Re: To Matt Pearson

In a message dated 10/25/01 1:02:14 PM, and_yo@HOTMAIL.COM writes:

<< If we assume that language is rule-governed (if not, then there's NO
predictable link between content and expression - an unlikely hypothesis
...), and that the human mind is capable of using language (if not, one
gotta wonder who's writing this ...), doesn't it then follow that the human
mind at some level has knowledge these rules? >>

    Is there any reason why it has to be one or the other?  Can't it be both?
 There are rules, sure, but sometimes you don't use them, as with the example
already pointed out, "Let's go, shall we?"  I think it's an easy phrase to
understand, but certainly there aren't a system of rules that explain why it
means exactly what it means.  However, there are rules that clearly map out
sentences like "I'm going to the store" and "do you want to come".  It's kind
of like assuming the simplest explanation is the true one always--it's NOT
always!  In fact, I'd say it's about 50/50, though, given all the things in th
e realm of human experience that require some sort of an explanation, I don't
think there's anyway of coming close to proving that; it's just something I
feel is right.  On topic, I'd say that there are rules, that they don't
govern ALL production and comprehension, and that they're constantly
changing.  (I should hang on to these things I'm saying and see what I think
after I've taken that course on syntax.)

-David

Reply