The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?
Citations
2,010 citations
1,818 citations
1,623 citations
1,409 citations
Cites background from "The faculty of language: what is it..."
...…explained, but in fact it is a virtual conceptual necessity;9 some version of transformational grammar seems to be the null hypothesis, 7 For discussion in a broader framework, see Hauser, Chomsky, and Fitch 2002; and for intriguing extensions, see Piattelli-Palmarini and Uriagereka, to appear....
[...]
1,385 citations
Cites background from "The faculty of language: what is it..."
...5 Recent findings are said to show that “animals lack the capacity to create open-ended generative systems,” whereas human “languages go beyond purely local structure by including a capacity for recursive embedding of phrases within phrases” (Hauser et al. 2002, p. 1577)....
[...]
...In the recent debates following Hauser et al. (2002), there is sometimes a conflation between constituent structure and recursion (see, e.g., Pinker & Jackendoff 2005, p. 215), but they are potentially orthogonal properties of languages....
[...]
...These adaptations of the peripheral input/output systems for spoken language have, for some unaccountable reason, been minimized in much of the discussion of language origins, in favor of an emphasis on syntax (see, for example, Hauser et al. 2002)....
[...]
...…syntax for a general cognitive science audience, it is simply presumed that the syntax of natural languages can basically be expressed in terms of constituent structure, and thus the familiar tree diagrams for sentence structure (Hauser et al. 2002; Jackendoff 2002; 2003a; Pinker 1994, p. 97 ff.)....
[...]
References
12,586 citations
Additional excerpts
...DOI: 10.1126/science.298.5598.1569 , 1569 (2002); 298 Science et al....
[...]
12,225 citations
11,302 citations
9,104 citations
6,894 citations