and Gregory Currie, Cambridge University Press.
Schütze, Carson. (1996)The Empirical Base of Linguistics: Grammaticality Judgments and Linguistic Methodology, University of Chicago Press.
Ueyama, Ayumi (2005) "Generative Grammar as an Empirical Science---Grammaticality and Acceptability---", Kyushu University Papers in Linguistics, vol.25/26, pp.189-213.
Ueyama, Ayumi (to appear) "Model of Judgment Making and Hypotheses in Generative Grammar," in the proceedings of J/K Linguistics vol. 17, CSLI, Standard.
LING_539_Syllabus-hh
1/7
[1]On some Mondays, there will be a faculty meeting in Linguistics (9/22, 10/27, 11/24, 12/1), 2-3:30. So, on those Mondays, my office hours will be 3:30-6:00. On some other Mondays (9/15, 10/6, 11/3, and 11/17) my office hours will be 2-3 and 4:30-6.
[2]Zibunzisin and otagai in Japanese are often regarded as corresponding to the English reflexives and reciprocals, respectively.
[3]Feel free to make more appointments than suggested in (9).