Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Chomskyans must be credited with holding that the primary... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Chomskyans must be credited with holding that the primary linguistic data are impoverished quite generally.

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Chomskyans defend the view that all of Universal Grammar (UG) is inborn.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the innateness of UG as a whole is to be supported by poverty of the stimulus considerations, then the specific cases nativists discuss (polar interrogatives, complex auxiliaries, etc.) must be only the tip of a larger unlearnable iceberg.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Chomsky's own methodological writings distinguish between UG as a formal object of study and the empirical claim that all of UG requires innate specification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The poverty of the stimulus argument is a local, case-by-case abductive inference, not a global claim that all grammatical knowledge is underdetermined by input.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Crediting Chomskyans with a 'general impoverishment' thesis conflates the logical structure of individual learnability arguments with a sweeping nativist doctrine they need not endorse.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Pullum and Scholz (2002) demonstrated that the specific stimulus data children receive is richer than Chomskyan poverty arguments typically assume, undermining the empirical basis for generalizing impoverishment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If paradigm cases like structure-dependent interrogatives are shown to be learnable from available input, the inductive inference to global impoverishment lacks its evidential foundation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Related

    Chomsky's own methodological writings distinguish between UG as a formal object ...Chomskyans defend the view that all of Universal Grammar (UG) is inborn.Crediting Chomskyans with a 'general impoverishment' thesis conflates the logica...If paradigm cases like structure-dependent interrogatives are shown to be learna...
    +3 moreShow less
    If the innateness of UG as a whole is to be supported by poverty of the stimulus...Pullum and Scholz (2002) demonstrated that the specific stimulus data children r...The poverty of the stimulus argument is a local, case-by-case abductive inferenc...

    Similar

    Those corrective data do not exist in the primary linguistic data.81%The primary linguistic data available to children is impoverished in t...80%The Relational Analysis does a poor job of accounting for certain ling...78%Defending the claim that primary data are impoverished quite generally...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: innateness-language
    View source passageHide passage
    Because they are defending the view that all of UG is inborn, Chomskyans must be credited with holding that the primary data are impoverished quite generally. That is, if the innateness of UG tout court is to be supported by poverty of the stimulus considerations, the idea must be that the cases that nativists discuss in detail (polar interrogatives, complex auxiliaries, etc.) are but the tip of the unlearnable iceberg. Nativists quite reasonably do not attempt to defend this claim by end
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit