What differences in ethics do you think exist in public vs. private organizations, , Do you agree veith Kohlberg that ‘most Americans think at Stage 4 and that Stage 5 and 6 reasoning was uncommon”? Why?
essential to note that the unacceptability of the latter sentencecannot be explained by connection with the clause styles and the rules of syntax by myself.Secondly, the phenomenon of iconicity confirms our in advance concept thatextensionality have to be seen as as a substitute untypical of natural languages. subsequently, cognitiveanalyses of iconicity corroborate the thesis that meaning and grammar interface, asgrammar transpires to be an ‘photo’. Inasmuch as syntax rules, within generative linguistics, are impartial of semanticsand pragmatics, generative grammar runs counter to natural intuitions with itsimplications that natural language consists of uninterpreted symbols and, therefore,its primary characteristic need to be manufacturing of sequences of uninterpreted sounds as a substitute thancommunication. this is clean already in Syntactic structures were Chomsky broadcasts “we had been reading language as an tool or tool, attempting to describe itsstructure with no express reference to the manner wherein this instrument is placed touse” (1957:103). Generative grammar makes two crucial divisions: first off, it differentiates betweenacceptability and grammaticality and, secondly, it differentiates among semantics andpragmatics (cf. e.g. Chomsky 1965:eleven sq..). with reference to the first department, it has to besaid that when differentiating among acceptability and grammaticality of sentences,generative grammar relegates the previous to the sector of performance, while the latter isgenerated by the syntax. This differentiation effects in the opposition among sentencesand utterances: sentences are recognized with competence and belong to grammar whichis viewed as an algorithm producing a set of sentences, while utterances are relegatedto performance, as they may be seen as unique and contingent instances of sentences.in regards to the second one division, it has to be said that after differentiating betweensemantics and pragmatics, generative grammar deems semantics to be a ways crucial, as itdeals with the which means of sentence that is to be ‘goal’, i.e. independent of speaker’sintensions and able to correctly corresponding to the outside international. Pragmatics,which offers with how audio system use sentences, is certainly separated from semantics andrelegated to a role of secondary significance. pointless to say, the primacy of semanticsover pragmatics stems from the belief that it's miles semantics that concerns itself withthe objective members of the family between language and the external global. On coming across that syntactic classes and grammatical family members are notautonomous, however dependent of meaning and use, cognitive grammar repudiates the ideaof an independent syntax and keeps that many a syntactic analysis is incompleteunless provided with semantic and pragmatic analyses. Inasmuch as it is not onlyacceptability but additionally grammaticality that is decided via the context, which means and use,cognitive linguistics departs from the generative corporation in its assumption that theorder in which component structures are included into composite structure (i.e. theconstituency in Langacker’s terminology) is bendy and variable, whilst in generativegrammar it is continually constant and invariable. Langacker demonstrates that special (e.g.communicative) occasions can exert profound effect on the constituency and,therefore, exchange it in a way that cognitive linguistics can give an explanation for tons better thangenerative grammar. for instance Langacker offers the sentence: This goal / thearrow hit / (however no longer that one), explaining that the canonical NP + vice chairman corporation is conveniently suspended while communicativefactors prefer keeping apart the direct object as a separate major constituent(1987:319).>GET ANSWER