Can syntax swallow semantics? Or might it not be the other way around?
-
Patrick Duffley
Abstract
In the Generative model of human language, the semantic component has the role of interpreting the syntax. This amounts to semantics being swallowed up by syntax and explains Chomsky’s reiterated statements that at bottom natural language has only syntax and pragmatics: “natural language has no semantics … it has syntax (symbol manipulation) and pragmatics (modes of use of language)” (Chomsky, Noam. 2013. Notes on denotation and denoting. In Ivano Caponigro & Carlo Conchetto (eds.), From grammar to meaning: the spontaneous logicality of language, 38–45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). It will be argued that this conclusion is predetermined by the view of language as a computationally perfect syntactic system. Language is thereby reduced to syntactic distribution and symbol manipulation, linguistic form separated from meaning, with syntax being investigated according to the goals of coherence and consistency and subsequently reconnected extrinsically to the world by means of pragmatics. It will be shown that a basic understanding of the nature of language, which is constituted by the fundamental correlation between linguistic signs and their meanings, reveals that one cannot isolate and study separately the physically observable side of language without tearing asunder the very object of one’s investigation. The causal conditioning of syntax by both semantics and pragmatics will be demonstrated via the examples of English causative verbs and the ‘degree adverb + proper name’ construction.
-
Research ethics: N/A.
-
Informed consent: N/A.
-
Author contributions: The author has accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: No.
-
Conflict of interest: No.
-
Research funding: None.
-
Data availability: N/A.
References
Berwick, Robert C. 2011. Syntax facit saltum redux: Biolinguistics and the leap to syntax. In Anna Maria Di Sciullo & Cedric Boeckx (eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise. New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty, 65–99. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight L. 1963. The uniqueness of the word. Lingua 12. 113–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(63)90022-6.Search in Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan. 1970. On complementizers: Toward a syntactic theory of complement types. Foundations of Language 6(3). 297–321.Search in Google Scholar
Bylinina, Elizaveta. 2011. This is so NP!. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 6. 1–29.10.4148/biyclc.v6i0.1571Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.10.1515/9783112316009Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1962. Explanatory models in linguistics. In Ernest Nagel, Patrick Suppes, Alfred Tarski & Methodology Logic (eds.), The philosophy of science, 528–550. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.21236/AD0616323Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1975. The logical structure of linguistic theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1992. Explaining language use. Philosophical Topics 20. 205–231. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics19922017.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1998. On language. New York: The New Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511811937Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2004. The generative enterprise revisited: Discussions with Riny Huybregts, Henk van Riemsdijk, Naoki Fukui, and Mihoko Zushi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110902440Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2006. Language and mind, 3rd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2012. The science of language: Interviews with James McGilvray. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139061018Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2013. Notes on denotation and denoting. In Ivano Caponigro & Carlo Conchetto (eds.), From grammar to meaning: the spontaneous logicality of language, 38–45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139519328.004Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2016. What kind of creatures are we? New York: Columbia University Press.10.7312/chom17596Search in Google Scholar
Cruse, Alan. 2011. Meaning in language: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Deely, John. 1981. The relation of logic to semiotics. Semiotica 35. 193–265. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1981.35.3-4.193.Search in Google Scholar
Diver, William, Joseph Davis & Wallis Reid. 2012. Traditional grammar and its legacy in twentieth-century linguistics. In Alan Huffman & Joseph Davis (eds.), Language: communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver, 371–443. Leiden/Boston: Brill.10.1163/ej.9789004208582.i-566.82Search in Google Scholar
Duffley, Patrick. 2014. Reclaiming control as a semantic and pragmatic phenomenon. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.251Search in Google Scholar
Duffley, Patrick. 2020. Linguistic meaning meets linguistic form. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198850700.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan. 2009. How words mean. Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199234660.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Frazer-McKee, Gabriel & Patrick Duffley. 2024. The cognitive mechanisms involved in the “DEGREE ADVERB + PROPER NAME” construction: Evaluating proposals from construction grammar and formal semantics. International Review of Pragmatics 16(2). 188–231.10.1163/18773109-01602002Search in Google Scholar
García Velasco, Daniel. 2016. A flexible lexicon for functional discourse grammar. Linguistics 54(5). 907–945. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2016-0020.Search in Google Scholar
Glanzburg, Michael. 2021. Chomsky on semantics. In Nicholas Allott, Terje Lohndal & Georges Rey (eds.), A companion to Chomsky, 416–432. New York: Wiley Blackwell.10.1002/9781119598732.ch26Search in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gonzálvez-García, Francisco. 2014. “That’s so a construction!” Some reflections on innovative uses of “so” in present-day English. In M. de los Ángeles Gómez González, F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza & Francisco Gonzálvez-García (eds.), Theory and practice in functional-cognitive space, 271–293. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sfsl.68.12gonSearch in Google Scholar
Hirtle, Walter H. 2017. The word and its ways in English: Essays on the parts of speech and person. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press.10.1515/9780773549661Search in Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert. 1995. Logical form. From GB to minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316423530Search in Google Scholar
Huffman, Alan. 2001. The linguistics of William Diver and the Columbia School. Word 52. 29–68.10.1080/00437956.2001.11432507Search in Google Scholar
Jakielaszek, Jarosław. 2017. A minimalist view on the syntax-semantics relationship: Turning the mind into a snowflake. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.10.3726/b10789Search in Google Scholar
Janssen, Theo M. V. 1983. Foundations and applications of Montague grammar. University of Amsterdam Ph.D. Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Kim, Jong Bok & Mark A. Davies. 2015. The into transitive construction in English: A construction-based perspective. English Language and Linguistics 20. 55–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674315000271.Search in Google Scholar
Novotny, Ludmila M. 2022. La distribución de un signo lingüístico: Un análisis semiótico-semántico de la forma inglesa through. Universidad Nacional de La Plata MA thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Payne, John, Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2010. The distribution and category status of adjectives and adverbs. Word Structure 3(1). 31–81. https://doi.org/10.3366/e1750124510000486.Search in Google Scholar
Reid, Wallis R. 1991. Verb and noun number in English. A functional explanation. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Ruhl, Charles. 1989. On monosemy. Albany: State University of New York Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sabar, Nadav. 2018. Lexical meaning as a testable hypothesis: The case of English look, see, seem and appear. Amsterdam: John Bejamins.10.1075/sfsl.75Search in Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan & Thomas Wasow. 1999. Syntactic theory: A formal introduction. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.Search in Google Scholar
Schindler, David C. 2013. The catholicity of reason. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.Search in Google Scholar
Schwarzschild, Roger. 2006. The role of dimensions in the syntax of noun phrases. Syntax 9(1). 67–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2006.00083.x.Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Mark C. 2015. Word categories. In John R. Taylor (ed.), The Oxford handbook of the word, 175–195. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199641604.013.019Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Barry C. 2008. What I know when I know a language. In Ernest Lepore & Barry C. Smith (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the philosophy of language, 941–982. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199552238.003.0037Search in Google Scholar
Stainton, Robert J. 2008. Meaning and reference: Some Chomskian themes. In Ernest Lepore & Barry C. Smith (eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of language, 913–940. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199552238.003.0036Search in Google Scholar
Travis, Charles. 1985. On what is strictly speaking true. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 15. 187–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.1985.10716416.Search in Google Scholar
Veatch, Henry B. 1974. Aristotle: A contemporary appreciation. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.10.2979/5082.0Search in Google Scholar
Vecsey, Zoltán. 2021. Chomsky’s London. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 62. 285–299. https://doi.org/10.52685/cjp.21.62.4.Search in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
