No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Does kinship terminology provide evidence for or against universal grammar?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 December 2010
Abstract
Jones introduces an intricate machinery of kin classification that overcomes limitations of previous accounts. I question whether such a machinery is plausible. Because individuals never need to learn the entire spectrum of kin terminology, they could rely on data-driven learning. The complexity of Jones's machinery for kin classification casts doubt on the existence of innate structures that cover the complete linguistic domain.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010
References
Arbib, M., Liebal, K. & Pika, S. (2008) Primate vocalization, gesture, and the evolution of human language. Current Anthropology
49:1053–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Behme, C. & Deacon, H. (2008) Language learning in infancy: Does the empirical evidence support a domain specific language acquisition device?
Philosophical Psychology
21(5):641–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botha, R. (1999) On Chomsky's “fable” of instantaneous language evolution. Language and Communication
19:243–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiansen, M. & Chater, N. (2008) Language as shaped by the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences
31:489–558.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deacon, T. (2007) The evolution of language systems in the human brain. Evolution of Nervous Systems
4:529–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, S. & Waterfall, H. (2007) Behavioral and computational aspects of language and its acquisition. Physics of Life Reviews
4:253–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elman, J., Bates, E., Johnson, M., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D. & Plunkett, K. (1996) Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Evans, N. & Levinson, S. (2009) The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences
32:429–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacWhinney, B. (2005) Language evolution and human development. In: Origins of the social mind: Evolutionary psychology and child development, ed. Bjorklund, D. & Pellegrini, A., pp. 383–410. Guilford.Google Scholar
Monahagan, P. & Christiansen, M. (2008) Integration of multiple probabilistic cues in syntax acquisition. In: Corpora in language acquisition research, ed. Behrens, H., pp. 139–63. John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redington, M., Chater, N. & Finch, S. (1998) Distributional information: A powerful cue for acquiring syntactic categories. Cognitive Science
22:425–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagae, K., MacWhinney, B. & Lavie, A. (2004) Automatic parsing of parent–child interactions. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers
36:113–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solan, Z., Horn, D., Ruppin, E. & Edelman, S. (2005) Unsupervised learning of natural languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science
102:11629–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1998) The particulate origins of language generativity. In: Approaches to the evolution of language, ed. Hurford, J., Studdert-Kennedy, M. & Knight, C., pp. 202–21. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003) Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2006) Acquiring linguistic constructions. In: Handbook of child psychology, ed. Kuhn, D. & Siegler, R., pp. 255–98. Wiley.Google Scholar
Target article
Does kinship terminology provide evidence for or against universal grammar?
Related commentaries (1)
Human kinship, from conceptual structure to grammar