Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments
Linguistic Review (2002)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,679 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJoel W. Lidz & S. Waxman (2004). Reaffirming the Poverty of the Stimulus Argument: A Reply to the Replies. Cognition 93 (2):157-165.
Robert C. Berwick, Paul Pietroski, Beracah Yankama & Noam Chomsky (2011). Poverty of the Stimulus Revisited. Cognitive Science 35 (7):1207-1242.
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.
John Mikhail (2008). The Poverty of the Moral Stimulus. In Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (ed.), Moral Psychology Volume 1. MIT Press.
Geoffrey K. Pullum (1996). Learnability, Hyperlearning, and the Poverty of the Stimulus. In J. Johnson, M. L. Juge & J. L. Moxley (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting: General Session and Parasession on the Role of Learnability in Grammatical Theory. Berkeley, California: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
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.
Stephen Laurence & Eric Margolis (2001). The Poverty of the Stimulus Argument. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (2):217-276.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads10 ( #106,301 of 549,087 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,087 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
