Cognitive Science 35 (7):1207-1242 (2011)
|Abstract||A central goal of modern generative grammar has been to discover invariant properties of human languages that reflect “the innate schematism of mind that is applied to the data of experience” and that “might reasonably be attributed to the organism itself as its contribution to the task of the acquisition of knowledge” (Chomsky, 1971). Candidates for such invariances include the structure dependence of grammatical rules, and in particular, certain constraints on question formation. Various “poverty of stimulus” (POS) arguments suggest that these invariances reflect an innate human endowment, as opposed to common experience: Such experience warrants selection of the grammars acquired only if humans assume, a priori, that selectable grammars respect substantive constraints. Recently, several researchers have tried to rebut these POS arguments. In response, we illustrate why POS arguments remain an important source of support for appeal to a priori structure-dependent constraints on the grammars that humans naturally acquire|
|Keywords||Statistics Language acquisition Linguistics Syntax|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Stephen Laurence & Eric Margolis (2001). The Poverty of the Stimulus Argument. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (2):217-276.
Shaun Nichols (2005). Innateness and Moral Psychology. In Peter Carruthers, Stephen Laurence & Stephen Stich (eds.), The Innate Mind: Structure and Contents. New York: Oxford University Press New York.
Stephen Crain, Andrea Gualmini & Paul M. Pietroski (2005). Brass Tacks in Linguistic Theory: Innate Grammatical Principles. In Peter Carruthers, Stephen Laurence & Stephen Stich (eds.), The Innate Mind: Structure and Contents. New York: Oxford University Press New York.
Stephen Crain & Paul M. Pietroski (2001). Nature, Nurture, and Universal Grammar. Linguistics And Philosophy 24 (2):139-186.
John Mikhail (2008). The Poverty of the Moral Stimulus. In Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (ed.), Moral Psychology Volume 1. MIT Press.
Christina Behme & H. S. (2008). Language Learning in Infancy: Does the Empirical Evidence Support a Domain Specific Language Acquisition Device? Philosophical Psychology 21 (5):641 – 671.
Joel W. Lidz & S. Waxman (2004). Reaffirming the Poverty of the Stimulus Argument: A Reply to the Replies. Cognition 93 (2):157-165.
William Ramsey & Stephen P. Stich (1990). Connectionism and Three Levels of Nativism. Synthese 82 (2):177-205.
Wendy Lee-Lampshire (1998). The Foundation Walls That Are Carried by the House: A Critique of the Poverty of Stimulus Thesis and a Wittgensteinian-Dennettian Alternative. Journal of Mind and Behavior 19 (2):177-193.
David Papineau (2006). The Cultural Origins of Cognitive Adaptations. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 80 (56):24-.
Paul Pietrowski (2001). Nature, Nurture and Universal Grammar. Linguistics and Philosophy 24 (2):139 - 186.
Added to index2011-08-09
Total downloads113 ( #6,095 of 722,746 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,437 of 722,746 )
How can I increase my downloads?