Re: Chomsky's notions

Ph.D. wrote:
>Before I became interested in linguistics, I was
>under the impression (based on mentions of
>Chomsky in the general press) that his ideas
>had revolutionized linguistics, and that the vast
>majority of current linguists agreed with his
>theories.
>
>But after reading some articles about linguistics
>on the web and various comments in this forum,
>I now have the impression that his ideas are very
>controversial and that many, if not most, linguists
>are rather skeptical of his ideas.
It's certainly true that he revolutionized the field; his first works (and
those of his immediate disciples) were a real blast of fresh air.  Not too
many years before he appeared on the scene, some linguists had pronounced
"It seems that most of the problems in linguistics have been solved."  Oh
yes.  Other of his followers picked up the Chomskian ball and ran in other
directions-- the Lakoffs, McCawley et al.  Sorry to say, I haven't kept up
with developments in the grammatical theory field (never my favorite
anyway), but I believe there are now many theories that probably derive
ultimately from Chomsky's work

Christophe wrote:

>I've always thought from the linguistic articles I've read (mostly by
European linguists)...

Aye, there's the rub..........

>...that Chomsky was just an American curiosity who was not really taken
seriously anywhere but in America.

Could it be....professional envy? Surely not :-)))

 For European linguists, it was a great source of debates which pointed out
to places they hadn't really taken care of, but it shouldn't be taken more
seriously than that.

Where would any science be if, from time to time, someone didn't take a good
hard look at things "they hadn't really taken care of"?  Paradigm shifts
always discomfit the Old Guard.

Reply