Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (5):518-519 (2008)
Selection through iterated learning explains no more than other non-functional accounts, such as Universal Grammar (UG), why language is so well designed for communicative efficiency. It does not predict several distinctive features of language, such as central embedding, large lexicons, or the lack of iconicity, which seem to serve communication purposes at the expense of learnability
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Evolution, Selection, and Cognition: From Learning to Parameter Setting in Biology and in the Study of Language.Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini - 1989 - Cognition 31 (1):1-44.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Communication, Accountability and Professional Discourse: The Interaction of Language Values and Ethical Values. [REVIEW]H. W. Love - 1992 - Journal of Business Ethics 11 (11):883-892.
In Defense of Public Language.Ruth G. Millikan - 2003 - In Louise M. Antony & H. Hornstein (eds.), Chomsky and His Critics. Blackwell.
Cosmopolitan Communication and the Broken Dream of a Common Language.Niclas Rönnström - 2011 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 43 (3):260-282.
Language, Thought, and Communication.Gilbert Harman - 1975 - Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7:270-298.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #427,147 of 2,158,204 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #356,322 of 2,158,204 )
How can I increase my downloads?