Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Chomsky's original competence/performance distinction tre... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A fixed ordinal scale does not suffice for recording linguistic acceptability judgments.

    Chomsky's original competence/performance distinction treats grammaticality as binary, making gradient measurement a category error for core linguistic theory.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Competence describes idealized mental rules; performance involves messy execution. Gradient judgments reflect performance noise, not core grammar.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Binary grammaticality aligns with generative syntax's core insight: language uses discrete, recursive rules, not continuous scales.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Treating gradience as theoretically fundamental conflates acceptability (social/pragmatic) with grammaticality (structural), obscuring the distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Native speakers consistently produce gradient acceptability judgments; dismissing these as mere 'noise' ignores robust empirical phenomena requiring explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Many syntactic phenomena (garden-path effects, extraction domains, agreement) show gradient behavior that discrete rules alone cannot capture.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Linguistic competence itself may incorporate probabilistic/gradient mechanisms; the binary/gradient distinction need not map onto competence/performance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    A fixed ordinal scale does not suffice for recording linguistic acceptability ju...Binary grammaticality aligns with generative syntax's core insight: language use...Competence describes idealized mental rules; performance involves messy executio...Linguistic competence itself may incorporate probabilistic/gradient mechanisms; ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Many syntactic phenomena (garden-path effects, extraction domains, agreement) sh...Native speakers consistently produce gradient acceptability judgments; dismissin...Treating gradience as theoretically fundamental conflates acceptability (social/...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit