What I think Marcus and Pinker are resisting now therefore is the idea that ML is now revealing deeper truths of the quasi-computational (or at least extremely logically rigorous, since the Chomsky stack, which was set up to counter bad machine-trans) Universal Grammar paradigm.
Why does “innate general language skill” have to imply that syntax is all there is to it?
-
-
I don't know. This is where I disagree with Chomsky. I think it's bc like Feynman & all sane souls he despises philosophy. While syntax can be and was built up at his bidding into a marvellous pseudo-computatjonal logic edifice, semantics is mushy and gets philosophical fast.
-
Chomsky ruthlessly subordinated semantics to syntax in order to have a clean, sciencey paradigm and discipline. Everyone agrees what he built is epic qua syntax. Just parallel with formal semantics in linguistics is another part of social theory doing the same thing - semiotics.
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.