2. 2
Slides on the net at:Slides on the net at:
http://http-server.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/http://http-server.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/
http://http-http://http-
server.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/online_courses/Mind_World_andserver.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/online_courses/Mind_World_and
_knowledge/_knowledge/
3. 3
Chomsky’s EpiphenomenalismChomsky’s Epiphenomenalism
about Languageabout Language
LanguageLanguage vs.vs. GrammarGrammar
““Grammar” is a precise definite term while “language”Grammar” is a precise definite term while “language”
is a vague and derivative term which we could wellis a vague and derivative term which we could well
dispense of, without much loss.dispense of, without much loss.
The grammar in someone mind/brain is real whileThe grammar in someone mind/brain is real while
language is not.language is not.
4. 4
The aim of linguistics can be summarized by fourThe aim of linguistics can be summarized by four
questions.questions.
11.. What constitutes knowledge of language?What constitutes knowledge of language?
22.. How is such knowledge acquired?How is such knowledge acquired?
33.. How is such knowledge put to use?How is such knowledge put to use?
44.. What are the physical mechanisms that serve as theWhat are the physical mechanisms that serve as the
material basis?material basis?
5. 5
DeepDeep vs.vs. Surface StructureSurface Structure
Port Royal Grammar (1660)Port Royal Grammar (1660)
It is heavily influenced by Descartes.It is heavily influenced by Descartes.
It aims to propose the general form of any possibleIt aims to propose the general form of any possible
grammar.grammar.
In so doing it elaborates the universal structureIn so doing it elaborates the universal structure
underlying the “natural manner in which we expressunderlying the “natural manner in which we express
our thoughts”.our thoughts”.
6. 6
TheThe inner/outerinner/outer aspect of languageaspect of language
According to Port Royal grammarians we mustAccording to Port Royal grammarians we must
distinguish between language having an inner and andistinguish between language having an inner and an
outer aspect.outer aspect.
Hence we distinguish between a sentenceHence we distinguish between a sentence quaqua
expression of a thoughtexpression of a thought andand the physical shapethe physical shape of aof a
sentence (i.e. an utterance).sentence (i.e. an utterance).
To show the structure of the mind the grammar shouldTo show the structure of the mind the grammar should
reflectreflect properties of all mindsproperties of all minds, it should be, it should be universaluniversal..
7. 7
Mental GrammarMental Grammar
The deep structure is often only implicit and does notThe deep structure is often only implicit and does not
get expressed. It is only represented in the mind.get expressed. It is only represented in the mind.
The same deep structure can be realized differently inThe same deep structure can be realized differently in
different languages (e.g.: “Video canem currentum” anddifferent languages (e.g.: “Video canem currentum” and
“Je vois un chien qui court”).“Je vois un chien qui court”).
The rules of this grammar are not represented in theThe rules of this grammar are not represented in the
language user: they are simply there. Yet they must belanguage user: they are simply there. Yet they must be
“learned”. But see poverty of the stimulus argument.“learned”. But see poverty of the stimulus argument.
8. 8
Transformation RulesTransformation Rules
There are transformation rules operating from deep toThere are transformation rules operating from deep to
surface structure. It is the linguist’s job to figure outsurface structure. It is the linguist’s job to figure out
these rules.these rules.
The grammarians of Port Royal are the first toThe grammarians of Port Royal are the first to
recognize the two systems of rules:recognize the two systems of rules:
1.1. A base system generatingA base system generating deep structure.deep structure.
2.2. AA transformational systemtransformational system mapping these deepmapping these deep
structures into surface structure.structures into surface structure.
9. 9
UGUG
UG corresponds to the deep structure. Since it is theUG corresponds to the deep structure. Since it is the
expression of thought, it is common to all languages.expression of thought, it is common to all languages.
It is thus universal. Hence Universal Grammar, UG.It is thus universal. Hence Universal Grammar, UG.
The transformation rules converting the deep structureThe transformation rules converting the deep structure
into surface structure may differ from language tointo surface structure may differ from language to
language.language.
Different outputs can correspond to the same innerDifferent outputs can correspond to the same inner
structure.structure.
10. 10
Port RoyalPort Royal
Within the Cartesian tradition exemplified by theWithin the Cartesian tradition exemplified by the
grammarians of Port Royal, the deep structure is whatgrammarians of Port Royal, the deep structure is what
constitutes the meaning (sense) in the mind.constitutes the meaning (sense) in the mind.
It can be transmitted in different way (e.g.:It can be transmitted in different way (e.g.:
active/passive).active/passive).
E.g.: different languages or different surface structuresE.g.: different languages or different surface structures
transmit the same meaning/sense which is a mentaltransmit the same meaning/sense which is a mental
entity.entity.
11. 11
NowadaysNowadays UG means theUG means the initial stateinitial state of a languageof a language
learner.learner.
It is the “innate” (genetically transmitted) aspect ofIt is the “innate” (genetically transmitted) aspect of
grammatical rules; thegrammatical rules; the language instinctlanguage instinct (Pinker).(Pinker).
It is that aspect of the human mind that causes one toIt is that aspect of the human mind that causes one to
learn the language.learn the language.
UGUG quaqua initial state isinitial state is biologically determinedbiologically determined..
As such, it does not belong to a specific language.As such, it does not belong to a specific language.
12. 12
UG need not be supposed to be what is universalUG need not be supposed to be what is universal
among languagesamong languages (see Jackendoff 2002: 72ff.).(see Jackendoff 2002: 72ff.).
It is merely theIt is merely the humanhuman capacitycapacity, i.e., the, i.e., the initial stateinitial state,,
allowing one to learnallowing one to learn aa language.language.
The aspects of the initial state one ends up using inThe aspects of the initial state one ends up using in
one’s learning periods depends on the stimuli/input.one’s learning periods depends on the stimuli/input.
Languages (inputs) affect the development of the initialLanguages (inputs) affect the development of the initial
state and thus the outputs one ends up producing (cf.state and thus the outputs one ends up producing (cf.
switches metaphor explaining the learning ofswitches metaphor explaining the learning of
phonetics).phonetics).
13. 13
InnateInnate
We do not necessarily mean that it is present at birth orWe do not necessarily mean that it is present at birth or
in an embryo.in an embryo.
It rather means that itIt rather means that it automatically appearsautomatically appears duringduring
the development, regardless on whether it is present atthe development, regardless on whether it is present at
birth or not.birth or not.
It does not mean that it is free from the input of theIt does not mean that it is free from the input of the
environment. E.g. vision capacity.environment. E.g. vision capacity.
14. 14
DeepDeep vsvs. Surface Structure, and Creativity. Surface Structure, and Creativity
The deep/surface structure distinction is what helpsThe deep/surface structure distinction is what helps
explaining linguistic creativity.explaining linguistic creativity.
The Port Royal’s distinction between deep and surfaceThe Port Royal’s distinction between deep and surface
structure implicitly contains recursive devices allowingstructure implicitly contains recursive devices allowing
for infinite uses of the finite means that it disposes.for infinite uses of the finite means that it disposes.
The deep structure is what gets represented in the mindThe deep structure is what gets represented in the mind
when a sentence is produced/heard (see LF).when a sentence is produced/heard (see LF).
15. 15
Linguistic creativityLinguistic creativity and theand the argument for mentalargument for mental
grammargrammar
The expressive variety of language use implies that theThe expressive variety of language use implies that the
brain of a linguistically competent user contains a set ofbrain of a linguistically competent user contains a set of
unconscious grammatical principles.unconscious grammatical principles.
(cf. Jackendoff(cf. Jackendoff R. 1994.R. 1994. Patterns in the MindPatterns in the Mind. Basic Books. Basic Books
Harper Collins, New YorkHarper Collins, New York: 6).: 6).
16. 16
LOTLOT
In adopting the language of thought hypothesis, LOTIn adopting the language of thought hypothesis, LOT
(or Mentalese) the argument for mental grammar can be(or Mentalese) the argument for mental grammar can be
stated along the compositional principle for thoughts, orstated along the compositional principle for thoughts, or
what Fodor characterizes as the productivity of thought.what Fodor characterizes as the productivity of thought.
The classical argument that mental states are complex adverts toThe classical argument that mental states are complex adverts to
the productivity of the attitudes … The LOT story is, of course, athe productivity of the attitudes … The LOT story is, of course, a
paradigm of this sort of explanation, since it takes believing toparadigm of this sort of explanation, since it takes believing to
involve a relation to a syntactically structured object for which ainvolve a relation to a syntactically structured object for which a
compositional semantics is assumed. (Fodor J. 1987.compositional semantics is assumed. (Fodor J. 1987.
PsychosemanticsPsychosemantics. MIT: 147-8). MIT: 147-8)
17. 17
LogicalLogical vsvs. Grammatical Form. Grammatical Form
Arnauld & Nicole (inArnauld & Nicole (in PortPort Royal LogicRoyal Logic 1662: 160)1662: 160)
highlight the difference between deep (logical) structurehighlight the difference between deep (logical) structure
and surface (grammatical) structure.and surface (grammatical) structure.
In:In:
(1)(1) Now few pastors at the present time areNow few pastors at the present time are
ready to give their life for their flocksready to give their life for their flocks
the grammatical (surface) structure is affirmative, whilethe grammatical (surface) structure is affirmative, while
its underlying structure (LF) is negative.its underlying structure (LF) is negative.
18. 18
(1) contains the implicit negative sentence (“it contains(1) contains the implicit negative sentence (“it contains
this negation in its meaning”):this negation in its meaning”):
(1a)(1a) Several pastors at the present time are not ready toSeveral pastors at the present time are not ready to
give their lives for their flocksgive their lives for their flocks
The same with:The same with:
(2)(2) Come see meCome see me
whose deep structure is:whose deep structure is:
(2a)(2a) I order/beg you to come see meI order/beg you to come see me
19. 19
According to the Port Royal grammarians there is aAccording to the Port Royal grammarians there is a
transformationtransformation enabling to go from (1a/2a) (deepenabling to go from (1a/2a) (deep
structure) to (1/2) (surface structure).structure) to (1/2) (surface structure).
We have hidden underlying structure and a grammaticalWe have hidden underlying structure and a grammatical
transformations operating between the deep structuretransformations operating between the deep structure
(LF) and the surface (or grammatical) structure.(LF) and the surface (or grammatical) structure.
E.g.: the surface structure “Only the friends of God areE.g.: the surface structure “Only the friends of God are
happy” is a transformation of the deep structure “Thehappy” is a transformation of the deep structure “The
friends of God are happy”friends of God are happy” andand “all other who are not“all other who are not
friend of God are not happy”.friend of God are not happy”.
20. 20
UnderstandingUnderstanding
To understand a sentence one must grasp the sense, i.e.To understand a sentence one must grasp the sense, i.e.
the meaning (“natural order”) the speaker has in mind.the meaning (“natural order”) the speaker has in mind.
One grasps it in reconstructing its meaning, i.e. inOne grasps it in reconstructing its meaning, i.e. in
coming to entertain its underlying structure (LF) andcoming to entertain its underlying structure (LF) and
the meanings of the single words.the meanings of the single words.
The fundamental principles at work areThe fundamental principles at work are reorderingreordering andand
ellipsisellipsis which enable the hearer to recover in her mindwhich enable the hearer to recover in her mind
the meaning the speaker has in her.the meaning the speaker has in her.
21. 21
Linguistic explanation andLinguistic explanation and
descriptiondescription
Grammaire GénéraleGrammaire Générale (Port Royal)(Port Royal)
Cartesian linguistics did not confine to a mereCartesian linguistics did not confine to a mere
description of a language and its grammar.description of a language and its grammar.
It aimed to capture the universal (mental) structureIt aimed to capture the universal (mental) structure
underlying languages.underlying languages.
22. 22
Port Royal grammar, like modern (Chomsky’s inspired)Port Royal grammar, like modern (Chomsky’s inspired)
linguistics can be viewed as a branch of psychology orlinguistics can be viewed as a branch of psychology or
cognitive sciences.cognitive sciences.
The general grammar is a kind of universal grammar.The general grammar is a kind of universal grammar.
As such, it differs from the special grammar which isAs such, it differs from the special grammar which is
language specific. It differs from the grammar oflanguage specific. It differs from the grammar of
English, Chinese, etc.English, Chinese, etc.
23. 23
Linguistics/General Grammar as a ScienceLinguistics/General Grammar as a Science
General Grammar is … the rational science of the immutableGeneral Grammar is … the rational science of the immutable
and general principle of spoken and written language, whateverand general principle of spoken and written language, whatever
language this may be … General Grammar is a science, becauselanguage this may be … General Grammar is a science, because
its object is rational speculation on the immutable and generalits object is rational speculation on the immutable and general
principle of language … The science of grammar is anterior to allprinciple of language … The science of grammar is anterior to all
languages in so far as its objects presuppose only the possibilitylanguages in so far as its objects presuppose only the possibility
of languages and are the same as those which guide humanof languages and are the same as those which guide human
reason in its intellectual operations … because they are eternallyreason in its intellectual operations … because they are eternally
true (Bauzé 1767).true (Bauzé 1767).
24. 24
Shortcomings of CartesianShortcomings of Cartesian
Linguistics (1600-1700)Linguistics (1600-1700)
The underlying assumptionThe underlying assumption
UG (the abstract structure underlying a naturalUG (the abstract structure underlying a natural
language sentence) is a kind of sentence itself.language sentence) is a kind of sentence itself.
It is generally assumed that deep structure consists ofIt is generally assumed that deep structure consists of
actual sentences in a simpler or more naturalactual sentences in a simpler or more natural
organization.organization.
25. 25
The underlying assumption isThe underlying assumption is gratuitous and can begratuitous and can be
dismisseddismissed..
It rests on the Cartesian idea that the general principlesIt rests on the Cartesian idea that the general principles
underlying and determining our thoughts andunderlying and determining our thoughts and
perceptions must beperceptions must be accessibleaccessible toto introspectionintrospection andand
can be brought to consciousness with care andcan be brought to consciousness with care and
attention.attention.
If we assume that UG isIf we assume that UG is unconsciousunconscious we don’t have towe don’t have to
assume that the general principle are sentence-likeassume that the general principle are sentence-like
entities.entities.
26. 26
Language acquisitionLanguage acquisition
Universal ConditionsUniversal Conditions
They are not learned and must exist for languageThey are not learned and must exist for language
knowledge to be explained.knowledge to be explained.
They are the pre-requisite leading to knowledge:They are the pre-requisite leading to knowledge:
principles or notions implanted in the mind … a direct gift ofprinciples or notions implanted in the mind … a direct gift of
Nature, a percept of natural instinct … [they] remain latent whenNature, a percept of natural instinct … [they] remain latent when
their corresponding objects are not present, and even disappeartheir corresponding objects are not present, and even disappear
and give no sign of their existence (Herder 1624).and give no sign of their existence (Herder 1624).
27. 27
This contrasts with the empiricist view thatThis contrasts with the empiricist view that
our mind is a clean sheet, as though we obtained our capacity forour mind is a clean sheet, as though we obtained our capacity for
dealing with objects from objects themselves (Herder 1624).dealing with objects from objects themselves (Herder 1624).
The mind is not aThe mind is not a tabulatabula rasarasa..
28. 28
Nativism/InnatismNativism/Innatism
The universal principles are innate and implicit.The universal principles are innate and implicit.
Yet, we may require external stimulus to activate themYet, we may require external stimulus to activate them
and make them available to introspection.and make them available to introspection.
This is one of the main principles underlying theThis is one of the main principles underlying the
psychology of Cartesian linguistics and rationalism inpsychology of Cartesian linguistics and rationalism in
general (see e.g. Leibniz).general (see e.g. Leibniz).
[I]t is true that it is purely arbitrary to connect a certain idea to[I]t is true that it is purely arbitrary to connect a certain idea to
one particular sound rather than another. But ideas—at leastone particular sound rather than another. But ideas—at least
those that are clear and distinct—are not at all arbitrary thingsthose that are clear and distinct—are not at all arbitrary things
depending on our fancy. (Arnauld & Nicole 1662: 28)depending on our fancy. (Arnauld & Nicole 1662: 28)
29. 29
Plato’s ProblemPlato’s Problem
Nativism provides a solution to Plato’s problem (cf.Nativism provides a solution to Plato’s problem (cf.
Plato’sPlato’s MenoMeno andand TheaetetusTheaetetus).).
For it provides a science of language that shows how anFor it provides a science of language that shows how an
internal biological mechanism can, with little input frominternal biological mechanism can, with little input from
the external environment (poverty of the stimulithe external environment (poverty of the stimuli
argument) develop (almost automatically) in eachargument) develop (almost automatically) in each
individual the rich competence known as “knowing aindividual the rich competence known as “knowing a
language”.language”.
30. 30
Solving Plato’s problem for language acquisitionSolving Plato’s problem for language acquisition
It involves saying bothIt involves saying both whatwhat is known when one knowsis known when one knows
a language anda language and howhow one comes to know it.one comes to know it.
We should do this with a science of the mind, notWe should do this with a science of the mind, not
philosophical speculations.philosophical speculations.
31. 31
ChomskyChomsky vsvs. Plato. Plato
Plato appeals to myth, invoking the pre-existence of thePlato appeals to myth, invoking the pre-existence of the
boy’s soul with other souls in the world of Formsboy’s soul with other souls in the world of Forms
(ideas) and in going trough a process of reminiscence.(ideas) and in going trough a process of reminiscence.
Chomsky solves it in proposing a naturalistic theory ofChomsky solves it in proposing a naturalistic theory of
a biological system that makes language acquisitiona biological system that makes language acquisition
virtually automatic.virtually automatic.
32. 32
General Presuppositions of CartesianGeneral Presuppositions of Cartesian
LinguisticsLinguistics
The principle of language and natural logic are knownThe principle of language and natural logic are known
unconsciously and they are in large part a preconditionunconsciously and they are in large part a precondition
for language acquisition rather than a matter offor language acquisition rather than a matter of
institution or training.institution or training.
Linguistics as a science trying to bring to light theseLinguistics as a science trying to bring to light these
underlying principles becomes a branch of psychology.underlying principles becomes a branch of psychology.
Thus this art [logic or art of thinking] does not consist in findingThus this art [logic or art of thinking] does not consist in finding
the mean to perform these operations, since nature alonethe mean to perform these operations, since nature alone
furnished them in giving us reason, but in reflecting on whatfurnished them in giving us reason, but in reflecting on what
nature makes us do. (Arnauld & Nicole 1662: 23)nature makes us do. (Arnauld & Nicole 1662: 23)
33. 33
The Poverty of the StimulusThe Poverty of the Stimulus
ArgumentArgument
General language-acquisition schemaGeneral language-acquisition schema
InputInput →→ LADLAD →→ OutputOutput
(primary(primary (Grammar consisting of(Grammar consisting of
linguistic data)linguistic data) principles, parametersprinciples, parameters
and lexicon)and lexicon)
34. 34
Language acquisition is a matter of growth andLanguage acquisition is a matter of growth and
maturation of relatively fixed principles undermaturation of relatively fixed principles under
appropriate external conditions and training.appropriate external conditions and training.
Cf. growth and maturation of bones: the structure ofCf. growth and maturation of bones: the structure of
the bones is genetically programmed, yet it needsthe bones is genetically programmed, yet it needs
exercise to develop.exercise to develop.
35. 35
CreolizationCreolization
One learns a language because one is programmed toOne learns a language because one is programmed to
learn a language, i.e. because of one’s initial state, UG.learn a language, i.e. because of one’s initial state, UG.
The process of creolization underlies what happensThe process of creolization underlies what happens
when a child learns her mother tongue in normalwhen a child learns her mother tongue in normal
situations.situations.
The same kind of linguistic genius is involved every time a childThe same kind of linguistic genius is involved every time a child
learns his or her mother tongue. ... let us do away with thelearns his or her mother tongue. ... let us do away with the
folklore that parents teach their children language. (S. Pinker.folklore that parents teach their children language. (S. Pinker.
1994.1994. The Language InstinctThe Language Instinct: 39): 39)
36. 36
The crux of the argument is that complex language is universalThe crux of the argument is that complex language is universal
becausebecause children actually reinvent itchildren actually reinvent it, generation after, generation after
generation — not because they are taught, not because they aregeneration — not because they are taught, not because they are
generally smart, not because it is useful to them, but because theygenerally smart, not because it is useful to them, but because they
just can’t help it. (Pinker 1994: 32)just can’t help it. (Pinker 1994: 32)
The argument of innate knowledgeThe argument of innate knowledge
It rests on theIt rests on the actualactual way children acquire their motherway children acquire their mother
tongue.tongue.
It is an empirical hypothesis which posits that our brainIt is an empirical hypothesis which posits that our brain
is genetically programmed to invent a language.is genetically programmed to invent a language.
37. 37
ChomskyChomsky
Large-scale sensory deficit seems to have limited effect onLarge-scale sensory deficit seems to have limited effect on
language acquisition. Blind children acquire language as thelanguage acquisition. Blind children acquire language as the
sighted do, even color terms and words for visual experience likesighted do, even color terms and words for visual experience like
“see” and “look.”“see” and “look.” There are people who have achieved closeThere are people who have achieved close
to normal linguistic competence with no sensory inputto normal linguistic competence with no sensory input
beyond that can be gained by placing one’s hand onbeyond that can be gained by placing one’s hand on
another person’s face and throat.another person’s face and throat. The analytic mechanismThe analytic mechanism
of the language faculty seem to be triggered in much theof the language faculty seem to be triggered in much the
same way whether the input is auditory, visual, evensame way whether the input is auditory, visual, even
tactual, and seem to be localized in the same brain areastactual, and seem to be localized in the same brain areas,,
somewhat surprisingly.somewhat surprisingly.
38. 38
These examples ofThese examples of impoverished input indicate the richnessimpoverished input indicate the richness
of innate endowmentof innate endowment — though normal language acquisition is— though normal language acquisition is
remarkable enough, as even lexical access shows, not onlyremarkable enough, as even lexical access shows, not only
because of its rapidity and the intricacy of result. Thus verybecause of its rapidity and the intricacy of result. Thus very
young children can determine the meaning of a nonsense wordyoung children can determine the meaning of a nonsense word
from syntactic information in a sentence far more complex thatfrom syntactic information in a sentence far more complex that
they can produce.they can produce.
A plausible assumption today is that theA plausible assumption today is that the principles ofprinciples of
language are fixed and innatelanguage are fixed and innate, and that variations is restricted, and that variations is restricted
in the manner indicated. Each language, then, is (virtually)in the manner indicated. Each language, then, is (virtually)
determined by a choice of values for lexical parameters: with thedetermined by a choice of values for lexical parameters: with the
array of choices, we should be able to deduce Hungarian; witharray of choices, we should be able to deduce Hungarian; with
another, Yoruba. … The conditions of language acquisitionanother, Yoruba. … The conditions of language acquisition
make it plain that the process must bemake it plain that the process must be largely inner-directed,largely inner-directed,
as in other aspects of growth, which means that allas in other aspects of growth, which means that all
languages must be close to identical, largely fixed by initiallanguages must be close to identical, largely fixed by initial
statestate. (Chomsky 2000.. (Chomsky 2000. New Horizons …New Horizons … : 121-2): 121-2)
39. 39
The paradox of language acquisitionThe paradox of language acquisition
[A]n entire community of highly trained professionals, bringing[A]n entire community of highly trained professionals, bringing
to bear years of conscious attention and sharing of information,to bear years of conscious attention and sharing of information,
has beenhas been unable to duplicate the feat that every normal childunable to duplicate the feat that every normal child
accomplishes by the age of ten or so, unconsciously andaccomplishes by the age of ten or so, unconsciously and
unaidedunaided. (Jackendoff 1994: 26). (Jackendoff 1994: 26)
40. 40
Language Perception and UnderstandingLanguage Perception and Understanding
Perception of speech rests on innate discriminatoryPerception of speech rests on innate discriminatory
capacities.capacities.
There is a fundamental difference between theThere is a fundamental difference between the
perception of speech and the perception ofperception of speech and the perception of
unarticulated sounds.unarticulated sounds.
Speech perception, unlike visual perception forSpeech perception, unlike visual perception for
instance, requires the activation of the generative rulesinstance, requires the activation of the generative rules
playing the role in the production of speech.playing the role in the production of speech.
41. 41
Both the perceptual mechanism and the mechanism ofBoth the perceptual mechanism and the mechanism of
speech production make use of the same underlyingspeech production make use of the same underlying
system of generative rules.system of generative rules.
It is because these underlying systems are the sameIt is because these underlying systems are the same
among us that communication can occur.among us that communication can occur.
It is because of this uniformity of human nature that weIt is because of this uniformity of human nature that we
talk the way we do and succeed in understanding eachtalk the way we do and succeed in understanding each
others (cf. Humboldt 1836).others (cf. Humboldt 1836).
42. 42
Every young child (raised in an English speakingEvery young child (raised in an English speaking
community) would know that in English ‘blug’ iscommunity) would know that in English ‘blug’ is
phonetically possible while ‘bkr’ is not. And they knowphonetically possible while ‘bkr’ is not. And they know
it without being told.it without being told.
Science ofScience of Intelligent BehaviourIntelligent Behaviour
It may be within the boundary of some other cognitiveIt may be within the boundary of some other cognitive
beings (Martians, God) but it transcends humanbeings (Martians, God) but it transcends human
capacities.capacities.
43. 43
ReasonsReasons vsvs. causes. causes
Wittgenstein (Wittgenstein (Blue BookBlue Book) says that in explaining action in) says that in explaining action in
terms of their coherence and appropriateness withterms of their coherence and appropriateness with
respect to human aims etc. we “give reasons”, not “giverespect to human aims etc. we “give reasons”, not “give
causes”.causes”.
When talking about creative linguistic actions ChomskyWhen talking about creative linguistic actions Chomsky
and Descartes seem to accept Wittgenstein’s view inand Descartes seem to accept Wittgenstein’s view in
assuming that we are giving reasons, not causes.assuming that we are giving reasons, not causes.
44. 44
Descartes’Descartes’ dualismdualism
It was a scientific hypothesis dictated by the science ofIt was a scientific hypothesis dictated by the science of
his time (mechanism).his time (mechanism).
Descartes did not have at his disposal the biologicalDescartes did not have at his disposal the biological
science of our time, he did not know of geneticscience of our time, he did not know of genetic
transmission and could not possibly imagine howtransmission and could not possibly imagine how
human cognition can rest to such an extent on ahuman cognition can rest to such an extent on a
biological base of concept and structure acquisition.biological base of concept and structure acquisition.
Descartes could not imagine that these biologicalDescartes could not imagine that these biological
mechanisms need only a little input to produce richmechanisms need only a little input to produce rich
conceptual material.conceptual material.
45. 45
At presentAt present little is knownlittle is known on how UG is embodied inon how UG is embodied in
the brain.the brain.
UG is considered as a computational system in theUG is considered as a computational system in the
head, but we do not know about the specific operationshead, but we do not know about the specific operations
of the brain itself and what leads to the development ofof the brain itself and what leads to the development of
these computational systems.these computational systems.
46. 46
A plausible view is that language is a distinct andA plausible view is that language is a distinct and
specific part of the human mind and not a manifestationspecific part of the human mind and not a manifestation
of a more general capacity or ability (of generalof a more general capacity or ability (of general
intelligence).intelligence).
Linguistic capacity rests on a specificLinguistic capacity rests on a specific modulemodule..
It is not the sub-product of a general cognitive capacity.It is not the sub-product of a general cognitive capacity.
47. 47
EvidenceEvidence
People can “lose their intelligence” and yet they do notPeople can “lose their intelligence” and yet they do not
loose their language: substantial retarded children (e.g.loose their language: substantial retarded children (e.g.
Williams syndrome) manifest a good grammatical andWilliams syndrome) manifest a good grammatical and
linguistic competence.linguistic competence.
On the other hand, highly intelligent people may lackOn the other hand, highly intelligent people may lack
linguistic capacity (e.g. aphasia).linguistic capacity (e.g. aphasia).
The fact that two kinds of abilities can dissociate quantitativelyThe fact that two kinds of abilities can dissociate quantitatively
and along multiple dimensions shows that they are notand along multiple dimensions shows that they are not
manifestations of a single underlying ability. (Pinker 2003: 23)manifestations of a single underlying ability. (Pinker 2003: 23)
