Full-text

URL: http://people.brandeis.edu/~jackendo/Rep...hHauserChomsky52.doc

Cached: PDF-62K

SAVE AS an easy-to-recall long filename:

Filename format: author--year--title   PDF-62K

Filename format: author--year--title--journal|proceedings|...--pages   PDF-62K

Related links

Source: http://people.brandeis.edu/~jackendo/recentpapers.htm

Web search: Google Web Search   ::   Google Scholar

Abstract

In a continuation of the conversation with Fitch, Chomsky, and Hauser on the evolution of language, we examine their defense of the claim that the uniquely human, language-specific part of the language faculty (the ``narrow language faculty'') consists only of recursion, and that this part cannot be considered an adaptation to communication. We argue that their characterization of the narrow language faculty is problematic for many reasons, including its dichotomization of cognitive capacities into those that are utterly unique and those that are identical to nonlinguistic or nonhuman capacities, omitting capacities that may have been substantially modified during human evolution. We also question their dichotomy of the current utility versus original function of a trait, which omits traits that are adaptations for current use, and their dichotomy of humans and animals, which conflates similarity due to common function and similarity due to inheritance from a recent common ancestor. We show that recursion, though absent from other animals' communications systems, is found in visual cognition, hence cannot be the sole evolutionary development that granted language to humans. Finally, we note that despite Fitch et al.'s denial, their view of language evolution is tied to Chomsky's conception of language itself, which identifies combinatorial productivity with a core of ``narrow syntax.'' An alternative conception, in which combinatoriality is spread across words and constructions, has both empirical advantages and greater evolutionary plausibility.

@article{jackendoff_pinker05ReplytoFitchHauserChomsky52,
  author={Ray Jackendoff and Steven Pinker},
  title={The nature of the language faculty and its implications for evolution of language (Reply to Fitch, Hauser, and Chomsky)},
  journal={Cognition},
  year={2005},
  month={September},
  url={http://www.isrl.uiuc.edu/~amag/langev/paper/jackendoff_pinker05ReplytoFitchHauserChomsky52.html}
}

HOME   ::  Journal List   ::   Article	Comments to: junwang4 you-know-at gmail.com	Last update: 2/2/08