How language couldn’t have evolved: A critical examination of berwick and chomsky’s theory of language evolution

Ronald J. Planer

doi:10.1007/s10539-017-9606-y

How language couldn’t have evolved: A critical examination of berwick and chomsky’s theory of language evolution

Ronald J. Planer^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article examines some recent work by Berwick and Chomsky as presented in their book Why Only Us? Language and Evolution (2015). As I understand them, Berwick and Chomsky’s overarching purpose is to explain how human language could have arisen in so short an evolutionary period. After articulating their strategy, I argue that they fall far short of reaching this goal. A coevolutionary scenario linking the mechanisms that realize the language system, both with one other and with cognitive mechanisms capable of exploiting linguistic expressions, is surely unavoidable. And yet this is precisely what Berwick and Chomsky in effect rule out.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	779-796
Number of pages	18
Journal	Biology and Philosophy
Volume	32
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-017-9606-y
Publication status	Published - Dec 2017

Access to Document

10.1007/s10539-017-9606-y

Cite this

@article{f85d30b5ccc94702b3338c6a007b29dc,

title = "How language couldn{\textquoteright}t have evolved: A critical examination of berwick and chomsky{\textquoteright}s theory of language evolution",

abstract = "This article examines some recent work by Berwick and Chomsky as presented in their book Why Only Us? Language and Evolution (2015). As I understand them, Berwick and Chomsky{\textquoteright}s overarching purpose is to explain how human language could have arisen in so short an evolutionary period. After articulating their strategy, I argue that they fall far short of reaching this goal. A coevolutionary scenario linking the mechanisms that realize the language system, both with one other and with cognitive mechanisms capable of exploiting linguistic expressions, is surely unavoidable. And yet this is precisely what Berwick and Chomsky in effect rule out.",

keywords = "Evolution of language, Hierarchical structure, Massive modularity, Merge, Rapid evolution, Symbolic behavior, Syntax",

author = "Planer, {Ronald J.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017.",

year = "2017",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1007/s10539-017-9606-y",

language = "English",

volume = "32",

pages = "779--796",

journal = "Biology and Philosophy",

issn = "0169-3867",

publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How language couldn’t have evolved

T2 - A critical examination of berwick and chomsky’s theory of language evolution

AU - Planer, Ronald J.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017.

PY - 2017/12

Y1 - 2017/12

N2 - This article examines some recent work by Berwick and Chomsky as presented in their book Why Only Us? Language and Evolution (2015). As I understand them, Berwick and Chomsky’s overarching purpose is to explain how human language could have arisen in so short an evolutionary period. After articulating their strategy, I argue that they fall far short of reaching this goal. A coevolutionary scenario linking the mechanisms that realize the language system, both with one other and with cognitive mechanisms capable of exploiting linguistic expressions, is surely unavoidable. And yet this is precisely what Berwick and Chomsky in effect rule out.

AB - This article examines some recent work by Berwick and Chomsky as presented in their book Why Only Us? Language and Evolution (2015). As I understand them, Berwick and Chomsky’s overarching purpose is to explain how human language could have arisen in so short an evolutionary period. After articulating their strategy, I argue that they fall far short of reaching this goal. A coevolutionary scenario linking the mechanisms that realize the language system, both with one other and with cognitive mechanisms capable of exploiting linguistic expressions, is surely unavoidable. And yet this is precisely what Berwick and Chomsky in effect rule out.

KW - Evolution of language

KW - Hierarchical structure

KW - Massive modularity

KW - Merge

KW - Rapid evolution

KW - Symbolic behavior

KW - Syntax

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054409887&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10539-017-9606-y

DO - 10.1007/s10539-017-9606-y

M3 - Article

SN - 0169-3867

VL - 32

SP - 779

EP - 796

JO - Biology and Philosophy

JF - Biology and Philosophy

IS - 6

ER -

How language couldn’t have evolved: A critical examination of berwick and chomsky’s theory of language evolution

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this