Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Syntactic Structures and Recursive Devices: A Legacy of Imprecision

  • Published:
Journal of Logic, Language and Information Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Taking Chomsky’s Syntactic Structures as a starting point, this paper explores the use of recursive techniques in contemporary linguistic theory. Specifically, it is shown that there were profound ambiguities surrounding the notion of recursion in the 1950s, and that this was partly due to the fact that influential texts such as Syntactic Structures neglected to define what exactly constituted a recursive device. As a result, uncertainties concerning the role of recursion in linguistic theory have prevailed until the present day, and some of the most common misunderstandings that have appeared in recent discussions are examined at some length. This article shows that debates about such topics are frequently undermined by fundamental misunderstandings concerning core terminology, and the full extent of the prevailing haziness is revealed. An attempt is made, for instance, to distinguish between such things as iterative constructional devices and self-similar syntactic embedding, despite the fact that these are usually both unhelpfully classified as examples of recursion. Consequently, this article effectively constitutes a plea for much greater accuracy and clarity when such important issues are addressed from a linguistic perspective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arden B. (1963) An introduction to digital computing. Addison-Wesley, Massachusetts, Paolo Alto, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Hillel Y. (1953) On recursive definitions in empirical science. 11th International Congress of Philosophy 5: 160–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Hillel Y. (1954) Logical syntax and semantics. Language 30: 230–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, S. (2007). The grammar of focus interpretation. In Sauerland & Gätner (Eds.), (pp. 255–280). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Bickerton D. (2009) Recursion: Core of complexity or artifact of analysis?. In: Givón T., Shibatani M. (eds) Syntactic complexity: Diachrony, acquisition, neuro-cognition, evolution. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 531–544

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky N. (1956) Three models for the description of language. IRE Transactions of Information Theory IT-2: 113–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky N. (1957) Syntactic structures. Mouton, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1975[1955]). The logical structure of linguistic theory. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

  • Chomsky N. (1995) The minimalist program. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Church A. (1936) An unsolvable problem of elementary number theory. American Journal of Mathematics 58: 345–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corballis M. (2007) The uniqueness of human recursive thinking. American Scientist 95(3): 240–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Dedekind R. (1888) Was sind und was sollen die Zahlen?. F. Vieweg, Braunschweig

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillinger M., Palácio A. (1997) Generative linguistics: development and perspectives: An interview with Noam Chomsky. Revista DELTA 13: 159–194 (Especial: Chomsky in Brasil)

    Google Scholar 

  • Everett D. (2005) Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã: Another look at the design features of human language. Current Anthropology 46(4): 621–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Everett D. (2009) ‘Pirahã culture and grammar: A response to some criticisms. Language 85(2): 405–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gödel, K. (1986[1931]). Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme (Vol. I, pp. 144–194), (Reprinted in Gödel 1986).

  • Gödel, K. (1986[1934]). On undecidable propositions of formal mathematical systems (Vol. I, pp. 346–371), (Reprinted in Gödel 1986).

  • Gödel, K. (1986). Kurt Gödel: Collected works (Vol. 1). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Haas W. (1958) Review of Syntactic Structures. Archivum Linguisticum 10: 50–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser M., Chomsky N., Fitch T. (2002) The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve. Science 298: 1569–1579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser M. (2009) The possibility of impossible culture. Nature 460: 190–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby S. (2002) Learning, bottlenecks, and the evolution of recursive syntax. In: Ted B. (ed.) Linguistic evolution through language acquisition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 173–204

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Koerner E. F. K. (2002) Toward a history of american linguistics. Routledge, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lees R. (1957) Review of Syntactic Structures. Language 33: 375–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberman, M. (2006). ‘Parataxis in Pirahã’, posted on May 19 2006, http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003162.html

  • Lobina, D. & García-Albea, J. E. (2009). Recursion and Cognitive Science to appear in CogSci09.

  • Matthews P. (1993) Grammatical theory in the United States from Bloomfield to Chomsky. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McCracken D. (1957) Digital computer programming. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevins A., Pesetsky D., Rodrigues C. (2009) Pirahã exceptionality: A reassessment. Language 85(2): 355–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nevins A., Pesetsky D., Rodrigues C. (2009) Evidence and argumentation: A reply to Everett (2009). Language 85(3): 671–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newmeyer, F. J. (1980). Linguistic theory in America: the first quarter-century of transformational grammar. New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, and San Fransisco: Academic Press.

  • Noordegraaf J. (2001) On the publication date of syntactic structures: A footnote to Murray (1999). Historiographia Linguistica 28: 225–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peano, G. (1889). Arithmetices principia, nuovo methodo exposita. Opere scelte (Vol. 2, pp. 20–55). Unione Matematica Italiana: Rome. (Reprinted in U. Cassina (Ed.) 1957–1959).

  • Pike K. L. (1952) More on grammatical prerequisites. Word 8: 106–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker S., Jackendoff R. (2005) The faculty of language: What’s special about it?. Cognition 95: 201–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post E. (1944) Recursively enumerable sets of positive integers and their decision problems. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 50: 284–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pullum G.K. (1991) Formal linguistics meets the Boojum collected in The Great Eskimo vocabulary hoax and other irreverent essays on the study of language. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 48–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Pullum G. K. & Scholtz, B. (2010). Recursion and the Infinitude Claim, to appear in van der Hulst, (pp. 1–9).

  • Soare R. I. (1996) Computability and recursion. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 2: 284–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soare R. I. (1999) The history and concept of computability. In: Grior E. (ed.) Handbook of computability theory. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 3–26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sauerland, U., Gätner, H-M. (eds) (2007) Interfaces + recursion = language?: Chomsky’s minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics. Mouton de Gruyter, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon C., Weaver W. (1949) The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomalin M. (2006) Linguistics and the formal sciences: The origins of generative grammar. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tomalin M. (2007) Reconsidering recursion in syntactic theory. Lingua 117(10): 1784–1800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turing, A. (1936). On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem. In Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society (Vol. 42, pp. 230–265).

  • van der Hulst, H. (ed.) (2010) Recursion in human languages. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Voegelin C. F. (1958) Review of syntactic structures. International Journal of American Linguistics 24: 229

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Downing College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1DQ, UK

    Marcus Tomalin

Authors
  1. Marcus Tomalin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcus Tomalin.

Additional information

This article is an extensively revised version of a paper that was delivered at MoL10 in 2007. The original paper was delivered as a ‘key-note’ address which celebrated the 50th anniversary of the publication of Syntactic Structures (1957).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tomalin, M. Syntactic Structures and Recursive Devices: A Legacy of Imprecision. J of Log Lang and Inf 20, 297–315 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-011-9141-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-011-9141-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation