Generativismo y minimimalismo: ¿cuál es la teoría y cuál el programa?

• Guillermo Lorenzo ^[1]
  1. [1] Universidad de Oviedo

     Universidad de Oviedo

     Oviedo, España

     
• Localización: Revista Española de Lingüística, ISSN-e 2254-8769, ISSN 0210-1874, Vol. 52, N. 2, 2022, págs. 7-26
• Idioma: español
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Generativism and minimimalism
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen
  • español

    Chomsky y sus seguidores suelen presentar el minimalismo lingüístico como un «programa», en el sentido de que se limita a introducir unas líneas maestras para la elaboración de teorías gramaticales propiamente dichas. De acuerdo con esta interpretación ortodoxa, a estas teorías cabe atribuirles un contenido fáctico, es decir, expuesto a falsación empírica, pero el programa como tal es inmune a este tipo de refutación. Este artículo rebate esta visión del «programa» minimalista y plantea una reconceptualización tanto del minimalismo como del generativismo en sus diferentes fases de desarrollo. Según esta propuesta, la tesis minimalista tiene un contenido fáctico y el minimalismo, aunque puede calificársele trivialmente como programático, un carácter ineludiblemente teórico.

  • English

    Chomsky and his followers routinely introduce linguistic minimalism as a «program», in the sense that it merely provides some guidelines for the elaboration of grammatical theories proper. According to this orthodox interpretation, these theories can be attributed factual content, that is, content open to empirical refutation, but the program as such is immune to this type of rebuttal. This article discusses this vision of the minimalist «program» and proposes a reconceptualization of both minimalism and generativism in its different phases of development. According to this proposal, the minimalist thesis has factual content and minimalism, although it can be trivially described as programmatic, has an inescapably theoretical character.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Balari, S., Lorenzo, G. y Sultan, S. (2020). Language acquisition and eco-devo processes: The case of the lexicon-syntax interface. Biological...
  • Behme, C. (2015). Is the ontology of biolinguistics coherent? Language Sciences 47, 32-42. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.07.012
  • Berwick, R. C., y Chomsky, N. (2011). The biolinguistics program: the current state of its development, en A.M. di Sciullo y C. Boeckx (Eds.),...
  • Berwick, R. C., y Chomsky, N. (2016). Why only us. Language and evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Berwick, R. C., Friederici, A. D., Chomsky, N. y Bolhuis, J. J. (2013). Evolution, brain, and the nature of language. Trends in Cognitive...
  • Berwick, R. C., Pietroski, P., Yankama, B. y Chomsky, N. (2011). Poverty of stimulus revisited. Cognitive Science. A Multidisciplinary Journal...
  • Boeckx, C. (2015). Un-Cartesian (bio-)linguistics. Teorema 34(1), 161-186. https://www.jstor.org/stable/i40148914
  • Boeckx, C. y Uriagereka, J. (2007). Minimalism, en G. Ramchand y Ch. Reiss (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces (pp. 541-573),...
  • Chomsky, N. (1955/75). The logical structure of linguistic theory. Nueva York: Plenum.
  • Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (citado por la traducción de Carlos-Peregrín Otero. 1999. Aspectos...
  • Chomsky, N. (1966). Cartesian linguistics. A chapter in the history of rationalist thought. Nueva York: Harper & Row (citado por la traducción...
  • Chomsky, N. (1968). Quine’s empirical assumptions. Synthese 19(1/2), 53-68. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20114630
  • Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization, en R. Jabobs y P. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp.184-221),...
  • Chomsky, N. (1972). Some empirical issues in the theory of transformational grammar, en Studies on semantics in generative grammar (pp. 120-202),...
  • Chomsky, N. (1973). Conditions on transformations, en S.R. Anderson y P. Kiparsky (Eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle (pp. 232-286), Nueva...
  • Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. Nueva York: Pantheon (citado por la traducción de Joan A. Argente y Josep M. Nadal. 1979. Reflexiones...
  • Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. Nueva York: Columbia University Press.
  • Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
  • Chomsky, N. (1991). Some notes on economy of derivation and representation, en R. Freidin (Ed.), Principles and parameters in comparative...
  • Chomsky, N. (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory, en K. Hale y S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from Building 20. Essays in linguistics...
  • Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: the framework, en R. Martin, D. Michaels y J. Uriagereka (Eds.), Step by step. Papers in minimalist...
  • Chomsky, N. (2004). Beyond explanatory adequacy, en A. Belletti (Ed.), Structures and beyond. Volume 3: The cartography of syntactic structures...
  • Chomsky, N. (2005). Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36(1), 1-22. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389052993655
  • Chomsky, N. (2007). Approaching UG from below, en U. Sauerland y H.-M. Gärtner, (Eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky’s...
  • Chomsky, N. (2013). Problems of projection. Lingua 130, 33-49. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.003
  • Chomsky, N. (2016). What kind of creatures are we? Nueva York: Columbia University Press.
  • Chomsky, N. (2019). Some puzzling foundational issues: The Reading program. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, Special Issue, 263-285. doi: http://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.287
  • Christiansen, M. y Chater, N. (2016). Creating language. Integrating development, acquisition, and processing. Cambridge; MA: MIT Press.
  • Deacon, T. W. (1997). The symbolic species. The co-evolution of language and the brain. Nueva York: W.W. Norton.
  • Eguren, L. y Fernández Soriano, O. (2004). Introducción a una sintaxis minimista. Madrid: Gredos.
  • Fodor, J. A. (1975). The language of thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Fodor, J. A. (1980). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Fodor, J. A. (2000). The mind doesn’t work that way. The scope and limits of computational psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Gallego, Á. J. (2022). Manual de sintaxis minimista. Madrid: Akal.
  • Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Hale, K. y Keyser, S. J. (2002). Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Hinzen, W. (2014). What is un-Cartesian linguistics? Biolinguistics 8, 226-257. https://www.biolinguistics.eu/index.php/biolinguistics/article/view/323
  • Hornstein, N., Nunes, J. y Grohmann, K. K. (2005). Understanding minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Huang, Ch.-T. J. (1982). Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Tesis Doctoral, MIT.
  • Jackendoff, R. (1977). X’ syntax. A study of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakatos, I. (1978). The methodology of scientific research programs. Philosophical papers. Volume I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press...
  • Lappin, S., Levine D. y Johnson, D.E. (2000). The structure of unscientific revolutions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 18(3), 665-671....
  • Lohndal, T. y Uriagereka, J. (2017). Third factor explanations and Universal Grammar, en I. Roberts (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of Universal...
  • Longa, V. M. y Lorenzo, G. (2008). What about a (really) minimalist theory of language acquisition? Linguistics 46(3), 541-570. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2008.018
  • Longa, V. M. y Lorenzo, G. (2012). ¿Reduce, complete o elimina? Sobre el estatus del Programa Minimalista en la gramática generativa. Revista...
  • Lorenzo, G. (2016). What is it like to be a human being? Language design and its implications for the «human nature» debate. Teorema 35(3),...
  • Martin, R. y Uriagereka, J. (2000). Some possible foundations of the Minimalist Program, en R. Martin, D. Michaels y J. Urigereka (Eds.),...
  • O’Grady, W. (2012). Three factors in the design and acquisition of language. WIREs Cognitive Science 3(5), 494-499. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1188
  • Postal, P. M. (2004). Skeptical linguistic essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Quine, W. V. O. (1953). From a logical point of view. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (citado por la traducción de Manuel Sacristán....
  • Quine, W. V. O. (1975). Mind and verbal dispositions, en S. Guttenplan (Ed.), Mind and language (pp. 83-95). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Reboul, A. (2017). Hinzen’s un-Cartesian linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics 43(3-4), 261-270. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2017-0017
  • Rizzi, L. (2016). The concept of explanatory adequacy, en I. Roberts (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Universal Grammar (pp. 97-113), Oxford:...
  • Ross, J. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Tesis Doctoral, MIT.
  • Thomas, M. (2020). On the reception and revivification of Cartesian linguistics, en É. Aussant y J.-M. Fortis (Eds.), History of linguistics...
  • Uriagereka, J. (1996). Formal and substantive elegance in the minimalist program, en Ch. Wilder, H.-M. Gärtner y M. Bierwisch (Eds.), The...
  • Williams, E. (1994). Thematic structure in syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.