Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] knowledge of language versus language use (was Pronoun )nky in Judg 6:8)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] knowledge of language versus language use (was Pronoun )nky in Judg 6:8)
  • Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:37:06 -0600

On Friday 08 October 2004 22:27, Robert Holmstedt wrote:
> Harold,
>
> I agree with you that there is often a difference (register, perhaps?)
> between written and spoken language. And certainly forming sentences is
> not an "unconscious" process (or I couldn't even be typing at this very
> moment). And I try (but don't always succeed) in choosing my words
> carefully, when writing or speaking. ;-)
>
> However, since there is very little that is intuitive about putting a verb
> before a subject, or vice versa, or even being able to carry information
> over from one statement to the next (e.g. gapping), how in the world are
> we to call this fully conscious activity? Rather, when we speak, write,
> or communicate in any way with our language, it is a subconscious activity
> that springs from the "language faculty". We are able to manipulate it
> and use it, but not access it. For instance, can you tell me exactly how
> your mind puts together a sentence, processes an implicature, or anything
> else?
>
> All of these issues are why Chomsky maintains a hard distinction between
> knowledge of language and language use (or what is more often called
> "competence" versus "perfomance").

I thought about responding to Harold's post, but figured you could do a
better
job :-) I think the reason he doesn't understand the subconscious part is
because you and he are talking about two very different levels of language
usage, i.e. you are talking about the very deep, fundamental level that says
"I form a question by reversing the subject and verb, except when X, Y or Z
is needed" and that sort of thing, whereas he's talking about a very high
level of word choice, connotation, emphasis, and other matters of a more
pragmatic nature. It's always difficult to have a discussion when we're
talking right past each other...

> Even for those of you who are die-hard anti-Chomskyans, I think you'd find
> the somewhat dated (but still valuable) book "Challenging Chomsky: The
> Generative Garden Game" by Rudolf Botha (Blackwell, 1990 -- out of print,
> though) very amusing and more than a little informative.

Sounds like an interesting book. I have Radford's earlier book about
transformational grammar and wasn't crazy about it. Now I notice from your
earlier post that he's following Chomsky into minimalism. I confess I have
always had difficulty understanding those who just follow him wherever he
goes...I once had a snail-mail conversation with Ray Jackendoff, one of
Chomsky's earlier students, and he told me in so many words that he finds
Chomsky, from about 1991-2 onwards, incomprehensible. I figured if HE
couldn't understand Chomsky, I didn't have a prayer ;-) For my own approach,
see my post in response to Clay.

--
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"No good. Hit on head." -Gronk




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page