Nature article in the news

[s.t. bischoff]

Thanks Dan,

I managed to get the link to the original article

Evolved structure of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order
universals<http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature09923.html>

and there is also a similar (to the LA Times) but perhaps more informative
general article at Nature
News<http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110413/full/news.2011.231.html>with
some "sober" reflection from Martin towards the end.

Cheers,
Shannon



On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Daniel Everett <dan at daneverett.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks for this, Shannon. Fascinating stuff.
>
> My book-length study on culture and language (Cognitive Fire: Language as
a Cultural Tool)  will be out from Random House in early 2012.  The folks in
NZ are doing some interesting research. Michael Corballis's new book, The
Recursive Mind: The Origins of Human Language, Thought, and Civilization (
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9424.html) is almost out and looks to be a
very worthwhile read.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> On Apr 14, 2011, at 3:12 PM, s.t. bischoff wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Here is an LA Times story that may be of interest...haven't had a chance
to
> > track down the original Nature article yet...would be curious to hear
> > reactions.
> >
> > Culture trumps biology in language development, study argues Researchers
> > construct evolutionary trees for four linguistic groups and conclude
that
> > cultures, not innate preferences, drive the language rules humans create
–
> > contrary to the findings of noted linguists Noam Chomsky and Joseph
> > Greenberg.
> > Are the rules of language encoded in our
> > genes<
http://www.latimes.com/topic/health/human-body/genes-chromosomes-HHA000024.topic
>,
> > or are they primarily shaped by the speaker's cultural context?
> >
> > Leading linguistic thinkers have argued that our brains are hard-wired
for
> > languages to follow certain sets of rules. But a team of scientists is
> > challenging that premise in a study published online Wednesday in the
> > journal Nature.
> >
> > The team used biological tools to construct evolutionary trees for four
> > language families and found that each of the families followed its own
> > idiosyncratic structural rules, a sign that humans' language choices are
> > driven by culture rather than innate preferences.
> >
> > The authors say their findings run contrary to the idea of Noam
> > Chomsky<
http://www.latimes.com/topic/entertainment/noam-chomsky-PECLB000974.topic>'s
> > generative grammar, which says the brain has hard and fast ordering
rules
> > for language. They also contradict the "universal rules" of Joseph H.
> > Greenberg, who said languages tended to choose certain patterns over
others.
> >
> >
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-language-20110414,0,1473928.story
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Shannon
> >
>