With us you Score High Grades
Languages (l) are all derived from Language (L). Some think morphology can be explained through the syntax, phonology, or semantics and there should not be a separate category. Yet, some linguists believe if it is part of L then it must be present in all l.
If there really is an innate basis for Language, do you think whatever features or distinctions that are part of Language need to be present in all languages?
Chapter 1 of Syntax: A Generative Introduction distinguishes between learning and acquiring knowledge—while learning is conscious, acquisition is automatic and subconscious. (Note, however, that acquired things are not necessarily innate, they are just subconsciously obtained.)
Besides language, what other knowledge do we acquire and what knowledge do we learn? What about walking; or reading; or sexual identity? In your response, be sure to also address what kind of evidence is necessary to distinguish between learning and acquisition.
Support your claims with examples from required material(s) and/or other scholarly resources, and properly cite any references
The reading assignment for this week reviews the theory of Universal Grammar in explaining how we acquire language. Syntax: A Generative Introduction goes on to discuss the concept of the universals of language, which are properties that all languages of the world share. Imagining for a moment that you do not think the theory of Universal Grammar is plausible, what other theories or explanations could account for the existence of these universals? Explain your answer.
Support your claims with examples from required material(s) and/or other scholarly resources, and properly cite any references.
Up to this point, this class has been concerned with understanding syntax and generative grammar from a theoretical point of view. This week, however, we are looking at possible applications of these theories, and the classroom is one of them. How do you think you might be able to incorporate your knowledge of generative grammar and syntactic theory into teaching? Do you think the theory of generative grammar has a place in the classroom at all?
Chapter 3 of Syntax: A Generative Introduction talks about four tests that help us determine whether or not a group of words functions as a constituency. First, briefly describe in your own words how each of the tests works. Then, for each of the sentences below, state whether or not you believe the sequences of words in the brackets are a real constituent, and which constituency tests you might use to determine this. Be sure to provide examples which show your reasoning.
Support your claims with examples from required material(s) and/or other scholarly resources, and properly cite any references
DescriptionWeek Three – Parts Of Speech ExerciseFor each numbered word below, decide how it is functioning in the sentence by choosing its correct part of speech. Write only the abbreviation rather than the full term! Chapter Two of Syntax: A Generative Grammar discusses each of the categories and includes their abbreviations: N- NounV- VerbAdj- AdjectiveAdv- AdverbConj- ConjunctionP- PrepositionD- DeterminerC- ComplementizerT- TenseNeg- Negation The propriety of introducing the university slang will be readily admitted; it is not less curious 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 than that of the Old Bailey, and is less generally understood. When the number and accuracy of 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 our additions are compared with the price of the volume, we have no doubt that 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 its editors will meet with the encouragement that is due to learning, modesty, and virtue.31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
In Week Three, we examined how the concept of the mental lexicon is studied in the field of psycholinguistics. In fact, the theories of syntax and generative grammar have also been applied to other fields of study as well, organization and management being one of them. Read “Allocation of Rights and the Organization of Transactions: Elements of a Generative Approach to Organizing.” According to Leblebici, how can the theory of generative grammar that we have been studying help to understand the organization of economic systems and the relationship between owners and managers? What assumptions or biases does the author have in his argument? Do you agree with the Leblebici’s ideas? Why or why not? How can this argument be applied in the real world?
Up to this point, this class has been concerned with understanding syntax and generative grammar from a theoretical point of view. This week, however, we are looking at possible applications of these theories, and the classroom is one of them. How do you think you might be able to incorporate your knowledge of generative grammar and syntactic theory into teaching? Do you think the theory of generative grammar has a place in the classroom at all?
August 28th, 2017 
