Abstract
Mind–body dualism has rarely been an issue in the generative study of mind; Chomsky himself has long claimed it to be incoherent and unformulable. We first present and defend this negative argument but then suggest that the generative enterprise may license a rather novel and internalist view of the mind and its place in nature, different from all of, (i) the commonly assumed functionalist metaphysics of generative linguistics, (ii) physicalism, and (iii) Chomsky’s negative stance. Our argument departs from the empirical observation that the linguistic mind gives rise to hierarchies of semantic complexity that we argue (only) follow from constraints of an essentially mathematical kind. We assume that the faculty of language tightly correlates with the mathematical capacity both formally and in evolution, the latter plausibly arising as an abstraction from the former, as a kind of specialized output. On this basis, and since the semantic hierarchies in question are mirrored in the syntactic complexity of the expression involved, we posit the existence of a higher-dimensional syntax structured on the model of the hierarchy of numbers, in order to explain the semantic facts in question. If so, syntax does not have a physicalist interpretation any more than the hierarchy of number-theoretic spaces does.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amundson R. (1994). Two Concepts of Constraint. Philosophy of Science 61:556–578
Baker, M.: 2006, ‘The Lego of Sentence Structure’, the 2005 Blackwell/Maryland Lectures on Language and Cognition
Baker, M. C.: 1988, Incorporation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Barrett, J.: 2006, ‘A Quantum-mechanical Argument for Mind-body Dualism’, Erkenntnis (DOI 10.1007/s10670-006-9016-z)
Borer H. (2005). Structuring Sense. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Block, N.: 1995, ‘The Mind as the Software of the Brain’, in D. N. Osherson and E. E. Smith (eds.), Thinking. An Invitation to Cognitive Science, Vol. 3, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 377–426.
Bloom, P.: 2004, Descartes' Baby, Basic Books, New York.
Brock, W. H.: 1992, The Fontana History of Chemistry, Fontana Press, London.
Chalmers, D. J.: 1996, The Conscious Mind, Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford.
Chierchia, G.: 1998, ‘Reference to Kinds across Languages’, Natural Language Semantics 6, 339–405.
Chomsky N. (1956). Three Models for the Description of Language. IRE Transactions on Information Theory IT-2(3):113–124
Chomsky, N.: 1959, ‘A Review of B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior’, Language 35(1), 26–58.
Chomsky N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Chomsky N. (1966). Cartesian Linguistics. Harper and Row, New York and London
Chomsky N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Chomsky, N.: 2000, New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Chomsky, N.: 2003, ‘Replies to Critics’, in L. Antony and N. Hornstein (eds.), Chomsky and his Critics, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 255–328.
Chomsky, N.: 2005, On Phases, MIT, Ms., Cambridge.
Churchland P. (1981). Eliminative Materialism and the Propositional Attitudes. Journal of Philosophy 78:67–90
Collins, C.: 2002, ‘Eliminating Labels’, in S. Epstein and D. Seely (eds.), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Blackwell, Cambridge, pp. 42–64.
Conway J. H., Smith D. A. (2001). On Quaternions and Octonions: Their Geometry, Arithmetic, and Symmetry. AK Peters, Natick, MA
Fodor, J.: 1990, A Theory of Content, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Fodor J. (1998). Concepts. Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong. Clarendon, Oxford
Fodor, J.: 2000, ‘The Mind Doesn’t Work that Way’, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Fodor, J. and E. Lepore: 1998, ‘The Emptiness of the Lexicon’, Linguistic Inquiry 29(2), 269–288.
Hale K., Keyser S. J. (2002). Prolegomena to a Theory of Argument Structure. MIT Press, Cambridge
Higginbotham J. (1991). Remarks on the Metaphysics of Linguistics. Linguistics & Philosophy 14:555–566
Hinzen, W.: 2006a, Mind Design and Minimal Syntax, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Hinzen, W.: 2006b, ‘Dualism and the Atoms of Thought’ (to appear)
Hinzen, W.: 2007, An Essay on Names and Truth, Oxford University Press, Oxford (forthcoming)
Jackendoff, R.: 2002, Foundations of Language, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Kayne R. (1984). Connectedness and Binary Branching. Foris, Dordrecth
Langendoen, T. and P. M. Postal: 1984, The Vastness of Natural Language, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lasnik H. (2000). Syntactic Structures Revisited. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Lewis, D.: 1994, ‘Reduction of Mind’, in T. O’Connor and D. Robb (eds.) 2003, Philosophy of Mind – Contemporary Readings, Routledge, London.
Meixner, U.: 2005, ‘Physicalism, Dualism, and Intellectual Honesty’, Dualism Review 1.
Mourelatos, A.: 1978, ‘Event, Processes and States’, Linguistics and Philosophy 2–3, 415–434.
Penrose, R.: 1994, Shadows of the Mind, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Putnam, H.: 1981, Reason, Truth, and History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Rey, G.: 2003, ‘Chomsky, Intentionality and a CRTT’, in L. Antony and N. Hornstein (eds.), Chomsky and his Critics, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 105–139
Rogers J. (1998). A Descriptive Approach to Language-theoretic Complexity. CSLI Publications, Stanford
Shapiro, S.: 2005, ‘Higher-order Logic’, in S. Shapiro (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of␣Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.␣751–780.
Stapp, H. P.: 2006, ‘Quantum Interactive Dualism, II’, Erkenntnis (DOI 10.1007/s10670-006-9017-y)
Uriagereka, J.: 1998, Rhyme and Reason: An Introduction to Minimalist Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Uriagereka, J.: 2002, Derivations, Routledge, London, UK.
Uriagereka, J.: (forthcoming), Syntactic Anchors (On Semantic Structures), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Yolton, J. W.: 1983, Thinking Matter. Materialism in 18th Century Britain, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Carlo Cecchetto, Rob Chametzky, and Helmut Weiss for their generous and inquisitive comments on these highly unusual subjects.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hinzen, W., Uriagereka, J. On the Metaphysics of Linguistics. Erkenntnis 65, 71–96 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-006-9015-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-006-9015-0