Universal Grammar and the Mind vs the Brain Elly van Gelderen 6 April 2012

Outline Some current developments regarding Universal Grammar (UG): What is (UG) and what is 3rd factor? Status of features Mind over matter: can linguistics contribute to the renewed interest in dualism?

Some current issues in Minimalism How much to attribute to Universal Grammar? Earlier: parameters in the syntax (e.g. head-initial) but now all variation is in the lexicon by means of features; syntax is `merge’ Lexical learning and the Poverty of the Stimulus suggest the need for innate concepts

From early Generative Grammar to Minimalism Universal Grammar UG and Third factors (= Principles & Parameters) + + Input Input (Scottish English, Western Navajo, etc) = = I-language I-language E-language E-Language

Three Factors relevant to the FL “(1) genetic endowment, which sets limits on the attainable languages, thereby making language acquisition possible; (2) external data, converted to the experience that selects one or another language within a narrow range; (3) principles not specific to FL [the Faculty of Language]. Some of the third factor principles have the flavor of the constraints that enter into all facets of growth and evolution.... Among these are principles of efficient computation”. (Chomsky 2007: 3)

The actual features are not third factor Chomsky (1965: 142): “semantic features ... too, are presumably drawn from a universal ‘alphabet’ but little is known about this today and nothing has been said about it here.” Chomsky (1993: 24) vocabulary acquisition shows poverty of the stimulus.

The importance of various features Chomsky (1965: 87-88): lexicon contains information for the phonological, semantic, and syntactic component. Sincerity (+N, -Count, +Abstract...) Chomsky (1995: 230ff; 236; 277ff): semantic (e.g. abstract object), phonological (e.g. the sounds), and formal features: intrinsic or optional.

Features of airplane and build (adapted from Chomsky 1995: 231) Semantic would be innate; formal needs to be learned! airplane build semantic: e.g. [artifact] e.g. [action] phonological: e.g. [begins with a vowel; e.g. [one syllable] two syllables] formal: intrinsic optional intrinsic optional [nominal] [number] [verbal] [phi] [3 person] [Case] [assign accusative] [tense] [non-human]

Categories/semantic features Humans and non-humans are excellent at categorization, e.g. prairie dogs have colors, shape, size. Words are not the problem; morphology is!

Innate vs learned shapes grammatical gender negatives grammatical number `if’ modals mass-count Another question: much more speculative!

Free will vs determinism “Les idées ... ne tirent en aucune sorte leur origine des sens ... Notre ame a la faculté de les former de soi-même.” `Ideas do not in any fashion have their origin in the senses ... Our mind has the faculty to form those on its own.’ (Arnauld & Nicole 1662 [1965]: 45) Language is about the mind not the world!

Is the `mind’ purely material? De la Mettrie Descartes Skinner Eccles/Popper Churchland Sperry (mentalism) Dennett Chalmers Consciousness and subjectivity? The problem of reference: unicorn, circle The mind thinks about that which is not; we can’t know what others think.

For Baker (2011) FL is an ideal testing ground Vocabulary and grammar vs creative aspect (CALU). CALU: unbounded, stimulus-free, and appropriate use. a) Is there an area in the brain for CALU? Wernicke and Broca’s aphasia: no evidence that CALU is affected. Lichtheim (1885): no aphasia with concept center affected. b) Is there a CALU gene? c) OCD therapy (Schwarz): mind tells the brain to stop

In short Recent changes in what UG is: from Principles and Parameters > features Now the question is: are concepts and features innate and third factor? New focus: CALU and dualism