Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T01:31:01.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The myth of language universals and the myth of universal grammar

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Morten H. Christiansen  and
Nick Chater
Morten H. Christiansen
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, andSanta Fe Institute, Santa Fe, NM 87501. [email protected]://www.psych.cornell.edu/people/Faculty/mhc27.htm
Nick Chater
Affiliation:
Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom. [email protected]://www.psychol.ucl.ac.uk/people/profiles/chater_nick.htm
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Evans & Levinson (E&L) argue that language universals are a myth. Christiansen and Chater (2008) have recently suggested that innate universal grammar is also a myth. This commentary explores the connection between these two theses, and draws wider implications for the cognitive science of language.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 5 , October 2009 , pp. 452 - 453
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chater, N. & Christiansen, M. H.(in press)Language acquisition meets language evolution. Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
Chater, N., Reali, F. & Christiansen, M. H. (2009) Restrictions on biological adaptation in language evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106(4):1015–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chater, N. & Vitányi, P. (2007) ‘Ideal learning’ of natural language: Positive results about learning from positive evidence. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 51:135–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiansen, M. H. & Chater, N. (1999) Toward a connectionist model of recursion in human linguistic performance. Cognitive Science 23:157–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiansen, M. H. & Chater, N. (2003) Constituency and recursion in language. In: The handbook of brain theory and neural networks, 2nd edition, ed. Arbib, M. A., pp. 267–71. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Christiansen, M. H. & Chater, N. (2008) Language as shaped by the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31(5):489–509; discussion 509–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christiansen, M. H., Chater, N. & Reali, F.(in press)The biological and cultural foundations of language. Communicative and Integrative Biology.Google Scholar
Christiansen, M. H. & MacDonald, M.C.(in press)A usage-based approach to recursion in sentence processing. Language Learning.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1975) Bridging. In: Theoretical issues in natural language processing, ed. Schank, R. C. & Nash-Webber, B. L., pp. 169–74. Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1967) Logic and conversation. William James Lectures. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Harman, G. & Kulkarni, S. (2007) Reliable reasoning: Induction and statistical Learning theory. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, S. (2007) The evolution of meaning-space structure through iterated learning. In: Emergence of communication and language, ed. Lyon, C., Nehaniv, C. & Cangelosi, A., pp. 253–68. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, J. R. & Kubovy, M. (1986) Theoretical approaches to perceptual organization: Simplicity and likelihood principles. In: Handbook of perception and human performance, vol. 2: Cognitive processes and performance, ed. Boff, K. R., Kaufman, L. & Thomas, J. P., pp. 36:1–46. Wiley.Google Scholar
Pullum, G. K. & Scholz, B. C. (2002) Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. Linguistic Review 19:9–50.Google Scholar
Reali, F. & Christiansen, M. H. (2005) Uncovering the richness of the stimulus: Structure dependence and indirect statistical evidence. Cognitive Science 29:1007–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wittgenstein, L. (1953) Philosophical investigations. Blackwell.Google Scholar