Abstract

In this paper we purport to qualify the claim, advanced by Appelbaum (1999) that speech perception research, in the last 70 years or so, has endorsed a view on the nature of speech for which no evidence can be adduced and which has resisted falsification through active ad hoc “theoretical repair” carried by speech scientists. We show that the author’s qualms on the putative dogmatic status of speech research are utterly unwarranted, if not misconstrued as a whole. On more general grounds, the present article can be understood as a work on the rather underdeveloped area of the philosophy and history of Linguistics.