Skip to main content

Natural Languages and Context-Free Languages

  • Chapter
The Formal Complexity of Natural Language

Part of the book series: Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy ((SLAP,volume 33))

  • 272 Accesses

Abstract

In his 1956 paper ‘Three Models for the Description of Language’ Noam Chomsky posed an interesting open question: when we consider the human languages purely as sets of strings of words (henceforth stringsets), do they always fall within the class called context-free languages (CFL’s)? Chomsky declared that he did not know the answer to this question, and turned to a very different set of questions concerning relative elegance and economy of different types of description. Since 1956 various authors (Chomsky included) have attempted to provide answers in the negative, and the negative answer is now the standardly accepted one. We take up the question again in this paper, and show that it is still open, as all the arguments for the negative answer that have been provided in the literature are either empirically or formally incorrect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aho, A. V. and J. D. Ullmann: 1972, The Theory of Parsing, Translation and Compiling, Volume I: Parsing (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey).

    Google Scholar 

  • Aho, A. V. and J. D. Ullmann: 1973, The Theory of Parsing, Translation and Compiling, Volume II: Translation and Compiling (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey).

    Google Scholar 

  • Akmajian, A. and F. Heny: 1975, An Introduction to the Principles of Transformational Syntax (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Allerton, D. J.: 1980, Essentials of Grammatical Theory (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bach, E.: 1974, Syntactic Theory (Holt Rinehard and Winston, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Hillel, Y. and E. Shamir: 1960, ‘Finite State Languages: Formal Representations and Adequacy Problems’, reprinted in Y. Bar-Hillel (1964), Language and Information (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.), pp.87–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonvillain, N.: 1974, ‘Noun Incorporation in Mohawk’, in M. K. Foster (ed.), Papers from the 1972 Conference on Iroquoian Research (National Museum of Man, Ottawa, Canada), pp. 18–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonvillain, N. and B. Francis: 1980, ‘The Bear and the Fox, in Akwesasne Mohawk’, in Mithun and Woodbury (eds.), pp. 77–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresnan, J. W.: 1976, ‘Evidence for a Theory of Unbounded Transformations’, Linguistic Analysis 2, 353–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresnan, J. W.: 1978, ‘A Realistic Transformational Grammar’, in M. Halle, J. W. Bresnan, and G. A. Miller (eds.), Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N.: 1956, ‘Three Models for the Description of Language’, I. R. E. Transactions on Information Theory, Volume IT-2, Procedings of the Symposium on Information Theory, September, pp. 113–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N.: 1963, ‘Formal Properties of Grammars’, in R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush, an dE. Galanter (eds.), Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, Volume II (John Wiley, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N.: 1977, ‘On Wh-Movement’, in P. Culicover, T. Wasow, and A. Akmajian (eds.), Formal Syntax (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N.: 1981, Lectures on Government and Binding (Foris, Dordrecht).

    Google Scholar 

  • Church, K. W.: 1980, On Memory Limitations in Natural Language Processing, MSc Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornulier, B.de: 1973, ‘But If “Respectively” Meant Something?’, Papers in Linguistics 6, 131–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Culicover, P. W.: 1976, Syntax (Academic Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, R. T.: 1974, Applications of the Mathematical Theory of Linguistics (Mouton, The Hague).

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J.: 1978, Logic and Society: Contradictions and Possible Worlds (John Wiley, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fidelholtz, J.: 1975, Review of J. Kimball, The Formal Theory of Grammar, Language 51, 493–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. A.: 1975, The Language of Thought (Thomas Crowell, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromkin, V. and R. Rodman: 1978, An Introduction to Language, Second Edition (Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, G.: 1980, ‘A Phrase Structure Syntax for Comparative Clauses’, in T. Hoekstra, H. van der Hulst and M. Moortgat (eds), Lexical Grammar (Foris Publications, Dordrecht), pp. 165–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, G.: 1981, ‘Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure’, Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, G.: 1982, ‘Phrase Structure Grammar’, in P. Jacobson and G. K. Pullum (eds.), The Nature of Syntactic Representation (D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland), 131–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, G., G. K. Pullum, and I. A. Sag: 1981, Auxiliaries and Related Phenomena in a Restrictive Theory of Grammar (Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Ind.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, G. M.: 1971, ‘Unspeakable Sentences, Book I’, Linguistic Inquiry 2, 560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grinder, J. T. and S. H. Elgin: 1973, Guide to Transformational Grammar (Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinton, G.: 1978, ‘Respectively Reconsidered’, Pragmatics Microfiche 3.3, 912–914.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hopcroft, J. and J. D. Ullmann: 1979, Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hurford, J. R.: 1980, ‘Generative Growing Pains’, Lingua 50, 117–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huybregts, M. A. C.: 1976, ‘Overlapping Dependencies in Dutch’, Utrecht Working Papers in Linguistics I, 24–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. E. and P. M. Postal: 1980, Arc Pair Grammar (Princeton University Press, Princeton, N. J.).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kimball, J.: 1973, The Formal Theory of Grammar (Prentice-Hall, Engle-wood Cliffs, New Jersey).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Langendoen, D. T.: 1975, ‘Finite State Parsing of Phrase-Structure Languages and the Status of Readjustment Rules in the Grammar’, Linguistic Inquiry 6, 553–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langendoen, D. T.: 1977, ‘On the Inadequacy of Type-3 Grammars for Human Languages’, in P. J. Hopper (ed.), Studies in Descriptive and Historical Linguistics: Festschrift for Winfred P. Lehmann (John Benjamin, Amsterdam, Holland), pp. 159–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langendoen, D. T.: 1981, ‘The Generative Capacity of Word-formation Components’, Linguistic Inquiry 12, 320–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W. J. M.: 1974, Formal Grammars in Linguistics and Psycholinguistics, Volume II: Applications in Linguistic Theory (Mouton, The Hague, Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, F.: 1953, Oneida Verb Morphology (Yale University Publications in Anthropology, No. 48, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.).

    Google Scholar 

  • McCawley, J. D.: 1968, ‘The Role of Semantics in a Grammar’, in E. Bach and R. T. Harms (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory (Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelson, K.: 1980, ‘Mohawk Text: The Edge of the Forest Revisited’, in Mithun and Woodbury (eds.), pp. 26–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mithun, M. and H. Woodbury (eds.): 1980, Northern Iroquoian Texts (IJAL Native American Texts Series, No. 4) (University of Chicago Press, Chicago/University Microfilms Internationsl, Ann Arbor, Mich.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, S.: 1979, ‘Formal Models of Language Learning’, Cognition 7, 217–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Postal, P. M.: 1962, Some Syntactic Rules in Mohawk, Doctoral Dissertation (Yale University, New Haven, Conn.; published by Garland, New York, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  • Postal, P. M.: 1964, ‘Limitations of Phrase Structure Grammars’, in J. A. Fodor and J. J. Katz (eds.), The Structure of Language: Readings in the Philosophy of Language (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.), pp. 137–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, P. A.: 1969, ‘The Finiteness of Natural Language’, Language 45, 831–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, G.: 1975, The Form of Language (Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, G.: 1979, ‘A Non-Nativist Account of Language Universais’, Linguistics and Philosophy 3, 99–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O.: 1977, ‘Some Remarks on Noun Phrase Structure’, in P. W. Culicover, T. Wasow and A. Akmajian (eds.), Formal Syntax (Academic Press, New York), pp. 285–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachtel, T.: 1981, ‘Sex and the Single Pronoun’, unpublished paper (University of Warsaw).

    Google Scholar 

  • Winograd, T.: 1972, Understanding Natural Language (Academic Press, New York). Also Cognitive Psychology 3, No. 1 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodbury, H.: 1975, ‘Onondaga Noun Incorporation: Notes on the Interdependence of Syntax and Semantics’, International Journal of American Linguistics 41, 10–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaenen, A.: 1979, ‘Infinitival Complements in Dutch’, Papers from the Fifteenth Regional Meeting (Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, Ill.), pp. 378–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwicky, A. M.: 1963, ‘Some Languages That Are Not Context-free’, Quarterly Progress Report of the Research Laboratory of Electronics, MIT, 70, 290–293.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1987 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pullum, G.K., Gazdar, G. (1987). Natural Languages and Context-Free Languages. In: Savitch, W.J., Bach, E., Marsh, W., Safran-Naveh, G. (eds) The Formal Complexity of Natural Language. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, vol 33. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3401-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3401-6_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-55608-047-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-3401-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics