Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!insosf1.infonet.net!internet.spss.com!markrose
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Subject: Re: sci.lang FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)
Message-ID: <D07Apu.EAy@spss.com>
Sender: news@spss.com
Organization: SPSS Inc
References: <D01xHD.3Hr@spss.com> <jon-3011941358080001@hfmac323.uio.no> <aldersonD05vsE.J9L@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 20:39:29 GMT
Lines: 40

In article <aldersonD05vsE.J9L@netcom.com>,
Richard M. Alderson III <alderson@netcom.com> wrote:
>(Jon Hareide Aarbakke) writes:
>>I had no idea that the adherents of GB defined the domain of sci.lang.
>>Could we have a somewhat less prejudiced FAQ file, please?  Below are a
>>few quibbles.  What I don't quibble with I can largely agree with -it's
>>less controversial as well.
>
>Well, there are those of us who still think that generative semanitcs wasn't a
>bad idea.

Or "set of ideas", some of which have been snuck back into GB, and others
of which are still being developed by McCawley, Lakoff, and others.

I'm sure you noticed, Rich, that J.R. Ross has been invited to speak
at CLS next year.  Making your travel plans yet?

>>> 4. What are some good books about linguistics?
>
>>>   AN INTRODUCTION TO LANGUAGE, by Fromkin and Rodman (1974), is one of the 
>>>      best intro linguistics survey texts. (Read it!) There are many others.
>
>>It's distressingly GB and hence contains a lot of unsupportable claims
>>about the language FACULTY, as opposed to claims about language. The bit
>>about recursion is particularly sad reading for anyone with a mathematical
>>background.
>
>I see.  If it's transformational, it's GB.  Chomsky's _Lectures on Government
>and Binding_ was printed in 1980, from a series done in 1979.  Fromkin and
>Rodman were, as I recall, not in Chomsky's 1974 camp (interpretive semantics).
>
>But I agree that we need some breadth in the suggested readings--and some
>history, too.  Let's get Jespersen, Pedersen, and Sapir in there.

Sapir is already there.  I am quite willing and even eager to add more 
references to the FAQ; specific suggestions are welcome.  I hope people
will remember the general level of items in the FAQ, however, and suggest
books accessible to beginners in linguistics, most of whom need to learn
quite a bit more about Chomsky before they are in a position to appreciate
criticisms of his theories.
