Human evolution; Chomsky Everett language fight (Introduction)

by David Turell , Saturday, September 12, 2020, 18:03 (1531 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: This discussion is one long quibble over terminology.

DAVID: The argument is whether we are born with a basic mechanism in our brains for grammar and syntax, which would certainly suggest a designer introduced it into our current iteration of the human brain. I will differ with you. There are universal rules that seem to apply to all languages. The battle over recursion, however, seems to be difference over semantics. This author suggests strongly Everett is alone.

dhw: All human languages consist of sequences of words/sounds which are joined together. The words/sounds themselves and the manner in which they are joined together vary from language to language, though there are common features between some languages. All children are born with the necessary mechanisms for LEARNING the words/sounds and the way they are joined together, and children learn these by copying what they hear in their immediate surroundings. “Rules” and terminology are our attempts to systematize our respective languages, and these have undergone many changes over thousands of years. Nobody so far as I know has managed to write a grammar book with "rules" that can be applied to all human languages at all times of their history. I suggest strongly that Everett is not alone. “Difference over semantics” is another way of saying quibbling over terminology.

An interesting digression: in what language would we and your God communicate now? (Ugh, maybe that’s why he remains hidden!)

From what I have read the Chomsky theory is that there is an innate grammar and syntax in all of us at birth, to b e developed from listening. I confer with God in English. My German is weak and Yiddish very sketchy.