What else should a neurobiological theory of language account for?

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (2):291-292 (1999)
We critique five points that impede the target article's far-reaching efforts toward formulating a neurobiological theory of language. Neurolinguistics amounts to no more than neurology in linguistics in this account, because it assumes “perceptual representational isomorphism,” processing autonomy and “meaning,” thereby aiming primarily at justifying modular concepts in terms of associative principles.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 20,481
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

5 ( #505,913 of 1,801,598 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #466,493 of 1,801,598 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.