LINGUIST List 9.1131

Tue Aug 11 1998

FYI: Confs List, Universal Grammar (Proof)

Editor for this issue: Martin Jacobsen <martylinguistlist.org>


Directory

  • Peter White, Latest Conference List...
  • Dr. John Skoyles, New evidence for UG

    Message 1: Latest Conference List...

    Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 10:46:00 +1000 (EST)
    From: Peter White <peterwlingua.cltr.uq.edu.au>
    Subject: Latest Conference List...


    The August edition of the Conference Schedule: Linguistics and Related Topics is now available at http://www.cltr.uq.edu.au:8000/conf.html

    Sorry for the delay; I've been attending conferences. 30 new conferences have been added to the schedule.

    ============================================================= Peter White Centre for Language Teaching and Research University of Queensland, Qld 4072 Australia Tel: +61 7 3365 6893; Fax: +61 7 3365 7077 Email: peterwlingua.cltr.uq.edu.au Web: http://www.cltr.uq.edu.au:8000/users/peter.white ==============================================================


    Message 2: New evidence for UG

    Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 18:31:33
    From: Dr. John Skoyles <skoylesglobalnet.co.uk>
    Subject: New evidence for UG


    Surprising new evidence for UG.

    UG has been criticised recently upon empirical grounds. The stimulus experience by infants no longer seems so poor as Chomsky claims, (i) given the power of networks to extract grammars (Redington, M & Chater, N. 1997, Trends in Cognitive Science, 1, 273-281) and (ii) the existence following grammatical errors of corrective exemplars (for example Saxton, M. 1997, J. Child Lang, 24, 139-161). Moreover, universality as a claim sits poorly with the failure of linguists to table cross-linguistic supporting evidence in the context of the remarkable degree of syntax-related diversity among languages. Worse, suggestions exist dating back to the spring of 1994 in this list that UG has gained a status of being above criticism -- at least by junior faculty. From outside linguistics, UG does not appear a scientific data point, more an intellectual 'brand', or a philosophically motivated research program. Sources for the latter points (Sampson, G, Educating Eve, 1997; Pullum, G. K, 1996, J. Linguistics, 32, 137-147; Itkonen, E. 1996, J. Pragmatics, 25, 471-501).

    One recent research finding that few linguistics will know of however considerably increases the neurobiological plausibility for UG. The body schema by which we experience hands, fingers, feet and toes has been found like UG to be innate. Since early in this century, reports have existed of phantom limbs in those born limbless. A question mark, however, has until now existed over the validity of such reports due their subjectivity and their implausibility given the known neural plasticity in adults that erases limb representations following limb amputation. A recent report has removed such doubts (Kollias, S. et al [1998], 'Cortical representation of phantom limbs in congenital teramelia demonstrated by FMRI', NeuroImage, vol 7, section 3 [part ii], S18). A FMRI study is reported upon a 44 year-old university educated female born without arms or legs. As long as she can remember however she has experienced very vivid phantom limbs, for example, normally shaped thighs with feet and toes that are 'unquestionable parts of her body'. Indeed, she feels that her 'complete' arms with hand and fingers gesticulate during conversation. What is novel about Kollias et al's report is that these subjective experience are backed up with objective MRI detected activations in her motor cortex areas when asked to move her phantoms. This research argues strongly that we are born with a 'neuromatrix' that provides a template for our sense of bodily extension.

    This finding is important to linguistics as it provides something that has missing until now: a case of neurobiological pre-adaptation for mental processes that might otherwise be attributed exclusively to environmental learning. If such a neurobiological preadaption has evolved for our body schemata, it is not improbable that a similar pre-adaptation could have evolved for syntax. Thus, UG remains, in spite, of recent challenges, a probable theory.

    Dr. John R. Skoyles 6 Denning Rd, Hampstead, NW3 1SU London, UK

    Check out my Golden House-Sparrow award winning homepage http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~skoyles/index.htm