David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Indian Philosophy 20 (1):133-147 (1992)
In the preceding we have argued that brevity in the form of Generalizing Brevity is an important theoretical principle underlying Panini's grammar. It applies blindly at the metalevel, when the grammar is being chosen. Generalization is a concern at one remove: A device for the metalanguage is only chosen such that its use in accord with the maximum brevity leads to some generalization. Many potential brevity increasing devices are not chosen for this reason. But at the metalanguage level brevity is paramount. To prove this we have shown that Panini maximizes brevity in many cases at the cost of other possible theoretical principles. We have also shown that many features of the grammar flow from the brevity criterion. We have concluded that logical organization, generality, and other aspects of explanation largely follow from brevity and that this can be regarded as a substantial aspect of the explanatory power of the theory behind the grammar. Generalization should follow on the heels of maximum brevity. And, considering Panini's domain of data this is a perfectly reasonable expectation
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Paul Kiparsky (1968). Linguistic Universals and Linguistic Change. In Emmon Bach & R. Harms (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. 170--202.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
J. F. Staal (1965). Euclid and Pāṇini. Philosophy East and West 15 (2):99-116.
George Cardona (1970). Some Principles of Pānini's Grammargrammar. Journal of Indian Philosophy 1 (1):40-74.
Brendan S. Gillon (2007). Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī and Linguistic Theory. Journal of Indian Philosophy 35 (5-6):445-468.
Tom Rasmussen (1989). Tarquinia Maria Bonghi Jovino (ed.): Gli Etruschi di Tarquinia. Pp. 392; 373 illustrations. Modena: Edizioni Panini, 1986. Paper, L. 40,000. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 39 (01):117-119.
Malcolm A. R. Colledge (1985). Salvatore Settis (Ed.): Camposanto Monumentale di Pisa. Le Antichità, II. Pp. 327; Numerous Text Figures and Black and White Plates, 7 Colour Plates, 2 Tables, 3 Plans. Modena: Edizioni Panini, 1984. L. 50,000. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 35 (01):220-.
W. V. Quine (1980/2001). Elementary Logic. Harvard University Press.
Peter M. Scharf (1996). The Denotation of Generic Terms in Ancient Indian Philosophy: Grammar, Nyāya and Mīmāṃsā. American Philosophical Society.
John Kadvany (2007). Positional Value and Linguistic Recursion. Journal of Indian Philosophy 35 (5-6):487-520.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #254,577 of 1,101,091 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #290,337 of 1,101,091 )
How can I increase my downloads?