In:Usage-based and Typological Approaches to Linguistic Units
Edited by Tsuyoshi Ono, Ritva Laury and Ryoko Suzuki
[Benjamins Current Topics 114] 2021
► pp. 39–58
Linguistic units and their systems
Completeness, self-reference, and contingency
Published online: 21 April 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.114.03kre
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.114.03kre
Abstract
A theoretical discussion of units in linguistic theory would be, in a sense, incomplete without a discussion of the systems, whether overt or implied, that the units are associated with. This paper traces conceptualizations of units and their accompanying systems in several disciplines. We identify some important problems with rule-based accounts (Parsons 1937) of social action and discuss the transition to non-rule-based theory afforded by ethnomethodology (e.g. Garfinkel 1963, 1967; Heritage 1984, 2011). We draw direct parallels between these issues and analogous developments in mathematical logic (Gödel 1992) and philosophy of mind (Fodor 1968, 1983; Lucas 1961; Putnam 1960, 1967 etc.), and argue that these stem directly from fundamental properties of a class of all formal systems which permit self-reference. We argue that, since these issues are architectural in nature, linguistic theory which postulates that linguistic units are the outputs of a consistent, self-referential, rule-based formal systems (e.g. Hauser, Chomsky & Fitch 2002) will inevitably run into similar problems. This is further supported by examples from actual language use which, as a class, will elude any theoretical explanation grounded in such a system.
Keywords: units, actions, incompleteness, ethnomethodology, conversation analysis, formal system, rules, norms, Gödel, online speech, contingency, isotropy
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Social action, unit acts, interaction
- 3.Systems and incompleteness
- 4.Some deviant utterances
- 5.Concluding remarks
Notes References
References (46)
Braithewaite, R. B. 1992. Introduction. In Kurt Gödel (ed.), On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems. New York: Dover.
Chafe, Wallace. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2001. The Mind Doesn’t Work That Way: The Scope and Limits of Computational Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara A. Fox & Sandra Thompson. 2013. Units and/or Action Trajectories? The language of grammatical categories and the language of social action. In Beatrice Szczepek-Reed & Geoffrey Raymond (eds.), Units of Talk – Units of Action, 13–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Garfinkel, Harold. 1963. A conception of, and experiments with, ‘trust’ as a condition of stable concerted actions. In O. J. Harvey (ed.), Motivation and Social Interaction, 187–238. New York: Ronald Press.
Gawne, Lauren & Jill Vaughan. 2011. I can haz language play: The construction of language and identity in LOLspeak. Proceedings of the 42nd Australian Linguistic Society Conference.
Gödel, Kurt. 1931. Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme, I. Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38. 173–98.
. 1992. On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems. Trans. B. Meltzer, with Intro. by R. B. Braithwaite. New York: Dover.
Goodwin, Charles. 1979. The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation. In G. Psathas (ed.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, 97–121. New York: Irvington.
Grosholz, Emily R. 2016. Leibnizian analysis, canonical objects, and generalization. In Karine Chemla, Renaud Chorlay & David Rabouin (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Generality in Mathematics and the Sciences, 329–356. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hauser, Marc D., Noam Chomsky & W. Tecumseh Fitch. 2002. The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298. 1569–1579.
. 2011. A Galilean Moment in Social Theory? Language, Culture and their Emergent Properties. Qualitative Sociology 34(1). 263–270.
Hopcroft, John & Jeffrey Ullman. 1979. Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
. 2011. Emergent Grammar and temporality in interactional linguistics. In Peter Auer & Stefan Pfänder (eds.), Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, 22–44. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Iwasaki, Shoichi. 2015. A multiple-grammar model of speakers’ linguistic knowledge. Cognitive Linguistics 26. 161–210.
Linell, Per. 2009. Rethinking Language, Mind and World Dialogically: Contextual and Interactional Theories of Human Sense-Making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
. 2013. The dynamics of incrementation in utterance-building: Processes and resources. In Beatrice Szczepek Reed & Geoffrey Raymond (eds.), Units of Talk – Units of Action, 57–90. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Putnam, Hilary. 1960. Minds and machines. In Sidney Hook (ed.), Dimensions of Mind, 20–33. New York: New York University Press.
. 1967. The Nature of Mental States. In W. H. Capitan & D. D. Merrill (eds.), Art, Mind, and Religion, 51–58. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.
1975. Universals and cultural specifics in human categorization. In R. Brislin, S. Bochner & W. Lonner (eds.), Cross-cultural Perspectives on Learning. New York: Halstead Press.
1983. Prototype Classification and Logical Classification: The Two Systems. In E. F. Scholnick (ed.), New Trends in Conceptual Representation: Challenges to Piaget’s Theory?, 73–86. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rosch, E. & C. B. Mervis. 1975. Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7. 573–605.
Sacks, H. 1992. Lectures on Conversation, Volumes I and II. Ed. G. Jefferson with Introduction by E. A. Schegloff. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Gail Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50(4). 696–735.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1996a. Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff & S. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and Grammar, 52–133. Cambridge University Press.
1996b. Confirming Allusions: Toward an Empirical Account of Action. American Journal of Sociology 102(1). 161–216.
Schütz, Alfred. 1959. Type and Eidos in Husserl’s Late Philosophy. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 20(2). 147–165.
Serény, György. 2003. Gödel, Tarski, Church, and the Liar. The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 9(1). 3–25.
