|Title:||A challenge to the minimalist community|
|Description:||The challenge suggested by Richard Sproat is in my opinion a most
important research idea, vital to the further development and expansion of
P&P, although I share some of the worries expressed by previous writers
I would like to add that the positive approach to this challenge should
be “how can P&P be made to work”, and not “let’s see how P&P fails to meet
There is growing skepticism in psycholinguistic circles that P&P, though
accepted, does not deliver: It provides no practical gain in answering the
question how language is acquired (satisfying explanatory adequacy).
Moreover, the MP is considered to be too complicated, only accessible and
understood by a small isolated group of people, therefore of no practical
use, although it makes claims about explanatory adequacy. Quantum
physics is also extremely complex and difficult to understand, yet nobody
has claimed that it is of no practical use or isolated from the real world.
Generative circles have already identified the growing disparity between
P&P and psycholinguistic research. Currently, a broad research program
headed by Janet Dean Fodor et al. (CUNY) is carried out to satisfy
explanatory adequacy – to meet Sproat’s challenge.
I hope that one of the researchers will post a message here, or that Richard
Sproat will post their messages on the matter, should he get any.
Discipline of Linguistics