Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract In this article the notion of linguistic creativity is re-examined. It is shown that the notion of linguistic creativity as propounded by Chomsky (1966), here called generative creativity, reflects linguistic creativity only as the ability of the ideal speaker in a homogenous speech community to combine a finite known stock of elements on the basis of a finite known stock of computational patterns. It is argued that this view does not account for creativity as the open-ended ability of all human beings to create and innovate in various ways and for various motivations. By comparison, the view in diachronic semantics of lexical creativity does account for the notion that human beings can create new meanings as the need arises. It is, however, argued that these two opposing views of linguistic creativity need to be combined and extended to paint a broader canvas of what it really means for all human beings to be linguistically creative. To this end, an initial broad survey of what can be regarded as linguistic creativity is carried out, and a new definition of linguistic creativity is proposed.
Britta Zawada (Thu,) studied this question.