You must be more specific. But when i was as student Chomsky was God, that is his generative grammar, and the theories that supported this. But, a while back, I discovered that he was losing some traction because some of his underlying assumptions about language in the brain was being called into question. I remember that the critic was a scholar in the us, I think, who had studied the structure of amazonian lanaguges, and pinpointed some sort anomoly that should not exist, if everything Chomsky assumed was correct. Unfortunately, I do not remember this man's name. Nor do I know where the matter stands at the moment. But at least it gives you something to google....
Thanks Michael Henrik Wynn .Yes almost all theories have been subject to debate nd critique because language and language are such an enigmatic phenomenon. Moreover, with around 200 languages and more dialects spoken overall, no one formula can fit all. But as learners and instructors we have to touch upon most of them. Here is an interesting summary and critique of a few theorie that you might be interested in.
A little googling, and i found the man
Daniel Everett
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Everett
I remember one last thing about this, but I am less certain about this. So you must double and triple check this last thing. I seem to recall that Chomsky's argument relied on something called a modular model of the brain (?), and that one of the people who also relied on this was the renowned scholar Steven Pinker. What I am saying is that if Everett is correct (which i am by no means qualified to judge), then that may affect both Chomsky and Pinker. There is also the possibility of new physiological knowledge that may have modified the views of Pinker and Chomsky. The generative model was conceived BEFORE much new technology that we have today. So Chomsky did not ignore facts, they may simply not have been available to him.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics