Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 3 - The Recent History of Attempts to Ground Orthographic Concepts of Language Theory

  • from Part I - Questions of Ontology: Writing and the Speech–Language Divide
  • Victor J. Boucher, Université de Montréal
  • Book:
    The Study of Speech Processes
    Published online:
    14 January 2021
    Print publication:
    21 January 2021, pp 52-72

  • Summary

    In the latter half of the twentieth century, language theory adopted a formalist approach that focused on sentence generation. While generative models were originally intended as computational accounts of sentence grammaticality, they were later taken to reflect an inborn competence and a “language learning device.” Yet formal grammars were being worked out from analyses of script using orthographic units and categories. Several problems arose in bootstrapping grammatical categories in the mind to units like words and phrases, which entailed a shoehorning of concepts of syntax to children's speech. While theory-driven perception research sought to confirm children’s recognition of words, studies of speech corpora indicate that young children are not manipulating units like words as separate units but chunked clusters of items. In documenting these problems, recent evidence is discussed showing that syntactic category information may not be represented as properties of words in the brain, undermining the hypothesis of a language acquisition device.