Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:27:44.155Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On a class of not ungrammatical constructions1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

D. Terence Langendoen
D. Terence Langendoen
Affiliation:
Brooklyn College and CUNY Graduate Center
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Langendoen and Bever (1973) contended that both expressions in (1) are ungrammatical in English, despite the acceptability of the first to native speakers of English.

(1) (a) a not unhappy person

(b) a not sad person

We came to this conclusion because we believed, first, that all grammars of natural languages should be subject to a constraint ‘M’ that no syntactic rule is able to make use of the morphological structure of lexemes (1973:402); and, second, that we had shown that no grammar that satisfies M can distinguish the grammaticality of(1a) from that of (1b). Our exact wording of M was as follows: ‘no syntactic transformational rule is permitted to make use of the internal morphological structure of lexical items’. Since the only syntactic rules of the standard theory, within which we were operating that are not transformations are base-categorial rules, which by definition make no use of the internal morphological structure of lexical items, the word ‘transformational’ in our formulation of M is unnecessary.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , March 1982 , pp. 107 - 112
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aitchison, J. & Bailey, G. (1979). Unhappiness about not unhappy people. JL 15. 245–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bach, K. & Harnish, R. M. (1979). Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. L. (1980). A not impartial review of a not impeachable theory: some new adventures of ungrammaticality. In Shuy, R. W. & Shnukal, A. (eds.), Language use and the uses of language. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. (1978). A realistic transformational grammar. In Halle, M., Bresnan, J. & Miller, G. A. (eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press. 1–59.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In Jacobs, R. A. & Rosenbaum, P. S. (eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn-Blaisdell. 184–221.Google Scholar
Langendoen, D. T. & Bever, T. G. (1973). Can a not unhappy person be called a not sad one? In Anderson, S. & Kiparsky, P.(eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 392–409.Google Scholar