Précis of Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution,

2003 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 651-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ray Jackendoff
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Neuroscience ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Parallel Architecture ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Central Problem ◽  
Cognitive Sciences ◽  
Linguistic Performance ◽  
Incremental Evolution ◽  
Language Capacity ◽  
The Mind

The goal of this study is to reintegrate the theory of generative grammar into the cognitive sciences. Generative grammar was right to focus on the child's acquisition of language as its central problem, leading to the hypothesis of an innate Universal Grammar. However, generative grammar was mistaken in assuming that the syntactic component is the sole course of combinatoriality, and that everything else is “interpretive.” The proper approach is a parallel architecture, in which phonology, syntax, and semantics are autonomous generative systems linked by interface components. The parallel architecture leads to an integration within linguistics, and to a far better integration with the rest of cognitive neuroscience. It fits naturally into the larger architecture of the mind/brain and permits a properly mentalistic theory of semantics. It results in a view of linguistic performance in which the rules of grammar are directly involved in processing. Finally, it leads to a natural account of the incremental evolution of the language capacity.

Situating morphology

2019 ◽  
pp. 3-24
Author(s):  
Ray Jackendoff ◽  
Jenny Audring
Keyword(s):  
Internal Structure ◽  
Parallel Architecture ◽  
Fundamental Feature ◽  
Construction Morphology ◽  
Morphological Theory ◽  
Language Capacity ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Complex Words ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Shared Structure

The book has three interwoven themes: a morphological theory, the structure of the lexicon, and an integrated account of the language capacity and its place in the mind. These themes together constitute the theory of Relational Morphology (RM), itself an extension of the Parallel Architecture of Jackendoff’s Foundations of Language, and closely related to Construction Grammar and Construction Morphology. A fundamental feature is that phonology, syntax, and semantics are independent components of language, linked by interfaces. Another feature is the continuity between lexicon and grammar. RM extends these features to the internal structure of words. In particular, morphology is constituted of a morphosyntactic component and its interfaces to phonology, phrasal syntax, and semantics. Furthermore, RM expresses regularities among words not in terms of rules that derive morphologically complex words, but in terms of declarative schemas that capture patterns of shared structure. The chapter concludes with a survey of similarities and differences between phrasal syntax and morphosyntax.

Andrés Bello

1997 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-348
Author(s):  
Enrique Obediente ◽  
Francesco D’Introno
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Symbolic System ◽  
Philosophical Work ◽  
Independent System ◽  
Philosophical Position ◽  
Grammatical Analysis ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Andres Bello

Summary In this article we will analyze two aspects of Andrés Bello’s (1781–1865) grammatical thought: its relation to the English empiricists and its similarity with generative grammar. His relation to the English empiricists is due to the fact that Bello spent 19 years in London, where he became familiar with the work of Locke, Berkeley, Hume and Reid. In fact his philosophical work, Filosofía del entendimiento, sounds like some of those philosophers’ essays. From the empiricists Bello derives the idea that there is no innate universal grammar with rules present in all languages, as well as his concept of language as an independent system of arbitrary and conventional signs. From Reid he derived his interpretation of the evolution of the language: signs start as ‘natural’ (i.e., they allow humans to communicate without any particular language), and then they become ‘artificial’, i.e., arbitrary and conventional, particular to each grammatical system. Because of his philosophical position, Bello has been compared to structuralist linguists. Here we will show that some of Bello’s grammatical thoughts can be compared with those of Chomsky. The reason for this is that in his grammatical analysis Bello uses concepts reminiscent of generative grammar. For example, Bello proposes the notion of an ‘latent proposition’ similar to that of ‘deep sttaicture’. And when he analyzes for example relative clauses and elliptical constructions, he uses concepts that are familiar to generative grammarians. In other words, the paper tries to show that methodologically and analytically Bello shares some concepts present in Chomsky’s linguistic theory. It also shows differences between Bello and Chomsky, and concludes by pointing out that the major difference between the two linguists is that Bello assumes language can be learned through a symbolic system, while Chomsky assumes language to be innate and independent of other cognitive systemsof the mind.

The Texture of the Lexicon

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ray Jackendoff ◽  
Jenny Audring
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Parallel Architecture ◽  
Word Formation ◽  
Linguistic Theory ◽  
Human Cognition ◽  
Language Faculty ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Morphological Theory ◽  
Language Capacity ◽  
The Mind

The Texture of the Lexicon explores three interwoven themes: a morphological theory, the structure of the lexicon, and an integrated account of the language capacity and its place in the mind. These themes together constitute the theory of Relational Morphology (RM), extending the Parallel Architecture of Jackendoff’s groundbreaking Foundations of Language. Part I (chapters 1–3) situates morphology in the architecture of the language faculty, and introduces a novel formalism that unifies the treatment of morphological patterns, from totally productive to highly marginal. Two major points emerge. First, traditional word formation rules and realization rules should be replaced by declarative schemas, formulated in the same terms as words. Hence the grammar should really be thought of as part of the lexicon. Second, the traditional emphasis on productive patterns, to the detriment of nonproductive patterns, is misguided; linguistic theory can and should encompass them both. Part II (chapters 4–6) puts the theory to the test, applying it to a wide range of familiar and less familiar morphological phenomena. Part III (chapters 7–9) connects RM with language processing, language acquisition, and a broad selection of linguistic and nonlinguistic phenomena beyond morphology. The framework is therefore attractive not only for its ability to account insightfully for morphological phenomena, but equally for its contribution to the integration of linguistic theory, psycholinguistics, and human cognition.

LET'S MAKE UP YOUR MIND

1999 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 635-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bonnie D. Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Study ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Nonnative Language ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Language Module

This essay defends the idea that language is a unique, genetically underwritten (informationally encapsulated) “module of the mind” and considers some consequences such a stance holds for the psycholinguistic study of nonnative language (L2) acquisition. As is well known, language as conceived within the tradition of generative grammar (e.g., Chomsky, 1965, 1975, 1980, 1986) is unlike other types of cognition and its basis (viz., Universal Grammar) is innately given; this is the position I support in this paper. Specifically, I begin by summarizing the main arguments for this position, after which I discuss (following Segal, 1996) four different conceptions of what a module is and then devote particular attention to the theory developed by Fodor (1983, 1985) on the architecture of mind (his “modularity thesis”). There follows a comparison between the distinct views held by Chomsky and by Fodor on the conception of “the language module” and on the structure of mind more generally. Arguing that the two views are not inherently incompatible, I offer a speculation on how to begin to reconcile them, which leaves me well positioned to advance three specific implications for the theoretical study of L2 acquisition within the framework of generative grammar, couched within a theory of the modular mind.

scholarly journals The Linguistic Philosophy of Noam Chomsky

2014 ◽  
pp. 103-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Binoy Barman
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Analytic Philosophy ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Philosophical Investigation ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Noam Chomsky ◽  
Human Child ◽  
Mental Exercise ◽  
Linguistic Philosophy

Noam Chomsky, one of the most famous linguists of the twentieth century, based his linguistic works on certain philosophical doctrines. His main contribution to linguistics is Transformational Generative Grammar, which is founded on mentalist philosophy. He opposes the behaviourist psychology in favour of innatism for explaining the acquisition of language. He claims that it becomes possible for human child to learn a language for the linguistic faculty with which the child is born, and that the use of language for an adult is mostly a mental exercise. His ideas brought about a revolution in linguistics, dubbed as Chomskyan Revolution. According to him, the part of language which is innate to human being would be called Universal Grammar. His philosophy holds a strong propensity to rationalism in search of a cognitive foundation. His theory is a continuation of analytic philosophy, which puts language in the centre of philosophical investigation. He would also be identified as an essentialist. This paper considers various aspects of Chomsky’s linguistic philosophy with necessary elaborations.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/pp.v51i1-2.17681

Tool and Symbol

Mind Shift ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 32-45
Author(s):  
John Parrington
Keyword(s):  
Tool Use ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Brain Evolution ◽  
Human Society ◽  
Growing Up ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Human Brain Evolution ◽  
Equal Importance ◽  
Language Capacity ◽  
Development Of Language

This chapter examines the emergence of tool use and human language in human brain evolution. Increasing use and design of tools made possible by the bipedalism of our proto-human ancestors was a key step in the development of language. Indeed, communal tool use ‘helped to bring the members of society together by increasing the cases of mutual support and joint activity’. During this process, ‘the reaction of labour and speech on the development of the brain and its attendant senses, of the increasing clarity of consciousness, power of abstraction and of conclusion, gave both labour and speech an ever renewed impulse to further development’. The chapter then considers the studies which assess the fundamental differences in terms of language capacity between humans and apes. While the behaviourist view that human language acquisition is simply an accumulation of conditioned reflexes now looks incorrect, recent studies have also challenged the view of a biological basis for a ‘universal grammar’ shared by all humans. Instead, increasing evidence points to both human biology and the process of growing up in a specific human society as being factors of equal importance in the formation of language.

Human nature without a soul?

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
MALCOLM JEEVES
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Cognitive Neuroscience ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Neural Substrates ◽  
Top Down ◽  
The Past ◽  
Neural Processes ◽  
Mind And Brain ◽  
The Mind ◽  
To Receive

Rapid developments in neuroscience over the past four decades continue to receive wide media attention. Each new reported advance points to ever tightening links between mind and brain. For many centuries, what is today called ‘mind-talk’ was familiar as ‘soul-talk’. Since, for some, the possession of a soul is what makes us human, the challenges of cognitive neuroscience directly address this. This paper affords the non-specialist a brief overview of some of the scientific evidence pointing to the ever tightening of the mind-brain links and explores its wider implications for our understanding of human nature. In particular it brings together the findings from so-called bottom-up research, in which we observe changes in behaviour and cognition resulting from experimental interventions in neural processes, with top-down research where we track changes in neural substrates accompanying habitual modes of cognition or behaviour. Further reflection alerts one to how the dualist views widely held by New Agers, some humanists and many religious people, contrast with the views of academic philosophers, theologians and biblical scholars, who agree in emphasizing the unity of the person.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document