| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Evidence Rebuts Chomsky's Theory of Language Learning |
| 2016-09-12 |
| h/t Instapundit The idea that we have brains hardwired with a mental template for learning grammar--famously espoused by Noam Chomsky of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology--has dominated linguistics for almost half a century. Recently, though, cognitive scientists and linguists have abandoned Chomsky’s "universal grammar" theory in droves because of new research examining many different languages--and the way young children learn to understand and speak the tongues of their communities. That work fails to support Chomsky’s assertions. The research suggests a radically different view, in which learning of a child’s first language does not rely on an innate grammar module. Instead the new research shows that young children use various types of thinking that may not be specific to language at all--such as the ability to classify the world into categories (people or objects, for instance) and to understand the relations among things. These capabilities, coupled with a unique huÂÂÂman ability to grasp what others intend to communicate, allow language to happen. The new findings indicate that if researchers truly want to understand how children, and others, learn languages, they need to look outside of Chomsky’s theory for guidance. Bye, bye Noam (pleasant). |
| Posted by:g(r)omgoru |
| #8 The thing isn't that his theory is wrong that has been well established for over 30 years (despite what the article says). It is that he constantly twisted his theory to try and fit the contrary evidence. Much like his political theories. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2016-09-12 23:08 |
| #7 Thank you, Bright Pebbles. I've learnt something useful today, so I'm happy. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-09-12 22:54 |
| #6 @TW No not at all useful. The most used programming languages have nothing chumpsky about them If anything putting more "language" into code harms quality, readability and performance. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2016-09-12 17:54 |
| #5 It seems to me his work was useful to those developing computer languages, which must be some sort of comfort as his place in the pantheon crumbles to dust. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-09-12 17:46 |
| #4 Then again, I think a lot of people thought Das Kapital sounded reasonable. I read that book three fucking times and finally decided it was bullshit. It took me long enough... |
| Posted by: Raj 2016-09-12 15:47 |
| #3 Numb Chimpsky is more of a BS artist and hypnotist than he is a language theorist. I assume now that whenever the Chimpster speaks, he is engaging in another cunning plan. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2016-09-12 15:26 |
| #2 Not exactly--it sounded reasonable, and if it had panned out it would have been a legitimate claim to fame. It wouldn't have excused his vitriolic dishonesty in other fields, of course. |
| Posted by: james 2016-09-12 11:38 |
| #1 News Flash - another lefty is exposed as a bullshit artist. |
| Posted by: Raj 2016-09-12 11:14 |