Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T15:59:29.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What else should a neurobiological theory of language account for?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 1999

Vitor Geraldi Haase  and
Rui Rothe-Neves
Vitor Geraldi Haase
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, FAFICH, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, CEP 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG-Brazilhaase@fafich.ufmg.br
Rui Rothe-Neves
Affiliation:
Ph.D. Program in Linguistics, FALE, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, CEP 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG-Brazilpoetree@dedalus.lcc.ufmg.br
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We critique five points that impede the target article's far-reaching efforts toward formulating a neurobiological theory of language. Neurolinguistics amounts to no more than neurology in linguistics in this account, because it assumes “perceptual representational isomorphism,” processing autonomy and “meaning,” thereby aiming primarily at justifying modular concepts in terms of associative principles.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , April 1999 , pp. 291 - 292
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)