A shrug is not a sentence
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):215-215 (2003)
| Abstract | Corballis's claim that the origin of syntax lies in solely gesture is contested. His scenario does not explain why constraints on syntactic “movement” are apparently part of the human biological endowment for language. It also does not pay enough attention to the internal structure of sentences, and how they contrast with other linguistic units such as noun phrases. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesKnud Lambrecht (1994). Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge University Press.
Gregor Damschen (2008). This is Nonsense. The Reasoner 2 (10):6-8.
George C. Nelson (1998). Preservation Theorems Without Continuum Hypothesis. Studia Logica 60 (3):343-355.
Ernesto Napoli (2006). Negation. Grazer Philosophische Studien 72 (1):233-252.
Paul Pietrowski (2002). Function and Concatenation. In Georg Peter & Gerhard Preyer (eds.), Logical Form and Language. Oxford University Press.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads4 ( #180,507 of 556,840 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,931 of 556,840 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
