And:
>Yes, this is what I mean. So, there are no fixed limits to what is
>conventionalized
>-- the boundaries are gradient. Therefore we can't define the grammar as
>that
>which is conventionalized. Hence my wondering about how to recognize, define
>and model the systematic component of language.
## Yes to this too. So there's no natural boundary to grammar, there's
potentially unlimited variation from person to person and the traditional
view of language (which is probably driven by standardised languages)
disappears. That leaves a question about linguistics, but I think it's
possible to find an answer which keeps us employed.
Richard (= Dick) Hudson
Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London,
Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT.
+44(0)20 7679 3152; fax +44(0)20 7383 4108;
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
|