Bernard H. BichakjianBHB@Post.Harvard.edu

THE CANONICAL VIEW

Humans havelanguage

Sub humansdo not

… that humansare born with a Universal Grammarcoded in their genes

THIS A MATERIAL VIEW

Is it becauseabstract thinkingis alleged to be subjective?

Is it because it better dovetails into syntactic operations expressed in programming language?

Maybe both?

is in the words of Saussure a faculté de langage,

that has enabled us to forge and use a system of verbal communication.

i.e., an immaterial potential

Humans can also countbut no one would claim

that the known

quinquesimal,decimal, vigesimal,sexagesimal, and the modern binary

systems

Humans have a potential for counting, and that potential is immaterial

are variants of a core counting modelcoded in our genes

Humans can also dance.

They can dance the minuet

the waltz

the tango

But no one would claim that humans carry a core dance step in their genes.

Humans have a potential for rhythmic motion, and that potential is immaterial.

But we don’t have a rudimentary compassor a model mapcoded in our genes

We find our way and

we make maps

a dancer

or a surveyor

that not everyone becomes a mathematician

even among individuals without congenital deficits

not everyone acquires language

that’s the case of feral children

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ljVd6XS-J0s

suggests two things:

1.Language is not an organ-like entity, and language acquisition is not a case of gene expression.

2. We tap our various potentials to the extent they are needed in our everyday lives.

Language is indispensable for our survival;so, we are pressed into becoming linguistically proficient ASAP.

Counting is important, but not indispensable;so, we attain a measure of proficiency.

Dancing is a flourish and surveying a technique;so, not everyone learns to tango, and map making is left to the

experts.

If all humans are endowed with the same skeletal grammar, then all languages are gratuitous variants of a unique model.

No linguistic feature, present here and absent there, can be claimed to be more or less advanced than its homolog elsewhere.

All homologous features are equally advanced ,and all linguistic systems are equal.The Italians have a say: “Non è vero, ma è bello.”

Turning the words around, one may ask: “It’s beautiful alright, but is it true?”

The attendant relativism of Universal Grammar is politically convenient.

But, as far as I know, there is no evidence at all that this is the case” (1984:162).

“The notion that all languages are somehow exactly equal in

complexity and expressiveness is often taught as scientific truth in linguistics courses.

Charles Ferguson (1921–1998)

There are nono signs of a grammar gene

has been unambiguous

Science may indeed uncover unpleasant truths, but the critical thing is that they are truths.

Any effort, whether wicked or well-meaning, to conceal truth or impede its disclosure is destructive.” (James Watson, 2003:372).

Jim Watson

“… ideology – of any kind – & science are at best inappropriate bedfellows.

Contrary to what has been claimed

• Language is NOT a mental organ• Language acquisition is NOT a matter of

gene expression• Humans are NOT born with a Universal

Grammar coded in their genes

This has been my position for decades

I have been arguing for decades• that we have a potential for language, not a blue

print,•that languages have evolved, as linguistic communities

have sought to make their systems of thought and

communication• ever-more powerful •and ever-more efficient,•and that they have done so at their own pace and along

their own pathways

I have received more criticism than support,

but concurring views are emerging.

• “The claims of Universal Grammar … are empirically false, unfalsifiable, or misleading in that they refer to tendencies rather than strict universals.

• Structural differences should instead be accepted for what they are,

• and integrated into a new approach to language and cognition that places diversity centre stage” (Evans and Levinson 2009:429).

Nick Evans

Steve Levinson

In a seminal paper, Nick Evans and Steve Levinson have argued that

“We show that each of these [four] language families evolves according to its own set of rules, not ... to a universal set of rules.

That is inconsistent with the ... “universality theories” of grammar;

it suggests rather that language is part of• not a specialised module distinct from the rest of

cognition, • but more part of broad human cognitive skills.”

Describing what could be seen as a “follow up” article, Michael Dunn, the lead author, has stated:

I will argue and, to the extent possible, demonstrate

In the remaining part of my paper,

• that as incipient speakers cobbled their initial linguistic systems, they improvised grammatical implements on the basis of their perception of the outside world,

• but that as languages evolved, the grammatical implements molded on the outside world were gradually replaced with alternatives conceived in the mind exclusively for linguistic purposes.

• that this was an important process whereby languages as systems of thought and communication became

• ever-more powerful • and ever-more efficient.

Visual Cerebral

Perceptual Conceptual

Grammatical features Grammatical featuresmolded on the outside world developed in the mind

for linguistic purposes

Pictogram Alphabet

Pictogram Alphabet

Picture soundRebus

• tailor• tailgate

t…

Picture meaning• tail

Picture meaningExtension

• end

Picture sound Homonymy• tale

Acrophonic principle“d” as in “dog”

Pictogram Alphabet

head of an ox

stylized

stylized & rotated 90º

foot

yard

inch metric system

Protagoras: "Man is the measure of all things” ...

material and mental!

human

animal

vegetal

mineral

compact

long

solid

liquid

PracticallyDisappeared

active

stative

active

stative

stative

AgentErgative case

PatientAbsolutive case

Nouns SyntaxVerbs

PatientAbsolutive case

active

stative

Masculine Feminine

Neuter

Nouns

Ø

active

stative

active/passive

deponent

adjective

Verbs

stative

active

Patient of a stative verb

AgentErgative case

Syntax

Subjectnominative case

PatientAbsolutive case

Patient of a active verb

Direct objectaccusative case

• No active/stative distinction.

• All nouns can occupy all syntactic functions

• No active/stative distinction.

• All verbs can have a subject.

• Transitive verbs can be put in the passive voice.

Nouns SyntaxVerbs Adjectives

Can be • predicative• attributive.

• No agent/patient distinction.

• The action can be expressed from the angle of all participants

Nouns: No subcategorization. All nouns can be subject.(Originally, neuter nouns were stative and, as such, could not be

agents.)

Verbs: No subcategorization. All verbs can take a subject.(Originally, only active verbs could have an agent.)

Adjectives: They can be attributive or predicative.(Originally, they were stative verbs and, as such, only predicative.)

Syntax: All argument alignments are possible:(1) John gave Mary a present.(2) A present was given to Mary by John(3) Mary was given a present by John

(Originally, only [1] was possible.)

I can express the actions that are• in progress• completed• resulting state

Chainedto the present

I can expressthe actions• I saw• I am seeing• I shall see

Aspect Tense

my mind is free to travel

rhythmic drum beats

Stem modulation

Function words

• Vowel alternation sing~sang~song edit~ēdit

• Syllable reduplication canit~cecinit

• Conson’t reduplication kasara~kassara broke~broke to pieces

Suffixes Markers of case, person, degree, tense, mood, etc.

Function words

prepositions, pronouns,

degree adverbs, auxiliaries, etc.

• Stem modulation provides only a limited number of distinctions.

• Suffixes provide more distinctions, • but can trigger morphological irregularities • and therefore language acquisition problems and delays.

• Function words can provide• unlimited distinctions • and no language acquisition problems.

That we are a cerebral species, that we have achieved our survival and indeed our dominion over many of the elements by using our brain and finding cerebral solutionsis common knowledge.

What needed to be stressed and demonstrated is that the quest for cerebral alternatives also applies to language.

Expectedly enough, languages started with features molded on the out-side world, but the perceptual prototypes gradually morphed into mentally constructed alternatives, especially conceived for linguistic purposes.

Harry Jerison has argued that language has provided humans with a cognitive dimension that enables us to elaborate knowledge “not only from sensory mappings that we share with other anthropoids as well as most mammals, but by important inputs to the mapping that comes from our language ‘sense’ as it has evolved in Homo sapiens.”

The foregoing has shown that the trend from sensory mapping to cognitive processing has continued, whereby languages have become ever-more powerful instruments for the organization and transfer of knowledge.

BHB@Post.Harvard.eduhttp://www.bichakjian.com/

bernard/