Language Is Instinct: a New Paradigm in Linguistics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LANGUAGE IS INSTINCT: A NEW PARADIGM IN LINGUISTICS A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Guelph by ALAN BELK In partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Master of Arts September, 1998 O Alan Belk 1998 National Library Bibliothèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services seMces bibliographiques 39!5 WeUingtori Street 395. rue Wellington OttawaON K1AW Ottawa ON K1A ûN4 canada canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distn'bute or sell reproduire, prêter, disûi'buer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/nIm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fkom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otheNVIse de celle-ci ne doivent Seimprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation, LANGUAGE IS INSTINCT: A NEW PARADIGM IN LINGUISTICS Alan Belk Advisor: University of Guelph 1998 Professor Michael Ruse If we can idencify a science, descnbe its paradigm, anomalies and research questions, recognize a cnsis or impending crisis and a cornpeting paradigm, then a revolution as described by Thomas Kuhn (1970) is taking place. Steven Pinker's book The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creares Language is, according to its Preface, intended to explain the current state of knowledge about language. 1 examine Pinker's daims and arguments that language is instinciive using Kuhn's ideas as a hmework and show that there is a shift to a new paradigm in Linguistics, together with a new set of anomalies and research questions that are engendered by the new paradigm, and thus show that a revolution is occurring. To my friends: Isobel Heathcote, for encouraging me to start; Michael Ruse, for encouraging me to finish; David Martens, for the bits in between; and to my daughter Zoë (who Iistened to me talk about it so rnuch) and my son Edward. "'ïime flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." Pinker (1994) p. 153 Section 1 The Language Instinct 2 Section 2 The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 4 Section 3 Nagel's Reduction 7 3.1 Reduction and Emergence 7 3.2 Kuhn or Nagel? 12 Section 4 The Development of Linguistics in North Amenca 13 Section 5 The Development of Linguisucs in Europe 19 Section 6 The Standard Social Science Mode1 23 6.1 What are the Social Sciences? 23 6.2 Tooby and Cosmides 24 Section 7 Conclusion 28 CHAPTER 3 TkEE LANGUAGE LNS7ZNCT 30 Section 1 Introduction 30 Section 2 The Claim That Language 1s An Instinct 31 2.1 Language Complexity 35 2.2 Language Creation 37 2.3 Sign Languages 38 2.4 Teaching Children Language 39 2.5 What if Something Goes Wrong? 40 2.6 Thinking (Mentalese) 43 2.7 Do Words Detennine Thougbts? 44 2.8 How the Mind Works 46 2.9 The Turing Machine-Linking Language and Thought- 47 2-10 Conclusion 50 Section 3 Grammar and Lexicon 51 3.1 The Lexicon 52 3.2 The Grammar 54 3.3 Conclusion 57 Setion 4 The Physical Basis of Language 58 4.1 The Sound of Language (Connecting Language and Speech) 58 4.2 Sentences-Decoding the Message 61 4.3 Why Do We Speak Different Languages? 64 4.4 Conclusion 67 Section S Evolution and the Genetic Basis of Language 68 Section 6 The Relationship Between Language and the Mind 72 CHAPTER 4 THE REVOLUTION 73 Section 1 The Relationship between SSSM and Language is Instinct_ 73 Section 2 The Relationship with Darwinism 76 Setion 3 Who Wi11 Win the Revolution? 78 Section 4 Conclusion 79 BIBLIOGRAPHY 82 iii LIST OF WLES Table 1. The tenable positions for the various combinations of general intellect and apparent language ability 42 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION In his book The Larzguage Instinct, Steven Pinker makes a case that human language is an instinct, a biological drive chat we cannot subdue or control. This view opposes the established view that language is a culnirally determined artifact-what Pinker calls "the Standard Social Science Model" of language. (For an illustration that this view is still current, and of the research it governs, see for example Smillie (1995)). My thesis is chat we are experiencing a scientific revolution, as described by Thomas Kuhn (1970), in the field of linguistics. In the next chapter I will prepare the ground by giving a brkf ove~ewof The Language Instinct in order to outline the position Pinker is taking. I will outline Thomas Kuhn's The Stmctzue of Scientific Revolutions (Kuhn (1970)) which provides the framework for my thesis that we are undergoing a revolution in our understanding of language, and sumrnarise Ernest Nagel's views on the reduction of scientific theories to provide a contrasting view of how science changes. 1 will review the development of the field of linguistics over the last hundred years or so in order to demonstrate that it can be considered a science and thus be suitable for analysis in terms of Kuhn's (and Nagel's) ideas. And in order to show how Pinker's claim that language is an instinct differs from established views of language 1 will describe the Standard Social Science Model. In the third chapter 1 will analyze The Language Instinct in some detail to show how the ideas Pinker puts forward represent another view of the world with respect to language. That is, Pinker's view is wholly incommensurable with the Standard Social Science Model. In my final chapter 1 will show how a revolution is occumng to justify my thesis that there is a scientific revolution in progress which will change the way we understand human language. CWAPTER 2 BACKGROUND Section 1 The L~nguugeInstinct Pinker (1995) claims that, as a species, we possess a "remarkable abiliqt' which allows us "to shape events in each other's brains with exquisite precision" (p. 15); and that language is an ability such that "simply by making noises with our mouths, we can reliably cause precise new combinations of ideas to arise in each other's minds" (p. 15). Language is a "preeminent trait" of the human species. And the prevailing scienrific view of language has entered the general consciousness, so that Most educated people already have opinions about language. They know that it is man's most important cultural invention, the quintessenad exam- ple of his capacity to use syrnbols, and a biologicdly unprecedented event irrevocabIy separating him from other animais. They know that language pervades thought, with different languages causing their speakers to con- sme reality in different ways. They know that children learn to talk from role modeis and caregivers. They know that gm~aticalsophistication used to be nurntred in the schools, but sagging educational standards and the debasements of popular culture have led to a frightening deciine in the abil- ity of the average person to construct a grammatical sentence. They also know that Engiish is a zarq logicdemg tongue, in which one drives on a parkway and parks on a drivewax pIays at a recital and reates at a pIay @p. 17-18) However: .. every one of these cornmon opinions is wrong! And they are dl wrong for a single reason, Language is not a cultural arafact that we learn the way we lean to teii tirne or how the Federal Government works. Instead, it is a distinct piece of the biological rnakeup of our brains. Language is a complex, specialized skill, which develops in the child spontaneously, without con- scious effort or formai instruction, is depioyed without awareness of its un- derlying logic, is qualitatively the same in every individual, and is distinct from more general abilines to process information or behave inteliigently (P. 18) These daims announce that Pinker has a new way of looking at language. In his view it is a biological instinct as are the abilities to walk and to copulate: it is sornething we cannot help but do, that we do in spite of ourselves. It is something that is expressed at a parcicular stage in our development from conception to adulthood and death. It is an adaptive trait. Its use does not denote or indicate other abilities. And it serves not to describe the world, nor to exchange information, but to communicate intentionality (Intentionality, as described by Searle (1994) is the property of the mind "by which it is directed at, about, or of objects and states of affairs in the world" (emphasis in original)): Mental states have i~tn'nsicUitentionality, materiai objem in the world that are used to represent something have derived intentionality. The most im- portant fonn of derived intentionaliry is in Ianguage and there is a special name in English for this form of intentionality. It is cailed 'meaning' in one of the many senses of that word. (p. 386: emphasis in originai) If Pinker's claims are accepted, then we are in some stage of a scientific revolution as defined and described by Kuhn (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is a descriptive work, and shows that there are histoncally repeative patterns in the human activity called science which may therefore be used as predictive of future turns of events.