Devitt ’ s ‘ Ignorance of Language ’
نویسنده
چکیده
Devitt (2006) makes a sustained critique of Chomskyan linguistics, articulating persistent complaints about the “psychological reality” of generative grammars. I suggest these complaints are merely terminological and that Devitt fails to appreciate the status of Chomsky’s computational formalisms found elsewhere in cognitive science. Devitt ascribes an intentional conception of representations that Chomsky repudiates and that is independently implausible. I argue that Devitt’s proposed alternative “linguistic reality” constituted by physical symbol tokens neglects the problems of tokens as opposed to types and he misses the force of Chomsky’s case against Behaviourism and nominalism. I suggest that Devitt’s case against intuitions as data misunderstands their standard role throughout perceptual psychology. I argue that Devitt’s position exemplifies pervasive errors concerning mental representation seen throughout cognitive science.
منابع مشابه
Psychological Reality of Grammars: Devitt’s ‘Ignorance of Language’
Devitt makes a sustained critique of Chomskyan linguistics, articulating persistent complaints about the “psychological reality” of generative grammars. I suggest these complaints are merely terminological and that Devitt fails to appreciate the status of Chomsky’s computational formalisms found elsewhere in cognitive science. Devitt ascribes an intentional conception of representations that Ch...
متن کاملExplanation and Reality in Linguistics
This paper defends some anti-Chomskian themes in Ignorance of Language (Devitt 2006a) from the criticisms of John Collins (2007, 2008a) and Georges Rey (2008). It argues that there is a linguistic reality external to the mind and that it is theoretically interesting to study it. If there is this reality, we have good reason to think that grammars are more or less true of it. So, the truth of th...
متن کاملPsychological Conception, Psychological Reality: A Response to Longworth and Slezak
My book, Ignorance of Language (2006a), challenges the received Chomskian “psychological conception” of grammars and proposes a “linguistic conception” according to which a grammar is a theory of a representational system. My response to Guy Longworth rejects his claim in “Ignorance of Linguistics” (2009) that there is “mutual determination” between linguistic and psychological facts with the r...
متن کاملDefending Ignorance of Language: Responses to the Dubrovnik Papers
This paper is a response to some interesting papers critical of main themes in my recent book, Ignorance of Language [2006a]. Those papers all arose out of wonderfully convivial and productive conferences on the philosophy of linguistics in Dubrovnik in September 2005 and 2006. They are now published in the present volume. Four of the papers, Barry Smith’s “Why We Still Need Knowledge of Langua...
متن کاملCRITICAL D ISCUSSI ON What ‘‘Intuitions’’ are Linguistic Evidence?
In ‘‘Intuitions in Linguistics’’ (2006a) and Ignorance of Language (2006b) I took it to be Chomskian orthodoxy that a speaker’s metalinguistic intuitions are provided by her linguistic competence. I argued against this view in favor of the alternative that the intuitions are empirical theory-laden central-processor responses to linguistic phenomena. The concern about these linguistic intuitions...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2006