“
Suppose some proponent, like McCawley, of the unquestionably wrong and stupid Basic Semantics (BS) movement has, accidentally, hit on one two ideas you need to use, say hypothetically, the notion that surface quantifiers are connected to logic-like representations by transformational movement operations sensitive to syntactic constraints, or something like that.
When adopting this idea, assuming that you wish to do so, it would be an obvious rhetorical error to cite any proponents of BS. Not only would this waste a lot of serious linguists’ time if they were persuaded to actually read such misguided stuff, it might mislead less sophisticated thinkers than you into thinking something about BS was right.
So the correct procedure is to proclaim and get others to proclaim, over a long period many times, that BS is totally wrong, unscientific, etc. Then, quietly, simply use whatever BS ideas you want without warning and without any tiring citational or attributional material. A well-known principle of scholarly law known as Right of Salvage guarantees that you cannot be held accountable for this.
(Postal: Advances in Linguistic Rhetoric)
When adopting this idea, assuming that you wish to do so, it would be an obvious rhetorical error to cite any proponents of BS. Not only would this waste a lot of serious linguists’ time if they were persuaded to actually read such misguided stuff, it might mislead less sophisticated thinkers than you into thinking something about BS was right.
So the correct procedure is to proclaim and get others to proclaim, over a long period many times, that BS is totally wrong, unscientific, etc. Then, quietly, simply use whatever BS ideas you want without warning and without any tiring citational or attributional material. A well-known principle of scholarly law known as Right of Salvage guarantees that you cannot be held accountable for this.
(Postal: Advances in Linguistic Rhetoric)
Csak hogy tudjuk, a hoch tudományban is vannak ám sajátos idézési szokások.
