Chomsky: Obsolete?

[Gordon, Peter]

I think it would be an interesting exercise if Robin (and other Anti-Chomskians) could give us a sense of how child language might have developed without Chomsky and why it would have benefited from his absence.
 
Peter Gordon
 
Peter Gordon, Associate Professor
525 W 120th St. Box 180
Biobehavioral Sciences Department
Teachers College, Columbia University
New York, NY 10027
Office Phone: (212) 678-8162
FAX: (212) 678-8233
Web Page: www.tc.edu/faculty/index.htm?facid=pg328

________________________________

From: info-childes at mail.talkbank.org on behalf of Anat Ninio
Sent: Thu 10/11/2007 6:29 AM
To: Jeff MacSwan
Cc: Anat Ninio; r.n.campbell; info-childes at mail.talkbank.org
Subject: Re: Chomsky: Obsolete?



Well, generativism hasn't been the same since Chomsky turned his theory
into a sub-type of Dependency Grammar! My enthusiasm for highly-abstract
syntax as a framework for developmental theory has always been very
restricted, so it's good news that Chomsky doesn't work that way any more.

Anat Ninio

Jeff MacSwan wrote:
> It's not a surprise that those who are committed to frameworks which
> disavow generativist work would gleefully await the day when the most
> influential figure, who also created the field, is no longer "relevant."
>
> But Chomsky's work actually continues to grow in significance and
> influence, precisely due to its relevance not only to linguistics
> generally, but also to the social sciences, the cognitive sciences,
> computer science and mathematics, and philosophy.
>
> While one can do interesting and important linguistic research that does
> not heavily rely on Chomsky's own specific contributions to linguistic
> theory, the idea that his work has generally lost relevance or
> significance reflects a lack of acquaintance with the current
> linguistics literature.
>
> Jeff MacSwan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: info-childes at mail.talkbank.org
> [mailto:info-childes at mail.talkbank.org] On Behalf Of Anat Ninio
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 7:56 AM
> To: r.n.campbell
> Cc: info-childes at mail.talkbank.org
> Subject: Re: Chomsky: Obsolete?
>
> Hi Robin,
>
> Chomsky actually changed his mind about what syntax is, so maybe he's
> now a more relevant figure than before?
>
> Anat Ninio
>
>
>
> r.n.campbell wrote:
>  
>>> *Competence vs. Performance: A False Distinction?*
>>>      
>> A broader topic (which includes this one and is equally worth
>> discussing) is that Noam Chomsky and all his works are also obsolete.
>> For me, it will be a happy day when this is so.
>> --
>>  
>> Dr Robin N Campbell
>> Dept of Psychology
>> University of Stirling
>> STIRLING FK9 4LA
>> Scotland, UK
>>
>> telephone: 01786-467649  facsimile: 01786-467641
>> email: r.n.campbell at stir.ac.uk
>> Website: http://www.psychology.stir.ac.uk/staff/rcampbell/index.php
>>
>> --
>>
>> The University of Stirling is a university established in Scotland by
>> charter at Stirling, FK9 4LA. Privileged/Confidential Information may
>> be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated
>> in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such
>> person), you may not disclose, copy or deliver this message to anyone
>> and any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is
>> prohibited and may be unlawful. In such case, you should destroy this
>> message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise
>> immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email
>> for messages of this kind.
>>
>>    
>
>
>
>  




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/info-childes/attachments/20071011/d7b9af4e/attachment.htm>