文献メモ：「言語学の論証における直観」
Thomas Wasow & Jennifer Arnold, "Intuitions in linguistic argumentation," Lingua 115 (2005) 1481–1496.
アブストラクト
Generative grammarians have relied on introspective intuitions of well-formedness as their primary source of data. The overreliance on this one type of data and the unsystematic manner in which they are collected cast doubt on the empirical basis of a great deal of syntactic theorizing. These concerns are illustrated with examples and one more detailed case study, concerning the English verb-particle construction.
（生成文法家たちはデータの主要な源として適格性に関する内観的直観を頼りにしてきた．このタイプのデータばかりに過剰に依存し，その収集の仕方も体系的でないため，統語理論の仮説形成のうち相当な部分の経験的基盤は疑わしいものとなっている．こうした問題を例証すべく，いくつか事例をあげるとともに，英語の動詞-不変化辞構文のケーススタディを提示する．）
適格性の判断に「俺ソース」が多くてまずいという指摘はわりとむかしから言われていることですよね．有名どころでは↓がすぐに思い浮かびます：
- 作者: ドメニコラガナ
- 出版社/メーカー: 河出書房新社
- 発売日: 1988/10
- メディア: 単行本
- 購入: 1人 クリック: 11回
- この商品を含むブログ (1件) を見る
認知言語学でも事情はそれほどちがわない…かな？*1 「お前はどうなんだ」と言われると「スミマセン，英語の母語話者5人くらいに“容認度”を聞いてるだけです」と答えるしかなかったりします．*2
一方，ピンカーのように容認度などの「直観」についてかなり楽観的な人もいます：
Some people raise an eyebrow at linguists' practice of treating their own sentence judgments as objective empirical data. The danger is that a linguist's pet theory could unconsciously warp his or her judgments. It's a legitimate worry, but in practice linguistic judgments can go a long way. One of the perquisites of research on basic cognitive processes is that you always have easy access to a specimen of the species you study, namely, yourself. When I was a student in a perception lab I asked my advisor when we would stop generating tones to listen to and start doing the research. He corrected me: listening to the tones /was/ research, as far as he was concerned, since he was confident that if a sequence sounded a certain way to him, it would sound that way to every other normal member of the species. As a sanity check (and to satisfy journal referees) we would eventually pay students to listen to the sounds and press buttons according to what they heard, but the results always ratified what we could hear with our own ears. I've followed the same strategy in psycholinguistics, and in dozens of studies I've found that the average ratings from volunteers have always lined up with the original subjective judgments of the linguists.
（Steven Pinker, The Stuff of Thought, Penguin, 2007, p.34；強調は引用者によるもの；see also this）
とりあえずメモだけです．
