English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

This paper is intended to lay out for broader discussion some arguments for the importance of data in work in generative syntax. These are accepted by many linguists, but a significant number of others still seem reluctant to accept them. The basic claim is that it is no longer tenable for syntactic theories to be constructed on the evidence of a single person's judgements, and that real progress can only be made when syntacticians begin to think more carefully about the empirical basis of their work and apply the minimum standards we propose. We advance two groups of reasons for syntacticians to do this, negative and positive. The negative ‘stick’ group concerns the inadequacy of current practice. We argue that linguists are producing unsatisfactory work with these methods. Data quality is a limiting factor: a theory can only ever be as good as its data base. The positive ‘carrot’ group concerns the descriptive and theoretical advantages which become available with more empirically adequate data. We hope to tempt linguists to adopt new methods by showing them the insights which better data makes available.

Data in generative grammar: The stick and the carrot