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
    Generative grammar (Chomsky) posits that surface-level mu... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→It is difficult to maintain that all natural language predicates have a fixed degree.

    Generative grammar (Chomsky) posits that surface-level multigrade predicates reduce to fixed-arity structures at logical form via argument-position saturation.

    ?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.Surface variability in predicate arity (e.g., 'eat' as transitive/intransitive) suggests underlying invariant structure that syntax manipulates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Logical compositionality requires fixed argument positions; without them, semantic interpretation becomes indeterminate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Cross-linguistic patterns show consistent core valencies masked by surface phenomena, supporting deep structural reduction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.True multigrade predicates (e.g., 'cost': 'Book costs $5/time costs everything') resist reduction to single fixed-arity logical form.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Event semantics and neo-Davidsonian approaches explain arity variation without positing invisible argument positions at LF.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Construction grammar and usage-based models show arity flexibility is genuine, not surface disguise of deeper fixedness.
      ?

      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

    Construction grammar and usage-based models show arity flexibility is genuine, n...Cross-linguistic patterns show consistent core valencies masked by surface pheno...Event semantics and neo-Davidsonian approaches explain arity variation without p...It is difficult to maintain that all natural language predicates have a fixed de...
    +3 moreShow less
    Logical compositionality requires fixed argument positions; without them, semant...Surface variability in predicate arity (e.g., 'eat' as transitive/intransitive) ...True multigrade predicates (e.g., 'cost': 'Book costs $5/time costs everything')...

    Details

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