An essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possible
In 2015, Johnson-Laird, Khemlani, and Goodwin indicated four reasons why a basically syntactic approach explaining the human inferential activity is hard to accept nowadays. However, in this paper, I try to show that such reasons do not reveal real problems for the syntactic frameworks, and that mos...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Universidad de Cádiz
2017-12-01
|
| Series: | Pragmalingüística |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://localhost:8888/ojs-uca.3.3.x/index.php/pragma/article/view/3232 |
| _version_ | 1798000095124258816 |
|---|---|
| author | Miguel López Astorga |
| author_facet | Miguel López Astorga |
| author_sort | Miguel López Astorga |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In 2015, Johnson-Laird, Khemlani, and Goodwin indicated four reasons why a basically syntactic approach explaining the human inferential activity is hard to accept nowadays. However, in this paper, I try to show that such reasons do not reveal real problems for the syntactic frameworks, and that most of the difficulties related to them have already been addressed by the literature on cognitive science and considered to be clearly surmountable from a mainly formal perspective. In this way, I argue that it is still possible to claim that syntax plays an important role in the human thought. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T11:14:46Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-1e96c41b2fcf4ebcbb27666bd68065eb |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1133-682X 2445-3064 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T11:14:46Z |
| publishDate | 2017-12-01 |
| publisher | Universidad de Cádiz |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Pragmalingüística |
| spelling | doaj.art-1e96c41b2fcf4ebcbb27666bd68065eb2022-12-22T04:27:16ZengUniversidad de CádizPragmalingüística1133-682X2445-30642017-12-0125An essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possibleMiguel López Astorga0Universidad de TalcaIn 2015, Johnson-Laird, Khemlani, and Goodwin indicated four reasons why a basically syntactic approach explaining the human inferential activity is hard to accept nowadays. However, in this paper, I try to show that such reasons do not reveal real problems for the syntactic frameworks, and that most of the difficulties related to them have already been addressed by the literature on cognitive science and considered to be clearly surmountable from a mainly formal perspective. In this way, I argue that it is still possible to claim that syntax plays an important role in the human thought.http://localhost:8888/ojs-uca.3.3.x/index.php/pragma/article/view/3232forminferencelogicsyntaxthought |
| spellingShingle | Miguel López Astorga An essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possible Pragmalingüística form inference logic syntax thought |
| title | An essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possible |
| title_full | An essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possible |
| title_fullStr | An essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possible |
| title_full_unstemmed | An essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possible |
| title_short | An essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possible |
| title_sort | essentially syntactic and formal theory is still possible |
| topic | form inference logic syntax thought |
| url | http://localhost:8888/ojs-uca.3.3.x/index.php/pragma/article/view/3232 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT miguellopezastorga anessentiallysyntacticandformaltheoryisstillpossible AT miguellopezastorga essentiallysyntacticandformaltheoryisstillpossible |