The Classical Approach to Categorization Taylor 2 The Classical Approach to Categorization

2.1 Aristotelian Categorization Aristotle distinguished between: The essence of a thing Its necessary and sufficient features Vs. The accidents of a thing Its other features

Aristotle’s distinction yields 4 assumptions: 1) Categories are defined in terms of necessary and sufficient features 2) Features are binary 3) Categories have clear boundaries 4) All members of a category have equal status

2.2 The classical approach in linguistics: phonology [CAVEAT: Some of the assumptions listed below no longer hold; newer theories (especially Optimality Theory) have moved away from them] Phonological feature analysis added the following assumptions: 5) Features are primitive

2.2 The classical approach in linguistics: phonology, cont’d. 6) Features are universal Each language selects features from a fixed finite inventory 7) Features are abstract Features are conceptual, not necessarily measurable in terms of physics, they are mental representations

2.2 The classical approach in linguistics: phonology, cont’d. 8) Features are innate The universal inventory must be genetically inherited This is the most controversial assumption

2.3 The classical approach in semantics Some have adopted a parallel feature approach to syntax & semantics Features do capture significant generalizations (natural classes) and do facilitate analysis of certain kinds of sentence meanings (entailment, inclusion, contradiction)

2.3 The classical approach in semantics This line of reasoning has inspired the postulation of a universal set of primitive semantic features, “building blocks of human thought” (cf. Wierzbicka) Semantic features do not stand for and are not learnable from any “physical properties and relations outside the human organism” – it is necessary to assume that the set of universal features is genetically inherited.

2.3 The classical approach in semantics Distinguishes between Reference: Designation of entities in the world Vs. Sense: The set of relations which hold between the item in question and other items in the same lexical system

Questions about Classical Approaches Do all members of a category share necessary and sufficient features? Are words reducible to semantic primitives? Can we distinguish between linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge? Can one know the meaning of a word without being familiar with the relevant real-world facts?