In:Questioning Theoretical Primitives in Linguistic Inquiry: Papers in honor of Ricardo Otheguy
Edited by Naomi Shin and Daniel Erker
[Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 76] 2018
► pp. 133–156
Spooky grammatical effects
Published online: 6 December 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.76.07dav
https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.76.07dav
Abstract
Linguistic constructs often correspond to nothing concrete: Descriptivists’ zero morpheme, generativists’ trace, variationists’ null instantiation, and Columbia School’s null signal. These represent structural relations with no phonetic substance. Columbia School has posited, moreover, three types of relatively insubstantial semantic structure: The residual member and the including member are semantic value oppositions within a grammatical system, each defined by the system’s other members. In the opposition of substance, in my own work, two signals share a value from one semantic substance, but only one of them bears a meaning from an additional semantic substance. All of these constructs are justified by distributional facts within theoretical paradigms. It is possible, too, to distinguish between all of the above and absence.
Keywords: zero, null, Columbia School, residual member, including member, opposition of substance
Article outline
- 1.The null in mathematics
- 2.The null in semiotics
- 2.1Linguistics
- 2.1.1Saussure to Bloomfield to Chomsky and beyond
- 2.1.2William Diver and the Columbia School
- 2.1.2.1Diver and null
- 2.1.2.2Diver and homonymy in grammar
- 2.1.2.3Diver’s residual member
- 2.1.2.4Diver’s opposition of inclusion
- 2.1.3The opposition of substance
- 2.1Linguistics
- 3.Unsignaled structure in music
- 4.When there’s no there there
- 4.1Absence studied from a Columbia School linguistic perspective
- 4.2Absence studied in variationist linguistics
- 5.Conclusion
Notes References Sources of data
References (54)
Bickel, B., Witzlack-Makarevich, A., Zakharko, T., & Iemmolo, G. (2015). Exploring diachronic universals of agreement: Alignment patterns and zero marking across person categories. In J. Fleischer, E. Rieken, & P. Widmer (Eds.), Agreement from a diachronic perspective (pp. 29–51). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Bloomfield, L. (1926). A set of postulates for the science of language. Language 2. (Reprinted in Readings in linguistics I, 4th ed., pp. 26–31, by M. Joos , Ed., (1957/1966), Chicago, IL & London: University of Chicago Press.
Bybee, J. (1994). The grammaticization of zero: Asymmetries in tense and aspect systems. In W. Pagliuca (Ed.), Perspectives on grammaticalization (pp. 235–254). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Carvalho, A. M., Orozco, R., & Shin, N. L. (Eds.). (2015). Subject pronoun expression in Spanish: A cross-dialectal perspective. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
Contini-Morava, E. (2006). The difference between zero and nothing: Swahili noun class prefixes 5 and 9/10. In J. Davis, R. J. Gorup, & N. Stern (Eds.), Advances in functional linguistics: Columbia School beyond its origins (pp. 211–222). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
D’Arcy, Alexandra. (2012). The diachrony of quotation: Evidence from New Zealand English. Language Variation and Change, 24, 343–369.
Davis, J. (1992). Italian egli and lui: Grammatical meaning and inference (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University). (UMI No. 9313892)
(1995). Italian pronouns and the virtue of relative meaninglessness. In E. Contini-Morava & B. S. Goldberg (Eds.), Meaning as explanation: Advances in linguistic sign theory (pp. 423–440). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
(2002). A surpassingly simple analysis. In W. Reid, R. Otheguy, & N. Stern (Eds.), Signal, meaning, and message (pp. 113–136). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2004). The linguistics of William Diver and the linguistics of Ferdinand de Saussure. In G. Hassler, & G. Volkmann (Eds.), History of linguistics in texts and concepts, vol. 1 (pp. 307–326). Münster: Nodus.
(2016). Substance and structure in Columbia School linguistics. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 48, 59–69.
(2017b). The substance and value of Italian si. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Diver, W. (1974/2012). Substance and value in linguistic analysis. In A. Huffman, & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 23–45). Leiden: Brill.
(1975/2012). The nature of linguistic meaning. In A. Huffman, & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 47–63). Leiden: Brill.
(1978/2012). Putting the horse before the cart: Linguistic analysis and linguistic theory. In A. Huffman, & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 101–133). Leiden: Brill.
(1986/2012). Latin se. In A. Huffman, & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 279–289). Leiden: Brill.
(1987/2012). The dual. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 87–99). Leiden: Brill.
(1990/2012). The elements of a science of language. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 65–84). Leiden: Brill.
(1992/2012). The Latin demonstratives. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 265–277). Leiden: Brill.
(1995/2012). Theory. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 445–519). Leiden: Brill.
Diver, W., & Davis, J. (1993/2012). The phonology of the extremes: Or, What is a problem? In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 323–341). Leiden: Brill
(2012). Latin voice and case. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 195–245). Leiden: Brill.
(1983). Context dependence of language and of linguistic analysis. In F. Klein-Andreu (Ed.), Discourse perspectives on syntax (pp. 181–207). New York: Academic.
García, E. C., & Putte, F. V. (1989). Forms are silver, nothing is gold. Folia Linguistica Historica, 21, 365–384.
Gorup, R. J. (2006).
Se without deixis. In J. Davis, R. J. Gorup, & N. Stern (Eds.), Advances in functional linguistics: Columbia School beyond its origins (pp. 195–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Harris, Z. S. (1942). Morpheme alternants in linguistic analysis. Language, 18. (Reprinted in Readings in linguistics I, 4th ed., pp. 109–115, by M. Joos, Ed., (1957/1966), Chicago, IL & London: University of Chicago Press.
(1946). From morpheme to utterance. Language, 22. (Reprinted in Readings in linguistics I, 4th ed., pp. 142–153, by M. Joos, Ed., (1957/1966), Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.
Hockett, C. F. (1942). A system of descriptive phonology. Language 18. (Reprinted in Readings in linguistics I, 4th ed., pp. 97–108, by M. Joos, Ed., (1957/1966), Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.
Huffman, A. (1997).
The categories of grammar: French lui and le. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2012). Introduction: The enduring legacy of William Diver. In A. Huffman & J. Davis (Eds.), Language: Communication and human behavior. The linguistic essays of William Diver (pp. 1–20). Leiden: Brill.
Labov, W. (1969). Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language, 45, 715–762.
Li, C., & Thompson, S. A. (1979). Third-person pronouns and zero-anaphora in Chinese discourse. Syntax and Semantics, 12, 311–335.
Ono, T., & Thompson, S. A. (1997). Deconstructing 'zero anaphora' in Japanese. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 23, 481–491.
Otheguy, R. (2002). Saussurean anti-nomenclaturism in grammatical analysis: A comparative theoretical perspective. In W. Reid, R. Otheguy, & N. Stern (Eds.), Signal, meaning, and message (pp. 373–403). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2015) Preface. In A. M. Carvalho, R. Orozco, & N. L. Shin (Eds.), Subject pronoun expression in Spanish: A cross-dialectal perspective (pp. ix–xi). Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
Otheguy, R., & Zentella, A. C. (2012). Spanish in New York: Language contact, dialectal leveling, and structural continuity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(2011). The communicative function of English verb number. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 29, 1087–1146.
de Saussure, F. (1878). Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européenes. Paris. Published in Recueil des publications scientifiques de F. de Saussure, Geneva (1922). Cited in Diver, W. (1974/2012).
Schwenter, S. A. (2006). Null objects across South America. In T. L. Face, & C. A. Klee (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 8th Hispanic linguistics symposium (pp. 23–36). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
