Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T08:22:51.482Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tracking the origins of transformational generative grammar1

Review products

TomalinMarcus, Linguistics and the formal sciences: The origins of generative grammar (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Pp. xiv+233.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 October 2007

BARBARA C. SCHOLZ  and
GEOFFREY K. PULLUM
BARBARA C. SCHOLZ*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
GEOFFREY K. PULLUM*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
*
Authors' address: School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9LL, Scotland, U.K. E-mail: [email protected][email protected]
Authors' address: School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9LL, Scotland, U.K. E-mail: [email protected][email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , November 2007 , pp. 701 - 723
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1926. A set of postulates for the science of language. Language 2, 153–164. [Reprinted in Joos (1966), 26–31.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Brainerd, Walter S. & Lawrence, H. Landweber. 1974. Theory of computation. New York: Wiley Interscience.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. 1928. Der logische Aufbau der Welt: Versuch einer Konstitutionstheorie der Begriffe. Berlin: Welt-Kreis.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. 1934 [1937]. The logical structure of language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. 1967. The logical structure of the world: Pseudoproblems in philosophy, translation by Rolf A. George of Carnap (1928). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1951. Morphophonemics of modern Hebrew. MA thesis, University of Pennsylvania. [Published by Garland, New York, 1979.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1953. Systems of syntactic analysis. Journal of Symbolic Logic 18, 242–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1955 [1975]. The logical structure of linguistic theory. New York: Plenum. [Published edition of an unpublished typescript dating partly from 1955 and partly from 1956, published in 1975.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1959. On certain formal properties of grammars. Information and Control 2, 137–167. [Reprinted in R. Duncan Luce, Robert R. Bush & Eugene Galanter (eds.), Readings in mathematical psychology, vol. II, 125–155. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1962. Explanatory models in linguistics. In Ernest Nagel, Suppes & Alfred, Tarski (eds.) Logic, methodology and philosophy of science: Proceedings of the 1960 International Congress, 528–550. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Corry, Leo. 2004. David Hilbert and the axiomatization of physics (1898–1918): From Grundlagen der Geometrie to Grundlagen der Physik. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Martin (ed.). 2004. The undecidable: Basic papers on undecidable propositions, unsolvable problems and computable functions. Mineola, NY: Dover.Google Scholar
Dresner, Eli. 1999. Quine's philosophy of language and Polish Logic. History and Philosophy of Logic 20, 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frege, Gottlob. 1879. Begriffschrift, eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formalsprache des reinen Denkens. Breslau: Köbner. [Reprinted in van Heijenoort (1967), 1–82.]Google Scholar
Goodman, Nelson. 1943. On the simplicity of ideas. Journal of Symbolic Logic 8, 107–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, Nelson. 1951. The structure of appearance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Page references to 3rd edn. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1977.]Google Scholar
Goodman, Nelson. 1954. Fact, fiction and forecast. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Grabiner, Judith V. 1981. The origins of Cauchy's rigorous calculus. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harris, Zellig S. 1951. Methods in structural linguistics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Harwood, F. W. 1955. Axiomatic syntax: The construction and evaluation of a syntactic calculus. Language 31, 409–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heijenoort, Jean van (ed.). 1967. From Frege to Gödel: A source book in mathematical logic, 1879–1931. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hellman, Geoffrey. 1977. Introduction to The structure of appearance by Nelson Goodman, 3rd edn., xviv–xlvii. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Hilbert, David. 1927. The foundations of mathematics. Text of an address to the Hamburg Mathematical Seminar, translated by Stefan Bauer-Mengelberg and Dagfinn Føllesdal. In van Heijenoort, (1967), 464–479.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1948. A note on structure. International Journal of American Linguistics 14, 269–271. [Reprinted in Joos (1966), 279–280.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1955. A manual of phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics 21(4), part 1, memoir 11. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Huck, Geoffrey J. & John, A. Goldsmith. 1995. Ideology and linguistic theory: Noam Chomsky and the deep structure debates. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Joos, Martin (ed.). 1966. Readings in linguistics I: The development of descriptive linguistics in America 1925–56. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward & Edward, Stabler. 2003. Bare grammar: A study of language invariants. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Kozen, Dexter C. 1997. Automata and computability. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, Fernando. 2000. Formal grammar and information theory: Together again? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 358, 1239–1253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Paul S. 1981. Language acquisition and universal grammar. In Baker, C. L. & McCarthy, John (eds.), The logical problem of language acquisition, 22–29. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Post, Emil L. 1921. Introduction to a general theory of elementary propositions. American Journal of Mathematics 43, 163–185. [Page references to reprinting in van Heijenoort (1967), 264–283.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Post, Emil L. 1943. Formal reductions of the general combinatorial decision problem. American Journal of Mathematics 65, 197–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Post, Emil L. 1944. Recursively enumerable sets of positive integers and their decision problems. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 50, 284–316. [Reprinted in Davis (2004), 304–337.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Post, Emil L. 1947. Recursive unsolvability of a problem of Thue. Journal of Symbolic Logic 12, 1–11. [Reprinted in Davis (2004), 292–303.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1940. Mathematical logic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1953. From a logical point of view: Logico-philosophical essays. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Page references to 2nd edn. New York: Harper & Row, 1961.]Google Scholar
Rayo, Augustín. 2005. Logicism reconsidered. In Stewart, Shapiro (ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of mathematics and logic, 203–235. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbloom, Paul C. 1950. The elements of mathematical logic. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey. 1979. What was transformational grammar? Lingua 48, 355–378. [Reprinted in Sampson (2001), 141–164.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey. 2001. Empirical linguistics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Stewart. 1991. Foundations without foundationalism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Suppes, Patrick. 1956. Nelson Goodman on the concept of logical simplicity. Philosophy of Science 23, 153–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thue, Axel. 1914. Probleme über Veränderungen von Zeichenreihen nach gegebenen Regeln. Skrifter utgit av Videnskapsselskapet i Kristiana I (Matematisk-naturvidenskabelig klasse 1914. no. 10). Oslo: Norske Videnskaps-Akademi.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan. 1998. Rhyme and Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weiss, Albert P. 1925. One set of postulates for a behaviourist psychology. Psychology Review 32, 83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, Alfred N. & Bertrand, Russell. 1910–1913. Principia mathematica, 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar