Abstract
No idea is older in the history of linguistics than the thought that there is, somehow hidden underneath the surface of sentences, a form or a structure which provides a semantic analysis and lays bare their logical structure. In Plato’s Cratylus the theory was proposed, deriving from Heraclitus’ theory of explanatory underlying structure in physical nature, that words contain within themselves bits of syntactic structure giving their meanings. The Stoics held the same view and maintained moreover that every sentence has an underlying logical structure, which for them was the Aristotelian subject- predicate form. They even proposed transformational processes to derive the surface from the deep structure. The idea of a semantically analytic logical form underlying the sentences of every language kept reappearing in various guises at various times. Quite recently it re-emerged under the name of generative semantics.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Bach, E ., ‘Nouns and Noun Phrases’, Universals in Linguistic Theory, E. Bach and R. T. Harms (eds.), New York (1968), pp. 91–122.
Baker, C. L ., ‘Double Negation’, Linguistic Inquiry 1.2 (1970), pp. 169–86.
Chomsky, N., Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (1965), Cambridge, Mass.
Doherty, P. C. and Schwartz, A., ‘The Syntax of the Compared Adjective in English’, Language 43 (1967), pp. 903–36.
Huddleston, R ., ‘More on the English Comparative’, Journal of Linguistics 3.1 (1967), pp. 91–102.
Jespersen, O ., Negation in English and Other Languages (1917), Copenhagen.
Joly, A ., Negation and the Comparative Particle in English (1967), Quebec.
Lakoff, G ., ‘On Derivational Constraints’, Selected Papers in Generative Semantics, Tokyo (1970), pp. 120–42
Lakoff, R., ‘Some Reasons Why There Can’t Be Any Some-any Rule’, Language 45 (1969), pp. 608–15.
Lees, R. B., ‘Grammatical Analysis of the English Comparative Construction’, Word 17 (1961), pp. 171–85.
McCawley, J. D ., ’Meaning and the Description of Languages’, Kotoba No Uchu 2 (1967), No. 9: pp. 10–18; No. 10: pp. 38-48; No. 11: pp. 51-57
McCawley, J. D., ‘English as a KSO-Language’, Language 46 (1970), pp. 286–99.
Pilch, H., ‘Comparative Constructions in English’, Language 41 (1965), pp. 37–58.
Reichenbach, H., Elements of Symbolic Logic (1947), New York.
Ross, J. R ., ‘A Proposed Rule of Tree Pruning’, Modern Studies in English, D. A. Reibel and S. A. Schane (eds.), Englewood Cliffs (1968), pp. 288–99.
Russell, B ., An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth (1940), London.
Seuren, P. A. M ., Operators and Nucleus, A Contribution to the Theory of Grammar (1969), Cambridge.
Smith, C. S., ‘A Class of Complex Modifiers in English’, Language 37 (1961), pp. 342–65.
Strawson, P. F ., Introduction to Logical Theory (1952), London.
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1973 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht-Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Seuren, P.A.M. (1973). The Comparative. In: Kiefer, F., Ruwet, N. (eds) Generative Grammar in Europe. Foundations of Language, vol 13. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2503-4_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2503-4_22
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-2505-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-2503-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive