Graduate studies at Western
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (5):522-523 (2008)
|Abstract||This commentary aims to highlight what exactly is controversial about the traditional Universal Grammar (UG) hypothesis and what is not. There is widespread agreement that we are not born that language universals exist, that grammar exists, and that adults have domain-specific representations of language. The point of contention is whether we should assume that there exist unlearned syntactic universals that are arbitrary and specific to Language|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Julia Herschensohn (1998). Universal Grammar and the Critical Age. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):611-612.
Humphrey P. Polanen Van Petel (2006). Universal Grammar as a Theory of Notation. Axiomathes 16 (4):460-485.
Ray Jackendoff (2003). Précis of Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution,. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (6):651-665.
George Lakoff (1970). Linguistics and Natural Logic. Synthese 22 (1-2):151 - 271.
Aarne Ranta (2009). Type Theory and Universal Grammar. Philosophia Scientiae:115-131.
Noam A. Chomsky (1980). Rules and Representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3:1-61.
John Haiman & Pamela Munro (eds.) (1983). Switch-Reference and Universal Grammar: Proceedings of a Symposium on Switch Reference and Universal Grammar, Winnipeg, May 1981. J. Benjamins Pub. Co..
Gérold Stahl (1986). Á la Recherche d'Une Grammaire Universelle. Theoria 2 (1):61-68.
M. Dolores Jiménez López (2006). A Grammar Systems Approach to Natural Language Grammar. Linguistics and Philosophy 29 (4):419 - 454.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads33 ( #42,005 of 739,328 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?