Biblical Hebrew Forum

[dwashbur AT nyx.net]

Agreed.  In this vein I should also mention that I maintain a strict 
separation between syntax 
and semantics/pragmatics/discourse/etc.  With the earlier Chomsky, I see 
syntax as a 
distinct component of the internal grammar, and approach it as such.

On 18 Jun 2010 at 14:46, James Christian wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> word order isn't a problem. If you have multiple word orders you can
> define
> multiple rules. You just define whatever rules the data supports
> whatever
> the language. However, at a higher level of grammar, the discourse
> level,
> word orders are not as arbitrary as they may seem. Word order, in
> many
> languages, expresses what in English is expressed by accenting an
> emphasised
> word or phrase. There may be contextual reasons for producing this
> kind of
> emphasis. Defining a contextual rule set that captures these nuances
> of a
> language would be challenging. You raise a good point. However, this
> is all
> a little too premature. If we've already got to the point where we
> are
> worrying about rules at this level then you already have a pretty
> darn good
> grammar. I foresee many lower level problems is properly defining
> rules for
> smaller chunks of language before we could even dream of being able
> to boast
> we are only left with these high level problems.
> 
> James Christian
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> 


Dave Washburn

http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur