Abstract
Since the Middle Ages philosophers have periodically made proposals for a universal a priori grammar, frequently suggesting that such a grammar be considered as a branch or an application of formal logic. These researches have never progressed very far, not even during the period when grammarians were themselves primarily logicians. In the modern period, since scientific linguistics has vindicated its own independence of logic and philosophy, philosophical proposals of this kind have fallen into “scientific” disrepute. Thus, Edmund Husserl’s project for a “pure logical grammar” — which is probably the most recent full-scale proposal in this area from the side of philosophy — has fallen upon deaf ears. But now, within the past decade, Noam Chomsky has begun to propose, from the side of linguistics itself, a program for the study of grammar which, if it were to succeed, might seem to justify the earlier intuitions of rationalistic philosophy and to give a new grounding to its ancient quest. Might it not be, after all, that what was needed was a more sophisticated development of grammatical studies themselves before such a proposal could be sufficiently clarified to be prosecuted with any confidence?
Reprinted from Lester E. Embree (ed.), Life-World and Consciousness, Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1972, with permission. — J. N. M.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen (Tübingen, 1968), II, i, 342. (Cited hereafter as “LU”. All references are to Volume II.
Edmund Husserl, Formal and Transcendental Logic, trans. Dorion Cairns (The Hague, 1969), p. 49. (Cited herafter as “FTL.”)
See André de Muralt, L’Idée de la phénoménologie (Paris, 1958), pp. 115ff., and Bachelard, A Study, pp. 18ff., 33ff.
See the excellent article by Robert Sokolowski, “The Logic of Parts and Wholes in Husserl’s Investigations,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, XXVIII (1968), 537–553, esp. pp. 538fT. and 542fF., 548fF. [included in this volume. — J. N. M.
Noam Chomsky, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax ( Cambridge, Mass., 1965 ), pp. 16–17.
Noam Chomsky, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (The Hague, 1967), p. 9, and Language and Mind (New York, 1968), p. 32.
Noam Chomsky, Cartesian Linguistics (New York, 1966), pp. 59–60.
Cf. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, “Phenomenology and the Sciences of Man,” in The Primacy of Perception and Other Essays, ed. James M. Edie (Evanston, 1964), pp. 51ff., 56ff., and 66–73.
G. Benjamin Oliver, “The Ontological Structure of Linguistic Theory,” The Monist, LIII (1969), 270.
Charles F. Hockett, The State of the Art (The Hague, 1968), pp. 60ff.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1977 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Edie, J.M. (1977). Husserl’s Conception of “The Grammatical” and Contemporary Linguistics. In: Mohanty, J.N. (eds) Readings on Edmund Husserl’s Logical Investigations . Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1055-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1055-9_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-247-1928-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-1055-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive