Chomsky, Surface Structure and Deep Structure (Linguistics)

[This is part of some research I did years ago. Please, let's not relitigate whether Chomsky is right or not: I merely want to discuss surface and deep structure here. On-topic comments welcomed. Thank you.]

In the 1960s, Noam Chomsky discovered that "language has an outer and inner aspect" (Chomsky 32). He called the outer aspect of language "surface structure" and the inner aspect he termed "deep structure." Surface structure refers to "the particular words and phrases used to make up a sentence" (Morris 237). Yule defines surface structure as 'the syntactic form taken in actual sentences.' Conversely, deep structure is "the underlying abstract structure that determines [the] semantic interpretation" of a sentence (Chomsky 33). The deep structural component of language is what enables linguists to study the various language systems of the world: it provides the basis for a universal grammar that operates according to certain well-defined rules despite numerous variations in surface structure (Black 18). The example that psychologist Charles Morris gives demonstrates this fact:

The ocean is unusually calm tonight.

Tonight the ocean is particularly calm.

Compared to most nights, tonight the ocean is calm.

These examples indicate that language is systematic and contains not only a surface, but also an inherent or underlying grammatical structure. Every language has both a surface and underlying grammar that determines how sounds and words are combined and utilized to communicate meaning within the language. Two major components of grammar are semantics and syntax.

Sources:

Black, David A. Linguistics for Students of NT Greek: A Survey of Basic Concepts and Applications. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1995.

Chomsky, Noam. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist Thought. New York: Harper and Row, 1996.

Morris, Charles, G. Understanding Psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1996.

Yule, George. The Study of Language. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996. 

Determinism, Free Will, and Neuroscience

I believe that neuroscience tends to be deterministic. Now to be clear, I would not say that all neuroscientists are determinists but it seems that neuroscience continuously moves in that direction. This point seems to be substantiated by what I've read in one book that covers four views of free will. Furthermore, the late Francis Crick suggested that free will is an illusion created by the brain such that we have a sense of free will, which is not the same thing as having free will:

"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that 'You,' your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules" (Francis Crick, The Astonishing Hypothesis, page 3).

Owen Flanagan (a philosopher and Duke professor of neurobiology) appears to reject free will and views it as a disease while Joel B. Green provides evidence that science is leading us to believe "free won't" is more likely than free will: he too works in neuroscience. Many other examples could be given of neuroscientists who affirm determinism rather than free will. Even the notable Churchlands (Patricia and Paul) are known as "eliminative materialists," which means they want to replace talk of emotions (mental states) with neuroscientific terminology (brain states) and flatten any distinction between the two categories. I would be very surprised if either Patricia or Paul believed in libertarian free will.

To summarize, it is my contention that neuroscience largely tends to be deterministic and increasingly so; on the other hand, there are many neuroscientists who affirm free will for one reason or another. But none of what I say here is meant to be a repudiation of neuroscience in toto: I greatly appreciate its useful insights.

Sources Consulted: Watson, Gary (editor). Free Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Flanagan, Owen J. The Problem of the Soul: Two Visions of Mind and How to Reconcile Them. New York: Basic Books, 2002.

Green, Joel B. Body, Soul, and Human Life: The Nature of Humanity in the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academics, 2008. Print.

See also https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18958759-investigating-life-s-meaning

Christ Condemned Sin "in the flesh" (Romans 8:3)

Jesus was like his brothers/sisters in every way except he was without sin (Hebrews 4:15-16; 1 Peter 2:21-25).

The Apostle Paul writes under inspiration: "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Romans 8:3, KJV)

So Christ was manifested in the "likeness" of sinful flesh (ἐν ὁμοιώματι σαρκὸς ἁμαρτίας), but he himself "condemned sin in the flesh" (κατέκρινε τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐν τῇ σαρκί). Zerwick's Grammatical Analysis of the Greek NT states:

"ὁμοίωμα likeness; not identity, because not prone to sin, not mere resemblance, as truly flesh" (p. 475).

See BDAG Greek-English Lexicon for more info on ὁμοίωμα.

The Bible's View of Prostitution

Does the Bible ever say there is nothing wrong with prostitution or with being a prostitute? No it does not.

https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/P/prostitute.html

https://www.openbible.info/topics/prostitution

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/pure-worship/survives/bring-end-to-your-prostitution/

https://biblehub.com/topical/p/prostitute.htm

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-israel/sacred-prostitution-in-the-story-of-judah-and-tamar/

https://www.proquest.com/openview/86440a167e523162b886d0222e80f4f9/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/prostitution

Galatians 3:19 (NIV)-"given through angels"

Greek (WH): Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος; τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν προσετέθη, ἄχρις ἂν ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται, διαταγεὶς δι' ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου·

"The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator" (NIV)

The context strongly indicates that the Mosaic Law is the ὁ νόμος under discussion in this text (Galatians 3:17-18). The Law was "added" until Messiah should come in order that transgressions could be made manifest. Moreover, Paul writes that ὁ νόμος had become a tutor (παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν) until τῆς πίστεως arrived (Galatians 3:24-25).

The Exodus account concerning Sinai is silent about angels transmitting the Law to Moses, but the NT speaks about angels/messengers of ὁ νόμος more than once (Acts 7:53; Hebrews 2:2; compare Acts 7:35, 38). I'm not surprised by Paul's reference since the angels shared in distributing the ten plagues and guided Israel through the wilderness, etc.

For a thorough analysis of the grammar in Galatians 3:19, see Porter, Stanley E., ed. 2019. Paul and Scripture. Leiden: Brill. Pages 327-330.

A Few Recommended Books (May 2024)

                        

Antonio Damasio on Reason

Interesting thought from Antonio Damasio (a "renowned" neurologist):

"Nature appears to have built the apparatus of rationality not just on top of the apparatus of biological regulation, but also from it and with it. The mechanisms for behavior beyond drives and instincts use, I believe, both the upstairs and the downstairs: The neocortex becomes engaged along with the older brain core, and rationality results from their concerted activity." (Descartes' Error, page 128).

Upstairs=neocortex

Downstairs=subcortex

Bibliographical Information: Antonio Damasio, Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Penguin Books, 2005.

Life and Death Are in the Power of the Tongue (Proverbs 18:21)

All of us have to watch  how we use our tongues (how we speak). We're imperfect and prone to "stumble many times" in word and deed (James 3:2). In fact, one proverb warns us that life and death are in the power of the tongue and those who love its fruit will eat the tongue's fruitage (Proverbs 18:21).

The ancients recognized this looming danger: hence, one writing states:

"The human tongue is not free, like some other members of the human body,  but is confined in the mouth, and moreover is constantly in moisture:  yet how many burns can it cause with its sharp edge and its fire. How  much worse then would it have been, were that dangerous member of the  human body possessed of more facilities."--Levit. Rabba 16.

James 3:6 (NAB)-"The tongue is also a fire. It exists among our members as a world of malice, defiling the whole body and setting the entire course of our lives on fire, itself set on fire by Gehenna."

Divine Hiddenness?

I've given little attention to the problem of divine hiddenness, but one treatment of the subject is by Peter van Inwagen. See his book, The Problem of Evil. I read the book some years ago and it covers the logical problem of evil in an interesting way, then discusses divine hiddenness toward the conclusion of the book. By LPE, I mean the supposedly contradictory set of propositions that 1) God is omnipotent; 2) God is omnibenevolent; 3) Evil exists.

Buut regarding the issue of hiddenness, I would say that God is hidden in one sense or Deus absconditus (Exodus 33:20; Isaiah 45:15; John 1:18; 1 John 4:20), but revealed in another sense (Deus revelatus). No one can see his face, yet he speaks face-to-face with Moses (Exodus 33:11). Merold Westphal says we are too ontologically inadequate to see God: having a glimpse of his brilliant doxa would overwhelm us, like looking directly at the sun (Ezekiel 43:2).

On the other hand, God's invisible qualities are clearly perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and divinity (Psalm 19:1-3; Romans 1:20). Paul said that God has not left himself without witness by the rains he provides and the crops that grow (Acts 14:17). Moreover, Jehovah directly communicated with some men, even supplying miraculous evidence that he exists. As someone pointed out earlier, critics might take issue with these accounts, but they illustrate the possibility that God is not completely hidden.

Besides, Peter van Inwagen rightly argues that God wants us to do more than believe in him: he wants humans to love and worship him. If Jehovah always provided visible evidence that he existed, it might conflict with the ultimate goal that he is trying to achieve. The inspired apostle likewise wrote that we walk by faith, not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:8). One day, God will reveal himself in order that all may know he is Jehovah.

The Council of Nicea Ecclesiastically Changed Things (Studer)

"The council of Nicea may with good reason be regarded as signalling a new era of Church history. In fact, it marks the beginning of a close co-operation between the Churches of early Christianity and the Roman empire, which was to bring about unforeseeable consequences for all fields of ecclesiastical life.  As far as the more outward aspect is concerned, a structure was fashioned at that time which resembled a good deal that of the civil organization of the empire, out of which the five great patriarchates were to emerge" (Basil Studer, Trinity and Incarnation, 101).

This relationship affected "all fields of ecclesiastical life" including the liturgy, kerygma, spirituality and theology (102).

Reading Zechariah 12:10---How?

The operative Hebrew words in Zechariah 12:10 are ELAY ET ASERDAQARU ("They shall look upon me whom they have pierced"). S.R. Driver recommends the MT emendation ELAYW ("to him" instead of "upon me") and Driver insists that more than fifty instances in the Hebrew text buttress this reading (See Driver, The Minor Prophets, p. 266).

Even if one reads "upon" or "to me" rather than "to him," it is still possible to understand the text as a reference to the representative of YHWH, that is, His shepherd (compare Zech 11:12-13; 13:7).

Another friend of mine once noted:

"Et-asher [--> 'whom'] is chosen here, as in Jer. 38:9, in the place of the simple 'asher' [whom], to mark 'asher' more clearly as an accusative, since the simple 'asher' might also be rendered 'who pierced (me).'" -- (K-D, Volume 10, page 609.)

Thus, one possible function of ET in Zechariah 12:10 is to clarify and specify the referential significance of the personal object, the one whom is pierced.

Prepare Spiritually As the Fiery-Colored Horse Gallops Along (Modified Talk)

As the end of this system approaches, we can expect more civil unrest, war, and violence to occur. As Revelation 6:4 prophesies, the fiery-colored horse that represents war will continue galloping until Jesus steps in to destroy Satan's godless system of things (compare Zechariah 6:1-2).

Since we can expect more civil unrest in the future, it is imperative for us to be prepared, both spiritually and physically. How can we prepare in both ways?

To prepare spiritually, we should identify Bible principles and scriptural accounts that build our trust in Jehovah and his earthly organization. Moreover, we should strengthen our determination to be neutral regarding this world's political affairs. 1 Peter 4:7-8 likewise emphasizes the need to have intense love for one another, so it is important to build strong friendships within the Christian congregation.

We can prepare physically by having an effective plan to shelter in place and we need to have a reasonable amount of supplies to facilitate such preparation.

What if we have to leave our homes? In that case, we'll need a go bag, personal protective equipment and money, and we'll want to make sure that the elders know how to contact us. Furthermore, we need to know their contact details. Isaiah 32:1-2 reminds us that the elders are a source of protection within the congregation: they have our best interests at heart.

Watch the video

Ask the questions after watching the video

Conclude

Words of the Month (May 2024)

1) Magniloquent:
"speaking in or characterized by a high-flown often bombastic style or manner."

Its usage dates "back to 1650–60; back formation from Latin magniloquentia elevated language, equivalent to magniloqu ( us ) speaking grandly ( magni- magni- + loqu ( ī ) to speak + -us adj. suffix) + -entia -ence.

See https://www.merriam-webster.com/word-of-the-day/magniloquent-2019-03-24?pronunciation&lang=en_us&dir=m&file=magnil02

2) Schonheit (German)-"beauty, fineness, belle." See https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/german-english/schonheit

3) Vermissen (German)-"to miss, to be missing, to fail to see, to regret."

4) Χήρα (Greek)-primarily, a "widow" or a woman left without a husband. See https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=xh/ra