3 ms·
This was interesting except for the pointless Chomsky bashing. The fact that languages are different does not mean that they do not share a universal grammar. L
by hristov 16y ago
This was interesting except for the pointless Chomsky bashing. The fact that languages are different does not mean that they do not share a universal grammar. Languages can be very different and yet still share some underlying rules.
This article was written on a very different conceptual level than the universal grammar theories so it is really pointless to even mention those theories.
- nhebb 16y agoBashing? Dr. Chomsky proposed that there is a universal grammar for all human languages - essentially, that languages don't really differ from one another in significant ways. And because languages didn't differ from one another, the theory went, it made no sense to ask whether linguistic differences led to differences in thinking. I don't see that as bashing. The author is just explaining the chain of reasoning.
- wazoox 16y agoIt's actually an oversimplified (biased?) view of Chomsky's theories. Chomsky stated that language acquisition relies upon innate abilities and that all languages share some basic "structures" (the theory dates back from times when structuralism was all the rage). The theory has been proven false or inaccurate in many details, but the driving concept is definitely true.