BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Talks.cam//talks.cam.ac.uk//
X-WR-CALNAME:Talks.cam
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Reconsidering Recursion in Syntactic Theory - Dr Marcus Tomalin (S
 peech Group\, Engineering)
DTSTART:20061024T170000Z
DTEND:20061024T183000Z
UID:TALK5882@talks.cam.ac.uk
CONTACT:Dr Theresa Biberauer
DESCRIPTION:In recent years\, recursion has started to occupy an increasin
 gly central position within the analytical  formalism elaborated by the Mi
 nimalist Program (MP). For instance\, in Hauser\, Chomsky\, and Fitch (200
 2)\, it was suggested that the Faculty of Language in the Narrow sense (FL
 N) `comprises only the core computational mechanisms of recursion as they 
 appear in narrow syntax and the mappings to the interfaces' (Hauser\, Chom
 sky\, and Fitch\, 2002: 1573). Since\, in the biolinguistics framework ado
 pted by the MP\, FLN is generally considered to be a computational mechani
 sm that is recently evolved and unique to homo sapiens\, this suggests tha
 t recursion is one of the most fundamental defining properties of natural 
 language. However\, despite this centrality\, the term `recursion'\nis ala
 rmingly ambiguous\, and disagreements about its role and status within lin
 guistic theory often arise as a result of terminological misunderstandings
  (e.g.\, see the debate developed in Pinker and Jackendoff (2005)\, and Ch
 omsky\, Hauser\, and Fitch (2005)). \n\nGiven the above\, this presentatio
 n will reconsider the role of recursion in syntactic theory\, and three  p
 articular aspects of this broad topic will be addressed. First\, the devel
 opment of recursive techniques within the formal sciences (e.g.\, mathemat
 ics\, symbolic logic) will be briefly considered\,\nand it will be shown t
 hat\, from the late 1930s onwards\, the term `recursion' could mean severa
 l different things. Second\, the incorporation of recursive devices into t
 he formal grammars in the 1950s will be summarised\, and the work of Bar-H
 illel and Chomsky from this period will be analysed in some detail in orde
 r to indicate the manner in which recursion (of several different kinds) w
 as transferred from the formal sciences into linguistics. Third\, having e
 stablished this historical context\, the role of recursion within the MP w
 ill be discussed at length\, and the main focus\nwill fall upon Chomsky's 
 `recursive' definition of `syntactic objects' (Chomsky 1995: 243). Accordi
 ng to this definition\, there are two types of syntactic objects:\n\n1. le
 xical items \n2. K = {gamma {alpha\,beta}}\, \nwhere alpha\, beta are synt
 actic objects and gamma is the label of K and (2) here constitutes the `re
 cursive step' (Chomsky 1995: 243).\n\nThe central task will be to determin
 e which particular kind of recursion is manifest in this sort of definitio
 n.\n\nIn conclusion\, it will be argued that\, if the role of recursion as
  part of FLN is to be clarified\, then it would be preferable to eliminate
  the term `recursion' from all discussions of FLN\, replacing it with less
  ambiguous (and more accurate) terminology.
LOCATION:G-R05\, English Faculty
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR