1

77Universal GrammarUniversal Grammar

2

Slides on the net at:Slides on the net at:

http://http-server.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/http://http-server.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/

http://http-http://http-server.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/online_courses/Mind_World_andserver.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/online_courses/Mind_World_and_knowledge/_knowledge/

3

Chomsky’s Epiphenomenalism Chomsky’s Epiphenomenalism about Languageabout Language

Language Language vs. vs. GrammarGrammar

““Grammar” is a precise definite term while “language” Grammar” is a precise definite term while “language” is a vague and derivative term which we could well is a vague and derivative term which we could well dispense of, without much loss.dispense of, without much loss.

The grammar in someone mind/brain is real while The grammar in someone mind/brain is real while language is not.language is not.

4

The aim of linguistics can be summarized by four The aim of linguistics can be summarized by four questions.questions.

11. . What constitutes knowledge of language?What constitutes knowledge of language?

22. . How is such knowledge acquired?How is such knowledge acquired?

33. . How is such knowledge put to use?How is such knowledge put to use?

44. . What are the physical mechanisms that serve as the What are the physical mechanisms that serve as the material basis?material basis?

5

Deep Deep vs.vs. Surface Structure Surface Structure

Port Royal Grammar (1660)Port Royal Grammar (1660)

It is heavily influenced by Descartes. It is heavily influenced by Descartes.

It aims to propose the general form of any possible It aims to propose the general form of any possible grammar. grammar.

In so doing it elaborates the universal structure In so doing it elaborates the universal structure underlying the “natural manner in which we express underlying the “natural manner in which we express our thoughts”.our thoughts”.

6

The The inner/outerinner/outer aspect of language aspect of language

According to Port Royal grammarians we must According to Port Royal grammarians we must distinguish between language having an inner and an distinguish between language having an inner and an outer aspect.outer aspect.

Hence we distinguish between a sentence Hence we distinguish between a sentence quaqua expression of a thoughtexpression of a thought and and the physical shapethe physical shape of a of a sentence (i.e. an utterance).sentence (i.e. an utterance).

To show the structure of the mind the grammar should To show the structure of the mind the grammar should reflect reflect properties of all mindsproperties of all minds, it should be , it should be universaluniversal..

7

Mental GrammarMental Grammar

The deep structure is often only implicit and does not The deep structure is often only implicit and does not get expressed. It is only represented in the mind. get expressed. It is only represented in the mind.

The same deep structure can be realized differently in The same deep structure can be realized differently in different languages (e.g.: “Video canem currentum” and different languages (e.g.: “Video canem currentum” and “Je vois un chien qui court”). “Je vois un chien qui court”).

The rules of this grammar are not represented in the The rules of this grammar are not represented in the language user: they are simply there. Yet they must be language user: they are simply there. Yet they must be “learned”. But see poverty of the stimulus argument.“learned”. But see poverty of the stimulus argument.

8

Transformation RulesTransformation Rules

There are transformation rules operating from deep to There are transformation rules operating from deep to surface structure. It is the linguist’s job to figure out surface structure. It is the linguist’s job to figure out these rules.these rules.

The grammarians of Port Royal are the first to The grammarians of Port Royal are the first to recognize the two systems of rules: recognize the two systems of rules:

1.1. A base system generating A base system generating deep structure.deep structure.

2. 2. A A transformational systemtransformational system mapping these deep mapping these deep structures into surface structure.structures into surface structure.

9

UGUG

UG corresponds to the deep structure. Since it is the UG corresponds to the deep structure. Since it is the expression of thought, it is common to all languages. expression of thought, it is common to all languages.

It is thus universal. Hence Universal Grammar, UG. It is thus universal. Hence Universal Grammar, UG.

The transformation rules converting the deep structure The transformation rules converting the deep structure into surface structure may differ from language to into surface structure may differ from language to language.language.

Different outputs can correspond to the same inner Different outputs can correspond to the same inner structure.structure.

10

Port RoyalPort Royal

Within the Cartesian tradition exemplified by the Within the Cartesian tradition exemplified by the grammarians of Port Royal, the deep structure is what grammarians of Port Royal, the deep structure is what constitutes the meaning (sense) in the mind.constitutes the meaning (sense) in the mind.

It can be transmitted in different way (e.g.: It can be transmitted in different way (e.g.: active/passive).active/passive).

E.g.: different languages or different surface structures E.g.: different languages or different surface structures transmit the same meaning/sense which is a mental transmit the same meaning/sense which is a mental entity.entity.

11

NowadaysNowadays UG means the UG means the initial stateinitial state of a language of a language learner.learner.

It is the “innate” (genetically transmitted) aspect of It is the “innate” (genetically transmitted) aspect of grammatical rules; the grammatical rules; the language instinctlanguage instinct (Pinker). (Pinker).

It is that aspect of the human mind that causes one to It is that aspect of the human mind that causes one to learn the language. learn the language.

UG UG quaqua initial state is initial state is biologically determinedbiologically determined..

As such, it does not belong to a specific language.As such, it does not belong to a specific language.

12

UG need not be supposed to be what is universal UG need not be supposed to be what is universal among languagesamong languages (see Jackendoff 2002: 72ff.). (see Jackendoff 2002: 72ff.).

It is merely the It is merely the human human capacitycapacity, i.e., the , i.e., the initial stateinitial state, , allowing one to learn allowing one to learn aa language. language.

The aspects of the initial state one ends up using in The aspects of the initial state one ends up using in one’s learning periods depends on the stimuli/input.one’s learning periods depends on the stimuli/input.

Languages (inputs) affect the development of the initial Languages (inputs) affect the development of the initial state and thus the outputs one ends up producing (cf. state and thus the outputs one ends up producing (cf. switches metaphor explaining the learning of switches metaphor explaining the learning of phonetics).phonetics).

13

InnateInnate

We do not necessarily mean that it is present at birth or We do not necessarily mean that it is present at birth or in an embryo. in an embryo.

It rather means that it It rather means that it automatically appearsautomatically appears during during the development, regardless on whether it is present at the development, regardless on whether it is present at birth or not. birth or not.

It does not mean that it is free from the input of the It does not mean that it is free from the input of the environment. E.g. vision capacity.environment. E.g. vision capacity.

14

Deep Deep vsvs. Surface Structure, and Creativity. Surface Structure, and Creativity

The deep/surface structure distinction is what helps The deep/surface structure distinction is what helps explaining linguistic creativity.explaining linguistic creativity.

The Port Royal’s distinction between deep and surface The Port Royal’s distinction between deep and surface structure implicitly contains recursive devices allowing structure implicitly contains recursive devices allowing for infinite uses of the finite means that it disposes. for infinite uses of the finite means that it disposes.

The deep structure is what gets represented in the mind The deep structure is what gets represented in the mind when a sentence is produced/heard (see LF).when a sentence is produced/heard (see LF).

15

Linguistic creativityLinguistic creativity and the and the argument for mental argument for mental grammargrammar

The expressive variety of language use implies that the The expressive variety of language use implies that the brain of a linguistically competent user contains a set of brain of a linguistically competent user contains a set of unconscious grammatical principles.unconscious grammatical principles.

(cf. Jackendoff(cf. Jackendoff R. 1994. R. 1994. Patterns in the MindPatterns in the Mind. Basic Books . Basic Books Harper Collins, New YorkHarper Collins, New York: 6).: 6).

16

LOTLOT

In adopting the language of thought hypothesis, LOT In adopting the language of thought hypothesis, LOT (or Mentalese) the argument for mental grammar can be (or Mentalese) the argument for mental grammar can be stated along the compositional principle for thoughts, or stated along the compositional principle for thoughts, or what Fodor characterizes as the productivity of thought.what Fodor characterizes as the productivity of thought.

The classical argument that mental states are complex adverts to The classical argument that mental states are complex adverts to the productivity of the attitudes … The LOT story is, of course, a the productivity of the attitudes … The LOT story is, of course, a paradigm of this sort of explanation, since it takes believing to paradigm of this sort of explanation, since it takes believing to involve a relation to a syntactically structured object for which a involve a relation to a syntactically structured object for which a compositional semantics is assumed. (Fodor J. 1987. compositional semantics is assumed. (Fodor J. 1987. PsychosemanticsPsychosemantics. MIT: 147-8). MIT: 147-8)

17

Logical Logical vsvs. Grammatical Form. Grammatical Form

Arnauld & Nicole (in Arnauld & Nicole (in PortPort Royal LogicRoyal Logic 1662: 160) 1662: 160) highlight the difference between deep (logical) structure highlight the difference between deep (logical) structure and surface (grammatical) structure. and surface (grammatical) structure.

In: In:

(1)(1) Now few pastors at the present time are Now few pastors at the present time are ready to give their life for their flocksready to give their life for their flocks

the grammatical (surface) structure is affirmative, while the grammatical (surface) structure is affirmative, while its underlying structure (LF) is negative.its underlying structure (LF) is negative.

18

(1) contains the implicit negative sentence (“it contains (1) contains the implicit negative sentence (“it contains this negation in its meaning”):this negation in its meaning”):

(1a)(1a) Several pastors at the present time are not ready to Several pastors at the present time are not ready to give their lives for their flocksgive their lives for their flocks

The same with:The same with:

(2)(2) Come see meCome see me

whose deep structure is:whose deep structure is:

(2a)(2a) I order/beg you to come see meI order/beg you to come see me

19

According to the Port Royal grammarians there is a According to the Port Royal grammarians there is a transformationtransformation enabling to go from (1a/2a) (deep enabling to go from (1a/2a) (deep structure) to (1/2) (surface structure).structure) to (1/2) (surface structure).

We have hidden underlying structure and a grammatical We have hidden underlying structure and a grammatical transformations operating between the deep structure transformations operating between the deep structure (LF) and the surface (or grammatical) structure. (LF) and the surface (or grammatical) structure.

E.g.: the surface structure “Only the friends of God are E.g.: the surface structure “Only the friends of God are happy” is a transformation of the deep structure “The happy” is a transformation of the deep structure “The friends of God are happy” friends of God are happy” andand “all other who are not “all other who are not friend of God are not happy”.friend of God are not happy”.

20

UnderstandingUnderstanding

To understand a sentence one must grasp the sense, i.e. To understand a sentence one must grasp the sense, i.e. the meaning (“natural order”) the speaker has in mind. the meaning (“natural order”) the speaker has in mind.

One grasps it in reconstructing its meaning, i.e. in One grasps it in reconstructing its meaning, i.e. in coming to entertain its underlying structure (LF) and coming to entertain its underlying structure (LF) and the meanings of the single words. the meanings of the single words.

The fundamental principles at work are The fundamental principles at work are reorderingreordering and and ellipsisellipsis which enable the hearer to recover in her mind which enable the hearer to recover in her mind the meaning the speaker has in her.the meaning the speaker has in her.

21

Linguistic explanation and Linguistic explanation and descriptiondescription

Grammaire GénéraleGrammaire Générale (Port Royal) (Port Royal)

Cartesian linguistics did not confine to a mere Cartesian linguistics did not confine to a mere description of a language and its grammar. description of a language and its grammar.

It aimed to capture the universal (mental) structure It aimed to capture the universal (mental) structure underlying languages. underlying languages.

22

Port Royal grammar, like modern (Chomsky’s inspired) Port Royal grammar, like modern (Chomsky’s inspired) linguistics can be viewed as a branch of psychology or linguistics can be viewed as a branch of psychology or cognitive sciences. cognitive sciences.

The general grammar is a kind of universal grammar.The general grammar is a kind of universal grammar.

As such, it differs from the special grammar which is As such, it differs from the special grammar which is language specific. It differs from the grammar of language specific. It differs from the grammar of English, Chinese, etc. English, Chinese, etc.

23

Linguistics/General Grammar as a ScienceLinguistics/General Grammar as a Science

General Grammar is … the rational science of the immutable General Grammar is … the rational science of the immutable and general principle of spoken and written language, whatever and general principle of spoken and written language, whatever language this may be … General Grammar is a science, because language this may be … General Grammar is a science, because its object is rational speculation on the immutable and general its object is rational speculation on the immutable and general principle of language … The science of grammar is anterior to all principle of language … The science of grammar is anterior to all languages in so far as its objects presuppose only the possibility languages in so far as its objects presuppose only the possibility of languages and are the same as those which guide human of languages and are the same as those which guide human reason in its intellectual operations … because they are eternally reason in its intellectual operations … because they are eternally true (Bauzé 1767).true (Bauzé 1767).

24

Shortcomings of Cartesian Shortcomings of Cartesian Linguistics (1600-1700)Linguistics (1600-1700)

The underlying assumptionThe underlying assumption

UG (the abstract structure underlying a natural UG (the abstract structure underlying a natural language sentence) is a kind of sentence itself. language sentence) is a kind of sentence itself.

It is generally assumed that deep structure consists of It is generally assumed that deep structure consists of actual sentences in a simpler or more natural actual sentences in a simpler or more natural organization. organization.

25

The underlying assumption is The underlying assumption is gratuitous and can be gratuitous and can be dismisseddismissed..

It rests on the Cartesian idea that the general principles It rests on the Cartesian idea that the general principles underlying and determining our thoughts and underlying and determining our thoughts and perceptions must be perceptions must be accessibleaccessible toto introspectionintrospection and and can be brought to consciousness with care and can be brought to consciousness with care and attention.attention.

If we assume that UG is If we assume that UG is unconsciousunconscious we don’t have to we don’t have to assume that the general principle are sentence-like assume that the general principle are sentence-like entities.entities.

26

Language acquisitionLanguage acquisition

Universal ConditionsUniversal Conditions

They are not learned and must exist for language They are not learned and must exist for language knowledge to be explained. knowledge to be explained.

They are the pre-requisite leading to knowledge:They are the pre-requisite leading to knowledge:

principles or notions implanted in the mind … a direct gift of principles or notions implanted in the mind … a direct gift of Nature, a percept of natural instinct … [they] remain latent when Nature, a percept of natural instinct … [they] remain latent when their corresponding objects are not present, and even disappear their corresponding objects are not present, and even disappear and give no sign of their existence (Herder 1624). and give no sign of their existence (Herder 1624).

27

This contrasts with the empiricist view thatThis contrasts with the empiricist view that

our mind is a clean sheet, as though we obtained our capacity for our mind is a clean sheet, as though we obtained our capacity for

dealing with objects from objects themselves (Herder 1624).dealing with objects from objects themselves (Herder 1624).

The mind is not a The mind is not a tabulatabula rasarasa..

28

Nativism/InnatismNativism/Innatism The universal principles are innate and implicit.The universal principles are innate and implicit.

Yet, we may require external stimulus to activate them Yet, we may require external stimulus to activate them and make them available to introspection. and make them available to introspection.

This is one of the main principles underlying the This is one of the main principles underlying the psychology of Cartesian linguistics and rationalism in psychology of Cartesian linguistics and rationalism in general (see e.g. Leibniz).general (see e.g. Leibniz).

[I]t is true that it is purely arbitrary to connect a certain idea to [I]t is true that it is purely arbitrary to connect a certain idea to one particular sound rather than another. But ideas—at least one particular sound rather than another. But ideas—at least those that are clear and distinct—are not at all arbitrary things those that are clear and distinct—are not at all arbitrary things depending on our fancy. (Arnauld & Nicole 1662: 28)depending on our fancy. (Arnauld & Nicole 1662: 28)

29

Plato’s Problem Plato’s Problem

Nativism provides a solution to Plato’s problem (cf. Nativism provides a solution to Plato’s problem (cf. Plato’s Plato’s MenoMeno and and TheaetetusTheaetetus). ).

For it provides a science of language that shows how an For it provides a science of language that shows how an internal biological mechanism can, with little input from internal biological mechanism can, with little input from the external environment (poverty of the stimuli the external environment (poverty of the stimuli argument) develop (almost automatically) in each argument) develop (almost automatically) in each individual the rich competence known as “knowing a individual the rich competence known as “knowing a language”. language”.

30

Solving Plato’s problem for language acquisitionSolving Plato’s problem for language acquisition

It involves saying both It involves saying both whatwhat is known when one knows is known when one knows a language and a language and howhow one comes to know it. one comes to know it.

We should do this with a science of the mind, not We should do this with a science of the mind, not philosophical speculations.philosophical speculations.

31

Chomsky Chomsky vsvs. Plato. Plato

Plato appeals to myth, invoking the pre-existence of the Plato appeals to myth, invoking the pre-existence of the boy’s soul with other souls in the world of Forms boy’s soul with other souls in the world of Forms (ideas) and in going trough a process of reminiscence.(ideas) and in going trough a process of reminiscence.

Chomsky solves it in proposing a naturalistic theory of Chomsky solves it in proposing a naturalistic theory of a biological system that makes language acquisition a biological system that makes language acquisition virtually automatic. virtually automatic.

32

General Presuppositions of Cartesian General Presuppositions of Cartesian LinguisticsLinguistics

The principle of language and natural logic are known The principle of language and natural logic are known unconsciously and they are in large part a precondition unconsciously and they are in large part a precondition for language acquisition rather than a matter of for language acquisition rather than a matter of institution or training. institution or training.

Linguistics as a science trying to bring to light these Linguistics as a science trying to bring to light these underlying principles becomes a branch of psychology.underlying principles becomes a branch of psychology.

Thus this art [logic or art of thinking] does not consist in finding Thus this art [logic or art of thinking] does not consist in finding the mean to perform these operations, since nature alone the mean to perform these operations, since nature alone furnished them in giving us reason, but in reflecting on what furnished them in giving us reason, but in reflecting on what nature makes us do. (Arnauld & Nicole 1662: 23)nature makes us do. (Arnauld & Nicole 1662: 23)

33

The Poverty of the Stimulus The Poverty of the Stimulus ArgumentArgument

General language-acquisition schemaGeneral language-acquisition schema

InputInput →→ LADLAD →→ OutputOutput

(primary(primary (Grammar consisting of(Grammar consisting of

linguistic data)linguistic data) principles, parameters principles, parameters and lexicon)and lexicon)

34

Language acquisition is a matter of growth and Language acquisition is a matter of growth and maturation of relatively fixed principles under maturation of relatively fixed principles under appropriate external conditions and training.appropriate external conditions and training.

Cf. growth and maturation of bones: the structure of Cf. growth and maturation of bones: the structure of the bones is genetically programmed, yet it needs the bones is genetically programmed, yet it needs exercise to develop. exercise to develop.

35

CreolizationCreolization

One learns a language because one is programmed to One learns a language because one is programmed to learn a language, i.e. because of one’s initial state, UG. learn a language, i.e. because of one’s initial state, UG.

The process of creolization underlies what happens The process of creolization underlies what happens when a child learns her mother tongue in normal when a child learns her mother tongue in normal situations.situations.

The same kind of linguistic genius is involved every time a child The same kind of linguistic genius is involved every time a child learns his or her mother tongue. ... let us do away with the learns his or her mother tongue. ... let us do away with the folklore that parents teach their children language. (S. Pinker. folklore that parents teach their children language. (S. Pinker. 1994. 1994. The Language InstinctThe Language Instinct: 39): 39)

36

The crux of the argument is that complex language is universal The crux of the argument is that complex language is universal because because children actually reinvent itchildren actually reinvent it, generation after , generation after generation — not because they are taught, not because they are generation — not because they are taught, not because they are generally smart, not because it is useful to them, but because they generally smart, not because it is useful to them, but because they just can’t help it. (Pinker 1994: 32)just can’t help it. (Pinker 1994: 32)

The argument of innate knowledgeThe argument of innate knowledge

It rests on the It rests on the actualactual way children acquire their mother way children acquire their mother tongue. tongue.

It is an empirical hypothesis which posits that our brain It is an empirical hypothesis which posits that our brain is genetically programmed to invent a language.is genetically programmed to invent a language.

37

ChomskyChomsky

Large-scale sensory deficit seems to have limited effect on Large-scale sensory deficit seems to have limited effect on language acquisition. Blind children acquire language as the language acquisition. Blind children acquire language as the sighted do, even color terms and words for visual experience like sighted do, even color terms and words for visual experience like “see” and “look.” “see” and “look.” There are people who have achieved close There are people who have achieved close to normal linguistic competence with no sensory input to normal linguistic competence with no sensory input beyond that can be gained by placing one’s hand on beyond that can be gained by placing one’s hand on another person’s face and throat.another person’s face and throat. The analytic mechanism The analytic mechanism of the language faculty seem to be triggered in much the of the language faculty seem to be triggered in much the same way whether the input is auditory, visual, even same way whether the input is auditory, visual, even tactual, and seem to be localized in the same brain areastactual, and seem to be localized in the same brain areas, , somewhat surprisingly.somewhat surprisingly.

38

These examples of These examples of impoverished input indicate the richness impoverished input indicate the richness of innate endowmentof innate endowment — though normal language acquisition is — though normal language acquisition is remarkable enough, as even lexical access shows, not only remarkable enough, as even lexical access shows, not only because of its rapidity and the intricacy of result. Thus very because of its rapidity and the intricacy of result. Thus very young children can determine the meaning of a nonsense word young children can determine the meaning of a nonsense word from syntactic information in a sentence far more complex that from syntactic information in a sentence far more complex that they can produce.they can produce.

A plausible assumption today is that the A plausible assumption today is that the principles of principles of language are fixed and innatelanguage are fixed and innate, and that variations is restricted , and that variations is restricted in the manner indicated. Each language, then, is (virtually) in the manner indicated. Each language, then, is (virtually) determined by a choice of values for lexical parameters: with the determined by a choice of values for lexical parameters: with the array of choices, we should be able to deduce Hungarian; with array of choices, we should be able to deduce Hungarian; with another, Yoruba. … The conditions of language acquisition another, Yoruba. … The conditions of language acquisition make it plain that the process must be make it plain that the process must be largely inner-directed, largely inner-directed, as in other aspects of growth, which means that all as in other aspects of growth, which means that all languages must be close to identical, largely fixed by initial languages must be close to identical, largely fixed by initial statestate. (Chomsky 2000. . (Chomsky 2000. New Horizons …New Horizons … : 121-2) : 121-2)

39

The paradox of language acquisitionThe paradox of language acquisition

[A]n entire community of highly trained professionals, bringing [A]n entire community of highly trained professionals, bringing to bear years of conscious attention and sharing of information, to bear years of conscious attention and sharing of information, has been has been unable to duplicate the feat that every normal child unable to duplicate the feat that every normal child accomplishes by the age of ten or so, unconsciously and accomplishes by the age of ten or so, unconsciously and unaidedunaided. (Jackendoff 1994: 26). (Jackendoff 1994: 26)

40

Language Perception and UnderstandingLanguage Perception and Understanding

Perception of speech rests on innate discriminatory Perception of speech rests on innate discriminatory capacities.capacities.

There is a fundamental difference between the There is a fundamental difference between the perception of speech and the perception of perception of speech and the perception of unarticulated sounds. unarticulated sounds.

Speech perception, unlike visual perception for Speech perception, unlike visual perception for instance, requires the activation of the generative rules instance, requires the activation of the generative rules playing the role in the production of speech. playing the role in the production of speech.

41

Both the perceptual mechanism and the mechanism of Both the perceptual mechanism and the mechanism of speech production make use of the same underlying speech production make use of the same underlying system of generative rules. system of generative rules.

It is because these underlying systems are the same It is because these underlying systems are the same among us that communication can occur. among us that communication can occur.

It is because of this uniformity of human nature that we It is because of this uniformity of human nature that we talk the way we do and succeed in understanding each talk the way we do and succeed in understanding each others (cf. Humboldt 1836).others (cf. Humboldt 1836).

42

Every young child (raised in an English speaking Every young child (raised in an English speaking community) would know that in English ‘blug’ is community) would know that in English ‘blug’ is phonetically possible while ‘bkr’ is not. And they know phonetically possible while ‘bkr’ is not. And they know it without being told.it without being told.

Science of Science of Intelligent BehaviourIntelligent Behaviour

It may be within the boundary of some other cognitive It may be within the boundary of some other cognitive beings (Martians, God) but it transcends human beings (Martians, God) but it transcends human capacities. capacities.

43

Reasons Reasons vsvs. causes. causes

Wittgenstein (Wittgenstein (Blue BookBlue Book) says that in explaining action in ) says that in explaining action in terms of their coherence and appropriateness with terms of their coherence and appropriateness with respect to human aims etc. we “give reasons”, not “give respect to human aims etc. we “give reasons”, not “give causes”. causes”.

When talking about creative linguistic actions Chomsky When talking about creative linguistic actions Chomsky and Descartes seem to accept Wittgenstein’s view in and Descartes seem to accept Wittgenstein’s view in assuming that we are giving reasons, not causes.assuming that we are giving reasons, not causes.

44

Descartes’ Descartes’ dualismdualism

It was a scientific hypothesis dictated by the science of It was a scientific hypothesis dictated by the science of his time (mechanism). his time (mechanism).

Descartes did not have at his disposal the biological Descartes did not have at his disposal the biological science of our time, he did not know of genetic science of our time, he did not know of genetic transmission and could not possibly imagine how transmission and could not possibly imagine how human cognition can rest to such an extent on a human cognition can rest to such an extent on a biological base of concept and structure acquisition.biological base of concept and structure acquisition.

Descartes could not imagine that these biological Descartes could not imagine that these biological mechanisms need only a little input to produce rich mechanisms need only a little input to produce rich conceptual material.conceptual material.

45

At present At present little is knownlittle is known on how UG is embodied in on how UG is embodied in the brain. the brain.

UG is considered as a computational system in the UG is considered as a computational system in the head, but we do not know about the specific operations head, but we do not know about the specific operations of the brain itself and what leads to the development of of the brain itself and what leads to the development of these computational systems.these computational systems.

46

A plausible view is that language is a distinct and A plausible view is that language is a distinct and specific part of the human mind and not a manifestation specific part of the human mind and not a manifestation of a more general capacity or ability (of general of a more general capacity or ability (of general intelligence).intelligence).

Linguistic capacity rests on a specific Linguistic capacity rests on a specific modulemodule..

It is not the sub-product of a general cognitive capacity. It is not the sub-product of a general cognitive capacity.

47

EvidenceEvidence

People can “lose their intelligence” and yet they do not People can “lose their intelligence” and yet they do not loose their language: substantial retarded children (e.g. loose their language: substantial retarded children (e.g. Williams syndrome) manifest a good grammatical and Williams syndrome) manifest a good grammatical and linguistic competence. linguistic competence.

On the other hand, highly intelligent people may lack On the other hand, highly intelligent people may lack linguistic capacity (e.g. aphasia).linguistic capacity (e.g. aphasia).

The fact that two kinds of abilities can dissociate quantitatively The fact that two kinds of abilities can dissociate quantitatively and along multiple dimensions shows that they are not and along multiple dimensions shows that they are not manifestations of a single underlying ability. (Pinker 2003: 23)manifestations of a single underlying ability. (Pinker 2003: 23)