Abstract
Vyvyan Evans’ The Language Myth argues that Chomsky’s program of Universal Grammar (UG) is “completely wrong,” and it has attracted much recent discussion, some of it laudatory. We set out what we take to be its many serious errors, including: (i) a misunderstanding of the empirical character of the evidence that Chomsky and other generativists have adduced for UG, in English as well as in many other languages, coupled with a mistaken claim that the theory is unfalsifiable; (ii) a confusion of superficial typological universals, or features present at the surface of all of the world’s languages, with UG features that are apparent only under analysis; and (iii) a failure to appreciate the significance of Fine Thoughts (the things one cannot say in natural languages, even though it would be clear what they would mean) as critical evidence of UG, and of the difficulties presented by them for the kinds of “language-as-use” and related empiricist theories that he favors. Indeed, Evans also (iv) fails to address the issues of competence and constraints that are raised by Fine Thoughts and that are a central concern of UG; and (v) conflates UG with a computational theory of mind, a Fodorean conception of modules and a Pinkerean interest in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
References
Ackerman, Farrell & Robert Malouf. 2016. Beyond caricatures: Commentary on Evans 2014. Language 92(1). 189–194.10.1353/lan.2016.0008Search in Google Scholar
Adger, David. 2003. Core syntax: A minimalist approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Adger, David. 2015a. More misrepresentation: A response to Behme and Evans 2015. Lingua 162. 160–166.10.1016/j.lingua.2015.05.005Search in Google Scholar
Adger, David. 2015b. Mythical myths: Comments on Vyvyan Evans’ “The Language Myth”. Lingua 158. 7–80.10.1016/j.lingua.2015.02.006Search in Google Scholar
Adger, David & Jennifer Smith. 2005. Variation and the minimalist program. In Leonie Cornips & Karen Corrigan (eds.), Syntax and variation: Reconciling the biological and the social, 149–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/cilt.265.10adgSearch in Google Scholar
Åfarli, Tor A. & Brit Mæhlum (eds.). 2014. The sociolinguistics of grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.154Search in Google Scholar
Aldridge, Michelle. 2014. The Language Myth: Why Language Is Not an Instinct, by Vyvyan Evans. Times Higher Education 13 November 2014. Available at https://www.timeshighereducation.com/books/the-language-myth-why-language-is-not-an-instinct-by-vyvyan-evans/2016831.article Retrieved 15 May 2017.Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, Alun. 2014. Why language is neither an instinct nor innate. New Scientist 20 October 2014. Available at https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22429911.000-why-language-is-neither-an-instinct-nor-innate/ Retrieved 15 May 2017.Search in Google Scholar
Baker, Mark C. 2001. The atoms of language. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Beaumont, Bertrand. 1954. Hegel and the seven planets. Mind LXIII(250). 246–248.10.1093/mind/LXIII.250.246Search in Google Scholar
Behme, Christina & Vyvyan Evans. 2015. Leaving the myth behind: A reply to Adger (2015). Lingua 162. 149–159.10.1016/j.lingua.2015.05.004Search in Google Scholar
Berent, Iris. 2016. Evans’ (2014) Modularity myths: A mental architecture digest. Language 92(1). 195–19710.1353/lan.2016.0012Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1959. Review of B. F. Skinner, ‘Verbal behavior’. Language 35. 26–58.10.2307/411334Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.10.21236/AD0616323Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1979. Morphophonemics of modern Hebrew. New York: Garland.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1988. Language and problems of knowledge: The managua lectures. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511811937Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2002. On nature and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511613876Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2013. Problems of projection. Lingua 130. 33–49.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.003Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2015. Some core contested concepts. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 44(1). 91–104.10.1007/s10936-014-9331-5Search in Google Scholar
Churchland, Patricia S. 2013. Preface to Quine, Willard Van Ormson. 2013 [1960]. In Word and object, 2nd edn. Cambridge, Mass: MIT PressSearch in Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo & Richard S. Kayne (eds.). 2005. The Oxford handbook of comparative syntax. Oxford: Oxford University PressSearch in Google Scholar
Cornips, Leonie. 2014. Socio-syntax and variation in acquisition: Problematizing monolingual and bidialectal acquisition. Linguistic Variation 14(1). 1–25.10.1075/lv.14.1.01corSearch in Google Scholar
Cornips, Leonie E. A. & Karen P. Corrigan (eds.). 2005. Syntax and variation : Reconciling the biological and the social. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.265Search in Google Scholar
Deen, Kamil U. 2016. Myths, magic, and poorly drawn battle lines: Commentary on Evans 2014. Language 92(1). 197–200.10.1353/lan.2016.0015Search in Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C. 1975. Why the law of effect will not go away. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 5. 169–187. Reprinted in (1978). Brainstorms : Philosophical essays on mind and psychology, 71–89. Montgomery, Vt.: Bradford Books.10.1111/j.1468-5914.1975.tb00350.xSearch in Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas & Stephen C. Levinson. 2009. The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32(5). 429–448.10.1017/S0140525X0999094XSearch in Google Scholar
Everett, Daniel. 2005. Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã. Current Anthropology 46(4). 621–646.10.1086/431525Search in Google Scholar
Fitch, W. Tecumseh, Marc D. Hauser & Noam Chomsky. 2005. The evolution of the language faculty: Clarifications and implications. Cognition 97. 179–210.10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.005Search in Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A. 1968. The appeal to tacit knowledge in psychological explanation. The Journal of Philosophy 65(20). 627–640.10.2307/2024316Search in Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A. 2000. The mind doesn’t work that way: The scope and limits of computational psychology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/4627.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work : The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268511.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2016. Another look at the universal grammar hypothesis: Commentary on Evans 2014. Language 92(1). 200–203.10.1353/lan.2016.0018Search in Google Scholar
Gross, Steven & Georges Rey. 2012. Innateness. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (eds.), Oxford handbook on cognitive science, 318–360. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195309799.003.0014Search in Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane M. V. 1994. Introduction to government and binding theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Hauser, Marc D., Robert C. Charles Yang, Ian Tattersall Berwick, Michael J. Ryan, Jeffrey Watumull, Noam Chomsky & Richard C. Lewontin. 2014. The mystery of language evolution. Frontiers in Psychology 5. 1–12.10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00401Search in Google Scholar
Hinzen, Wolfram. 2016. Is our mental grammar just a set of constructions? Commentary on Evans (2014). Language 92(1). 203–20710.1353/lan.2016.0021Search in Google Scholar
Hofmeister, Philip, Laura Staum Casasanto & Ivan A. Sag. 2013. Islands in the grammar? Standards of evidence. In Jon Sprouse & Norbert Hornstein (eds.), Experimental syntax and island effects, 42–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139035309.004Search in Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert. 2013. Three grades of grammatical involvement: Syntax from a minimalist perspective. Mind & Language 28(4). 392–420.10.1111/mila.12023Search in Google Scholar
Karimi, Simin (ed.). 2003. Word order and scrambling. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470758403Search in Google Scholar
Kegl, Judy, Anne Senghas & Marie Coppola. 1999. Creation through contact: Sign language emergence and sign language change in Nicaragua. In Michel DeGraff (ed.), Language creation and language change : Creolization, diachrony, and development, 179–237. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lidz, Jeffrey & Annie Gagliardi. 2015. How nature meets nurture: Universal grammar and statistical learning. Annual Review of Linguistics 1(1). 333–353.10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-125236Search in Google Scholar
Lidz, Jeffrey & Alexander Williams. 2009. Constructions on holiday. Cognitive Linguistics 20(1). 177–189.10.1515/COGL.2009.011Search in Google Scholar
Maynes, Jeffrey & Steven Gross. 2013. Linguistic intuitions. Philosophy Compass 8(8). 714–730.10.1111/phc3.12052Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Gereon. 2011. Constraints on displacement: A phase-based approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lfab.7Search in Google Scholar
Musso, Mariacristina, Andrea Moro, Volkmar Glauche, Michel Rijntjes, Jurgen Reichenbach, Christian Buchel & Cornelius Weiller. 2003. Broca’s area and the language instinct. Nature Neuroscience 6(7). 774–781.10.1038/nn1077Search in Google Scholar
Nevins, Andrew. 2009. On formal universals in phonology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 32(05). 461–462.10.1017/S0140525X09990537Search in Google Scholar
Nevins, Andrew, David Pesetsky & Cilene Rodrigues. 2009. Pirahã exceptionality: A reassessment. Language 85(2). 355–404.10.1353/lan.0.0107Search in Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven. 1994. The language instinct. London: Penguin.10.1037/e412952005-009Search in Google Scholar
Prinz, Jesse J. 2002. Furnishing the mind. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press10.7551/mitpress/3169.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Radford, Andrew. 2009. An introduction to English sentence structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511800924Search in Google Scholar
Rey, Georges. 2002. Searle’s misunderstandings of functionalism and strong AI. In John Preston & Mark Bishop (eds.), Views into the Chinese room, 201–225. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Rey, Georges. 2003. Intentional content and a Chomskyan linguistics, in A. Barber (ed.), Epistemology of language, 140–186. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Rey, Georges. ms. Representation and Other Philosophical Issues in a Chomskyan Linguistics. Under review at Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian G. 1997. Comparative syntax. London: Arnold.Search in Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A., Thomas Wasow & Emily M. Bender. 2003. Syntactic theory : A formal introduction, 2nd edn. Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Search in Google Scholar
Sandler, Wendy. 2010. The uniformity and diversity of language: Evidence from sign language. Lingua 120(12). 2727–2732.10.1016/j.lingua.2010.03.015Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Neil V. & Nicholas Allott. 2016. Chomsky: Ideas and ideals, 3rd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139979634Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Neil V. & Ianthi-Maria Tsimpli. 1995. The mind of a savant: Language learning and modularity. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Sprouse, Jon & Norbert Hornstein (eds.). 2013. Experimental syntax and island effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139035309Search in Google Scholar
Sprouse, Jon, Carson T. Schütze & Diogo Almeida. 2013. A comparison of informal and formal acceptability judgments using a random sample from Linguistic Inquiry 2001–2010. Lingua 134. 219–248.10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.002Search in Google Scholar
Wijnen, Frank. 2016. Not compelling: Commentary on Evans 2014. Language 92(1). 207–209.10.1353/lan.2016.0003Search in Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical investigations (Gertrude E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). New York: Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar
Yang, Charles. 2002. Knowledge and learning in natural language. Oxford: Oxford University PressSearch in Google Scholar
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Grammaticalization of auxiliaries and parametric changes
- CP-recursion in Danish: A cP/CP-analysis
- External syntax and the Cumulative Effect in subject sub-extraction: An experimental evaluation
- Feature reassembly as constraint satisfaction
- The many errors of Vyvyan Evans’ The Language Myth
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Grammaticalization of auxiliaries and parametric changes
- CP-recursion in Danish: A cP/CP-analysis
- External syntax and the Cumulative Effect in subject sub-extraction: An experimental evaluation
- Feature reassembly as constraint satisfaction
- The many errors of Vyvyan Evans’ The Language Myth