Related categories
Siblings:
101 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
1 — 50 / 101
  1. Filip Bacalu (2012). The Brain Mechanisms of Language. Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations 11:85-90.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Giosue Baggio, Michiel van Lambalgen & Peter Hagoort (2012). Language, Linguistics and Cognition. In Ruth M. Kempson, Tim Fernando & Nicholas Asher (eds.), Philosophy of Linguistics. North Holland
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3. Alex Barber (2007). Linguistic Structure and the Brain. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 7 (3):317-341.
    A popular interpretation of linguistic theories has it that they should describe the brain at a high level of abstraction. One way this has been understood is as the requirement that the theory’s derivational structure reflect (by being isomorphic to) relevant structural properties of the language user’s brain. An important criticisrn of this idea, made originally by Crispin Wright against Gareth Evans in the 1980s, still has purchase, notwithstanding attempts to reply to it, notably by Martin Davies and, indirectly, Christopher (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Edison Barrios (2012). Knowledge of Grammar and Concept Possession. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (3):577-606.
    This article deals with the cognitive relationship between a speaker and her internal grammar. In particular, it takes issue with the view that such a relationship is one of belief or knowledge (I call this view the ‘Propositional Attitude View’, or PAV). I first argue that PAV entails that all ordinary speakers (tacitly) possess technical concepts belonging to syntactic theory, and second, that most ordinary speakers do not in fact possess such concepts. Thus, it is concluded that speakers do not (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Shlomo Bentin & Ram Frost (2001). Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality: A Reply to Boudelaa & Marslen-Wilson. Cognition 81 (1):113-118.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Thomas G. Bever (ed.) (1984). Talking Minds: The Study Of Language In The Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  7. Je Boland (1992). Naming and Lexical Decision Provide a Window Into Syntactic and Semantic Processes. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 30 (6):455-456.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. M. J. Cain (2010). Linguistics, Psychology and the Scientific Study of Language. Dialectica 64 (3):385-404.
    In this paper I address the issue of the subject matter of linguistics. According to the prominent Chomskyan view, linguistics is the study of the language faculty, a component of the mind-brain, and is therefore a branch of cognitive psychology. In his recent book Ignorance of Language Michael Devitt attacks this psychologistic conception of linguistics. I argue that the prominent Chomskyan objections to Devitt's position are not decisive as they stand. However, Devitt's position should ultimately be rejected as there is (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Nick Chater & Christopher D. Manning (2006). Linguistics, Computational Linguistics and Cognitive Science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (7):335-344.
  10. Noam Chomsky (2005). Language and Mind : Current Thoughts on Ancient Problems. In Anjum P. Saleemi, Ocke-Schwen Bohn & Albert Gjedde (eds.), In Search of a Language for the Mind-Brain: Can the Multiple Perspectives Be Unified? Aarhus University Press ;
  11. Noam Chomsky (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. The MIT Press.
    Chomsky proposes a reformulation of the theory of transformational generative grammar that takes recent developments in the descriptive analysis of particular ...
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   951 citations  
  12. Noam A. Chomsky (1980). Rules and Representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (127):1-61.
    The book from which these sections are excerpted is concerned with the prospects for assimilating the study of human intelligence and its products to the natural sciences through the investigation of cognitive structures, understood as systems of rules and representations that can be regarded as These mental structui′es serve as the vehicles for the exercise of various capacities. They develop in the mind on the basis of an innate endowment that permits the growth of rich and highly articulated structures along (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   814 citations  
  13. Noam Chomsky & Jerrold J. Katz (1974). What the Linguist is Talking About. Journal of Philosophy 71 (12):347-367.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  14. Morten H. Christiansen & Nick Chater (2008). Language as Shaped by the Brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (5):489-509.
    It is widely assumed that human learning and the structure of human languages are intimately related. This relationship is frequently suggested to derive from a language-specific biological endowment, which encodes universal, but communicatively arbitrary, principles of language structure (a Universal Grammar or UG). How might such a UG have evolved? We argue that UG could not have arisen either by biological adaptation or non-adaptationist genetic processes, resulting in a logical problem of language evolution. Specifically, as the processes of language change (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   36 citations  
  15. John Collins (2014). Representations Without Representa: Content and Illusion in Linguistic Theory. In Piotr Stalmaszczyk (ed.), Semantics and Beyond: Philosophical and Linguistic Inquiries. De Gruyter 27-64.
  16. John Collins (2007). Review of Devitt 2006b. [REVIEW] Mind 116:416-23.
  17. John Collins, Robert J. Matthews, Barry C. Smith & Brian Epstein (2008). Philosophy of Linguistics. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 8 (22).
  18. Linguistic Competence (1985). N. Chomsky. In Jerrold J. Katz (ed.), The Philosophy of Linguistics. Oxford University Press 80.
  19. Fiona Cowie (1994). Innate Ideas. Dissertation, Princeton University
    Recent years have seen a renewal of the perennial debate concerning innate ideas: Noam Chomsky has argued that much of our knowledge of natural languages is innate; Jerry Fodor has defended the innateness of most concepts. ;Part One concerns the historical controversy over nativism. On the interpretation there developed, nativists have defended two distinct theses. One, based on arguments from the poverty of the stimulus, is a psychological theory postulating special-purpose learning mechanisms. The other, deriving from arguments entailing that learning (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Terry Dartnall (1997). What's Psychological and What's Not? The Act/Content Confusion in Cognitive Science, Artificial Intelligence and Linguistic Theory. In S. O'Nuillain, Paul McKevitt & E. MacAogain (eds.), Two Sciences of Mind. John Benjamins 9--77.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Grace A. de Laguna (1928). Linguistics and the Psychology of Speech. Journal of Philosophy 25 (3):75-78.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. Michael Devitt (2009). Psychological Conception, Psychological Reality. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 9 (1):35-44.
    My book, Ignorance of Language, challenges the received Chomskian “ psychological conception” of grammars and proposes a “linguistic conception” according to which a grammar is a theory of a representational system. My response to Guy Longworth rejects his claim in “Ignorance of Linguistics” that there is “mutual determination” between linguistic and psychological facts with the result that both of these conceptions are true. Peter Slezak’s “Linguistic Explanation and ‘ Psychological Reality ’” is full of flagrant misrepresentations of my discussion of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  23. Michael Devitt (2008). A Response to Collins' Note on Conventions and Unvoiced Syntax. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 8 (2):249-255.
    This paper takes up the two main points in John Collins “Note” (2008b), which responds to my paper, “Explanation and Reality in Linguistics” (2008). (1) Appealing to what grammars actually say, the paper argues that they primarily explain the nature of linguistic expressions. (2) The paper responds to Collins’ criticisms of my view that these expressions have many of their properties by convention.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  24. Michael Devitt (2008). Explanation and Reality in Linguistics. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 8 (2):203-231.
    This paper defends Some anti-Chomskian themes in Ignorance of Language (Devitt 2006a) from, the criticisms of John Collins (2007, 2008a) and Georges Rey (2008). It argues that there is a linguistic reality external to the mind and that it is theoretically interesting to study it. If there is this reality, we have good reason to think that grammars are more or less true of it. So, the truth of the grammar of a language entails that its rules govern linguistic reality, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  25. Michael Devitt (2006). Ignorance of Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    The Chomskian revolution in linguistics gave rise to a new orthodoxy about mind and language. Michael Devitt throws down a provocative challenge to that orthodoxy. What is linguistics about? What role should linguistic intuitions play in constructing grammars? What is innate about language? Is there a 'language faculty'? These questions are crucial to our developing understanding of ourselves; Michael Devitt offers refreshingly original answers. He argues that linguistics is about linguistic reality and is not part of psychology; that linguistic rules (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   32 citations  
  26. Michael Devitt (2006). Intuitions in Linguistics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (3):481-513.
    Linguists take the intuitive judgments of speakers to be good evidence for a grammar. Why? The Chomskian answer is that they are derived by a rational process from a representation of linguistic rules in the language faculty. The paper takes a different view. It argues for a naturalistic and non-Cartesian view of intuitions in general. They are empirical central-processor responses to phenomena differing from other such responses only in being immediate and fairly unreflective. Applying this to linguistic intuitions yields an (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   21 citations  
  27. Michael Devitt (2003). Linguistics is Not Psychology. In Alex Barber (ed.), Epistemology of Language. Oxford University Press
  28. Michael Devitt & Kim Sterelny (1989). Linguistics: What's Wrong with "the Right View". Philosophical Perspectives 3:497-531.
  29. Susan Dwyer & Paul M. Pietroski (1996). Believing in Language. Philosophy of Science 63 (3):338-373.
    We propose that the generalizations of linguistic theory serve to ascribe beliefs to humans. Ordinary speakers would explicitly (and sincerely) deny having these rather esoteric beliefs about language--e.g., the belief that an anaphor must be bound in its governing category. Such ascriptions can also seem problematic in light of certain theoretical considerations having to do with concept possession, revisability, and so on. Nonetheless, we argue that ordinary speakers believe the propositions expressed by certain sentences of linguistic theory, and that linguistics (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  30. Shimon Edelman, On Look-Ahead in Language: Navigating a Multitude of Familiar Paths.
    Language is a rewarding field if you are in the prediction business. A reader who is fluent in English and who knows how academic papers are typically structured will readily come up with several possible guesses as to where the title of this section could have gone, had it not been cut short by the ellipsis. Indeed, in the more natural setting of spoken language, anticipatory processing is a must: performance of machine systems for speech interpretation depends critically on the (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Christina Erneling (1997). Cognitive Science and the Study of Language. In David Martel Johnson & Christina E. Erneling (eds.), The Future of the Cognitive Revolution. Oxford University Press 115.
  32. Thomas A. Farmer, Meredith Brown & Michael K. Tanenhaus (2013). Prediction, Explanation, and the Role of Generative Models in Language Processing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (3):211-212.
    We propose, following Clark, that generative models also play a central role in the perception and interpretation of linguistic signals. The data explanation approach provides a rationale for the role of prediction in language processing and unifies a number of phenomena, including multiple-cue integration, adaptation effects, and cortical responses to violations of linguistic expectations.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  33. G. Fitzgerald, Is Linguistics a Part of Psychology?
    Noam Chomsky, the founding father of generative grammar and the instigator of some of its core research programs, claims that linguistics is a part of psychology, concerned with a class of cognitive structures employed in speaking and understanding. In a recent book, Ignorance of Language, Michael Devitt has challenged certain core aspects of linguistics, as prominent practitioners of the science conceive of it. Among Devitt’s major conclusions is that linguistics is not a part of psychology. In this thesis I defend (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Jerry Fodor & Ernie Lepore, Reply: Impossible Words.
    It matters to a number of projects whether monomorphemic lexical items (‘boy’, ‘cat’, ‘give’, ‘break’, etc.) have internal linguistic structure. (Call the theory that they do the Decomposition Hypothesis (DC).) The cognitive science consensus is, overwhelmingly, that DC is true; for example, that there is a level of grammar at which ‘breaktr’ has the structure ‘cause to breakint’ and so forth. We find this consensus surprising since, as far as we can tell, there is practically no evidence to support it. (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Sandra E. Freedman & Kenneth I. Forster (1985). The Psychological Status of Overgenerated Sentences. Cognition 19 (2):101-131.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  36. R. Freidin (1988). Connectionism and the Study of Language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11 (1):34.
  37. Robert Freidin (1991). Linguistic Theory and Language Acquisition: A Note on Structure-Dependence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (4):618-619.
  38. M. Garrett & J. Fodor (1968). Psycholinguistics, a Field Recently Characterized as Amorphous (Saporta, 1961), has Produced at Least One Issue on Which the Dialogue Between Psy-Chology and Linguistics has Achieved. In T. Dixon & Deryck Horton (eds.), Verbal Behavior and General Behavior Theory. Prentice-Hall 451.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  39. Merrill Garrett & Jerry A. Fodor (1968). Psychological Theories and Linguistic Constructs. In T. Dixon & Deryck Horton (eds.), Verbal Behavior and General Behavior Theory. Prentice-Hall 451--477.
  40. Alexander George (1989). How Not to Become Confused About Linguistics. In A. George (ed.), Reflections on Chomsky. Blackwell 90--110.
  41. Guillermo José Lorenzo González (2011). Language in Cognition. Uncovering Structures and the Rules Behind Them, de Cedric Boeckx. Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 30 (2):191-194.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. Richard E. Grandy (1982). Semantic Intentions and Linguistic Structure: Comments on Schiffer's Paper: ``Intention-Based Semantics''. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 23 (3):327-332.
  43. Prahlad Gupta & David S. Touretzky (1994). Connectionist Models and Linguistic Theory: Investigations of Stress Systems in Language. Cognitive Science 18 (1):1-50.
  44. Vicki L. Hanson, Donald Shankweiler & F. William Fischer (1983). Determinants of Spelling Ability in Deaf and Hearing Adults: Access to Linguistic Structure. Cognition 14 (3):323-344.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  45. Reza Heidarizadi (2014). Phonological Change of Vowel Length in Farsi. SOCRATES 2 (JUNE 2014):50-55.
    Phonological change of vowel length in Farsi -/- Author / Authors : Reza Heidarizadi Page no. 50 - 55 Discipline : Persian Linguistics/language Script/language : Roman/English Category : Research paper Keywords: Farsi vowels, vowel length, Compensatory lengthening.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. G. Hickok, U. Bellugi & E. S. Klima (1998). The Neural Organization of Language: Evidence From Sign Language Aphasia. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2 (4):129-136.
    To what extent is the neural organization of language dependent on factors specific to the modalities in which language is perceived and through which it is produced? That is, is the left-hemisphere dominance for language a function of a linguistic specialization or a function of some domain-general specialization(s), such as temporal processing or motor planning? Investigations of the neurobiology of signed language can help answer these questions. As with spoken languages, signed languages of the deaf display (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  47. G. Hickok, U. Bellugi & E. S. Klima (1998). What's Right About the Neural Organization of Sign Language? A Perspective on Recent Neuroimaging Results. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2 (12):465-468.
    To what extent is the neural organization of language dependent on factors specific to the modalities in which language is perceived and through which it is produced? That is, is the left-hemisphere dominance for language a function of a linguistic specialization or a function of some domain-general specialization, such as temporal processing or motor planning? Investigations of the neurobiology of signed language can help answer these questions. As with spoken languages, signed languages of the deaf display complex grammatical structure but (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  48. James Higginbotham (1991). Remarks on the Metaphysics of Linguistics. Linguistics and Philosophy 14 (5):555 - 566.
  49. Norbert Hornstein & David Lightfoot (1985). Explanation in Linguistics. The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition. Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 47 (2):338-338.
  50. Straight Hs (1976). Comprehension Versus Production in Linguistic Theory. Foundations of Language 14 (4):525-540.
1 — 50 / 101