sign in sign up
<<
Home , Reflections on Language, The Language Instinct

Book Reviews

Patterns in the Mind. and Nature

Ray Jackendoff New York Basic Books, a &ion of HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 1994

ISBN 0-465-05461-7 Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021

The Language

Steven Pinker. New York William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1994 ISBN 0-688-12141-1

Reviewed by Peter Marler

The eloquent, aggressive, and unswerving advocacy of behavioral development, came to eschew the term “in- , championing a nativistic interpretation nate.” Instead the view current in the 1970s and 1980s of the development of language, was launched in 1957 in most quarters has been that concepts of innateness with his first, and at that time revolutionary book, on were not just scientifically questionable, but in the eyes Syntactic Sbuctuws. He argued then, and has done so of some even intellectually dangerous.As the new dogma with great persuasiveness ever since, that the existence became prevalent, and a virtual taboo was imposed on of species-wide universals in the of all studied notions of innateness, Chomsky‘s voice was one of the can only be interpreted in one way; the con- few continuing to argue for strong genetic influences on sistent presence of these universals, he asserts, must behavioral development. His attacks on experientially imply a set of innate brain mechanisms that is uniquely based theories of the ontogeny of behavior were often human. His endorsement of what he has called “an innate vitriolic in their intensity, as in his 1976 book on Reflec- language-acquisition”device, has been steadfastly main- tions on Language. The following and several other tained for a third of a century. Chomsky’s review of quotations are intended to give a flavor of Chomsky’s Skinner’s 1957 book on Verbal Behavior; published in general, rather formalistic style, and to convey some 1959, reprinted repeatedly in subsequent years, set the sense of his proneness to a confrontational stance when stage for an endless series of confrontations with Skin- relating his own ideas to those of others, in the 1970s. nerian disciples and a host of other behavioristically minded opponents who view human behavior patterns No doubt what the organism does depends in part in general, and language in particular, as quintessential on its experience, but is seems to me entirely hope- cultural traits, receiving their structure by way of individ- less to investigate directly the relation between ex- ual experience. Chomsky was not alone in appreciating perience and action. Rather, if we are interested in the importance of language universals, but others favored the problem of “causation of behavior” as a prob- a behavioristic rather than a nativistic interpretation of lem of science, we should at least analyze the rela- them (e.g., Greenberg, 1963). The behavioristic dogma tion of experience to behavior into two parts: first, acknowledged that certain distinctive attributes of the LT, which relates experience to cognitive state, and human brain are required for the development of lan- second, a mechanism, Wsrwhich relates stimulus guage, but these were thought to provide the cognitive conditions to behavior, given the cognitive state CS. and intellectual underpinnings necessary for learning in To put it schematically, in place of the hopeless task general, including linguistic development,with no direct of investigating M as in 0,we may more reasonably bearing on the specific details of how language develops. undertake research into the nature of LT as in (II) Until recently an empiricist,experience-based view of and &, as in (III). language development prevailed among most anthro- 0 M: (experience, stimulus conditions) + behavior pologists, linguists, philosophers, and psychologists. So- 0 LT experience + cognitive state CS ciobiology bucked the trend, but had limited impact (III) WS:stimulus conditions + behavior (given CS) among psychologists. In recent years, even the ethologi- I think that we can make considerable progress to- cal disciples and other intellectual descendents of Kon- wards understanding LT as in 0;that is, towards rad Lorenz and Niko Tinbergen, once staunch advocates understanding particular LT(O,D)’s, for various of the crucial importance of innate contributions to choices of D given 0, and the interaction among

0 1995 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Journal of Cognitive Neumscience 7: 1, pp. 101-109 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021 them. It is this problem that I want to consider language development, and, by implication, for other here. I doubt that we can learn very much, as scien- types of behavior as well. There is another sense, how- tists at least, about the second of these two parts, ever, in which he has placed obstacles in the path of &,. But it seems to me most unlikely that there will those who would carry the concept of specific innate be any scientific progress at all if we do not at least predispositions further.Repeatedly, investigators eager to analyze the problem of “causation of behavior” into test the validity of Chomskyan propositions have found the two components LT and &, and their elements. his comments on their efforts less than encouraging, An attempt along the lines of 0 to study directly whether they chose to focus on descriptive studies of the relation of behavior to past and current experi- the actual patterns of language development in children, ence is doomed to triviality and scientific insig- or whether they adopted a comparative or evolutionary Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 nificance. (Chomsky, 1976, pp. 16-17) approach to the problem. In his comments on these nascent efforts, Chomsky‘s writings often took on an An expansion on the same formulation ends on an al- authoritative and even imperious air, as he issued edicts most reverential note: on those approaches to the study of innate language Consider our near-total failure to discover a scien- mechanisms he regards as sensible and potentially infor- tific theory that provides an analysis of M,, of (III) mative, and those he views as at best a waste of time and (quoted above)-that is, our very limited progress at worst simply stupid. in developing a scientific theory of any depth to ac- Take, for example, Chomsky’s skepticism about the count for the normal use of language (or other as- prospects of research on language in infancy, taken to pects of behavior). Even the relevant concepts seem such an extreme that it must surely have discouraged lacking; certainly, no intellectually satisfying princi- students from investigating early phases of speech be- ples have been proposed that have explanatory havior and development: force, though the questions are very old. It is not ex- There is no general reason to suppose that a human cluded that human science-forming capacities sim- language has “primitive subsystems”in any interest- ply do not extend to this domain, or any domain ing sense, and no convincing evidence for such a be- involving the exercise of will, so that for , lief. Observation of early stages of language these questions will always be shrouded in mystery. acquisition may be quite misleading in this regard. It (Chomsky, 1976, p. 25) is possible that at an early stage there is use of Ian- guagelike expressions, but outside the framework im- Few responded to Chomsky‘s call for more studies of posed, at a later stage of intellectual maturation, by genomic influences on behavior, and a long fallow pe- the faculty of language-much a dog can be riod ensued, in which little progress was made in under- as trained to respond to certain commands, though we standing processes of behavioral development,arguably would not conclude, from this, that it is using lan- a result of the unfashionability of invoking genetic con- guage. The most that we can say with any plausibil- tributions to behavior. We have had to wait until the ity is that a relation of “compatibility”holds 1990s for a more balanced approach appropriately coin- between the grammar constructed at a given stage ciding with the advent of the Human Genome Project. of mental growth and linguistic experience, as ana- This new viewpoint is well expressed in two creative lyzed at that stage by mechanisms of mind. . . and thought-provokingbooks, one by an M.I.T. colleague .-As for the further claim that language is not only of Chomsky, , author of The Language learned but taught, and that “teaching”is essen- Instinct, and the other, Patterns in the Mind by Ray this tial to establishing the meaning of Linguistic expres Jackendoff,an ex-student of Chomsky. With the approach sions, this view receives no support on either that they propose, we find ourselves contemplating an empirical or conceptual grounds. (Chomsky, 1976, attitude toward behavioral development that is much more in harmony with current activities in developmen- p. 53) tal biology than was previously the case in behavioral If Chomsky had any premonitions about the insights science. Genetic contributions are now given their that Jackendoff and Pinker or other students of infant proper due, as the primary determinants of how growing verbal behavior (e.g., Locke, 1993) might derive from organisms interact with their social and physical environ- their reviews of early stages of language development a ments, changing their behavior as a consequence of couple of decades later, they are not prominently dis- genomic-environmental interactions. played. Broaching the thorny question of the Chomsky’s contribution to these developments, with of language, Chomsky reviewed in 1976 possible coun- a greater emphasis than heretofore on the genetic foun- terarguments to the case for Universal Grammar. First he dations upon which experience operates,has been semi- dealt incisively with the objection that we know of no nal in some respects, and strangely enigmatic in others. genetic mechanisms adequate to account for the innate In one sense, he has, at times almost single handedly, structures of language postulated, pointing out that this kept alive the notion of specific innate fundaments for is a problem that genetic neurology will have to confront

I02 Journal of Cognitive Neumsdence Volume 7, Number 1 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021 in due course, here anticipating accurately the emphasis that more is to be expected in the latter case: after that both Jackendoff and Pinker place on evidence from all, flying and jumping are both forms of locomo- clinical neurology. tion; both involve going up and coming down; with diligent effort and special training people can jump Studying the use and understanding of language, we higher and farther. Perhaps some hopelessly con- reach certain conclusions about the cognitive struc- fused observer might argue, on these grounds, that ture (grammar) that is being put to use, thus setting the distinction between jumping and flying is arbi- a certain problem for the neurologist, whose task it trary, a matter of degree; people can really fly, just is to discover the mechanisms involved in linguistic like birds, only less well. Analogous proposals in the competence and performance. Noting that the case of language seem to me to have no greater Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 mechanisms appear to function in the absence of force or significance. (Chomsky, 1976, p. 41) relevant experience and quite uniformly for individu- als of vastly differing experience,we draw the natu- Addressing the issue of animal antecedents of lan- ral conclusion that they are not learned, but are guage more directly, he sees little hope that this or any part of the system that makes learning possible. This other evolutionary line of enquiry will be profitable: conclusion sets a further task for human biology, which will attempt to find the genetic mechanisms The examples of animal communication that have been examined to date do share many of the proper- that guarantee that the mental organ, language, will have the required character. There is nothing fur- ties of human gestural systems, and it might be rea- sonable to explore the possibility of direct ther to say, on this score. The second argument connection in this case. But human language, it [that it is improper to assign such complexity to ap pears, is based on entirely different principles. This, the mind as an innate property] has even less merit. I think, is an important point, often overloqked by It is a dogmatic assumption, and not a particularly those who approach human language a natural, plausible one, that the principles in question must as biological phenomenon; in particular, it seems have been developed in a few years of experience rather pointless, for these reasons, to speculate rather than through tens of thousands of years of about the evolution of human language from sim- evolution or perhaps by the operation of physical pler systems-perhaps as absurd as it would be to laws yet unknown. No questions are begged when speculate about the “evolution”of atoms from we reach the natural conclusion that the mind is clouds of elementary particles. (Chomsky, 1972, comparable in complexity to physical organs of the body that are not involved directly in higher mental P. 70) functions. The argument merely reiterates empiricist In the face of these many indications of reluctance on prejudice. It is no more interesting than the claim Chomsky’s part to expand the investigation of the Uni- that man must have an immortal soul. (Chomsky, versal Grammar into new domains, Pinker evidently de- 1976, pp. 91-92) cided that the time was ripe for change. For example, in While placing appropriate emphasis on the need for The Language Instinct, he overtly and eloquently count- genetic investigation, Chomsky displays some uncer- ers Chomsky‘s evident hesitation to embrace and ex- tainty about the underlying genetic principles. He states plore the implications of an evolutionary view of the origins of language. He rejects out of hand the obscure correctly, if somewhat obscurely, that ‘The fact that a thing is general is only evidence that it is innate, but it appeal to unspecified “physical laws” that Chomsky doesn’t demonstrate that it is innate.” But he contin- speculates might have led to the unexpected emergence ues-“If something is not general, then it is certainly not of linguistic abilities simply as a correlate of larger brains. innate,” overlooking the fact, crucial for the theory of Instead Pinker appeals squarely to Darwinian concepts natural selection,that genotypes vary within species, as to explain the emergence of language, thus opening the doors to what will undoubtedly be a flood of new well as between them (Chomsky, 1980, p. 81). Adding further to the discouragement of those trying research as students of human and animal communica- to understand how language evolved, he has the follow- tion begin to collaborate, rather than working in the all ing to say to those who take a comparative approach to too separate, armed camps of the past. the origin of language by studying the ability of animals Several reviewers of Pinker’s The Language Instinct, to learn to use language-like systems for communica- especially in the popular press, have stated that its prime tion with experimenters: accomplishment is to restate and clarify Chomskyan concepts, and there is some truth to this. What is truly Efforts to induce symbolic behavior in other species exciting, however, about the writings of both Jackendoff might illuminate the specific properties of human and Pinker, is that they supercede Chomsky in many language, just as the study of how birds fly might important respects. Their approach to behavioral devel- be advanced, in principle, by an investigation of opment, placed within the domain of cognitive science, how people jump or fish swim. Some might argue serves as an exemplary illustration of how behavioral

Book Review 103 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021 scientists in general, and not just students of language, and judging the speaker’s mood must in some degree be can now begin to come to grips with the complexities separable, because each one can be disrupted by brain of the nature-nurture dilemma that has plagued students damage from a stroke, while leaving the others intact. of human and animal behavior for so long. Under special circumstances the predispositions to Patterns in the Mind: Jackendoffs lean, precise prose, develop language may become so compelling that their blessedly free of jargon, serves as an ideal introduction. effects are manifest even when appropriate experience Patterns in the Mind begins with a deceptively simple is lacking. The inexorability with which the emergence statement of purpose, in the best tradition of those with of this specialized brain machinery drives the child to a talent for writing introductory texts. Almost without develop language is nowhere more forcefully manifest Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 realizing it, the reader is drawn into more and more than in the special case of the signing behavior of the profound and complex topics as the book progresses, congenitally deaf. The demonstration by Edward Klima culminating in an extension of the argument from lan- and Ursula Bellugi (1979) and others that American Sign guage to music (he is an accomplished concert clarinet- Language embodies all of the basic characteristics of tist and horn player), embracing visual perception and Universal Grammar is one of many remarkable recent even certain components of human social behavior. developments in and cognitive science. He begins with three ”fundamental arguments” that Intensive study of some cases of deaf children de- are expanded upon as the book unfolds. First is the prived of access to a signing tutor reveals that they not argument for a mental grammar. ‘The expressive variety only tend to create their own private so-called “home- of language use implies that a language user’s brain signing” systems, but also actually invent some of the contains a set of unconscious grammatical principles”(p. organizational features characteristic of spoken language 6). How does the child’s brain develop the talent for this (Feldman, Goldin-Meadow, & Gleitman, 1978; Goldin- most unusual behavior?The second argument states that Meadow & Mylander, 1990). Jackendoff points out the ”the way children talk implies that the human brain obvious, that it would be outlandish to postulate that contains a genetically determined specialization for lan- evolution has ”providedus with a Universal Grammar for guage” @. 6). Finally the same line of reasoning is ex- sign languages, to be drawn on just in case we happened tended to behavior in general. “Our experience of the to be deaf!” It makes more sense to conclude that “chil- world is actively constructed by the unconscious princi- dren come prepared to learn language, whatever the ples that operate in the brain” (p. 7). modality” (p. 97). Expanding on the theme of mental grammar Jack- That the parallels between speech and signing are endoff works us through the basic Chomskyan insight, more than skin deep is revealed by investigations of sign namely that we have to ascribe to the speaker’s mind a language aphasias, showing that damage in Broca’s and mental grammar that specifies possible sentence pat- Wernicke’s areas of the brain have the same effects on terns, if we are to account for the human ability to speak signing as on speech, even though apha- and understand a potentially infinite set of novel sen- sics can use their hands perfectly well for other pur- tences. The extraordinary facility that all children display, poses (Bellugi, Poizner, & Klima, 1989). whatever their cultural milieu, for unconsciously devel- Another compelling parallel between speech and sign- oping the Universal Grammar, as it came to be called, ing concerns sensitive periods of development, when without the need for explicit instruction, does indeed children learn most rapidly and achieve the greatest seem to imply that there is a sense in which the Univer- perfection in whatever they are learning. By dividing sal Grammar is not learned. Rather, “it is the machinery adult signers into three groups, one receiving their first that makes learning possible” (p. 29). exposure to signing from birth, another after 4 to 6 years The necessary learning machinery is conceived of in of age, and the third not until after age 12, it becomes concrete, neuroanatomical terms. ‘The mechanism for clear that although all are destined to be capable signers, acquiring innate knowledge is genetic transmission, when it comes to questions of accent and nuance, early through the medium of brain structure”(p. 30), with the experience is critically important (Newport, 1990). Simi- further implication that mental functioning is ultimately larly with the acquisition of a second spoken language, determined in specific ways by the structure of the brain those with experience prior to age 7 have much the best that is doing the thinking. This position has become a chance of achieving perfect performance and under- basic tenet of modem cognitive science, with an accu- standing. mulation of recent evidence indicating a much greater Of course, the innateness argument in no way contra- degree of local specialization or “modularization” of dicts the need for appropriate experience, if language is function than was envisioned only a few years ago. to develop normally. Rather it asserts that the effects of Thus language perception and production are viewed certain kinds of experience are most potent and far as the special responsibility of one such “module”in the reaching at certain stages, when they interact with in- human brain. This is not to say that there may not be nate predispositions that the child inevitably brings to functional subdivisions. We know that the processes of bear on the process of learning a language. “Nurture is identifying a speaker, understanding what is being said, maximally effective in language learning only when the

I04 Journal of Cognitive Neumscience Volume 7, Number I Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021 proper elements of nature are in place-when a normal go beyond the raw sensory material. The categories take child is exposed to language during the critical period. on an abstract character, sometimes leading to deceptive If, for whatever reason, the proper elements of nature judgments that are the basis for some of the optical aren't in place, far more extensive nurture still doesn't illusions of which psychologists are so fond. The same produce performance at anywhere near the same level." line of reasoning can be extended from perceptual cate- As Jackendoff puts it nicely, "Nature places its own stamp gories to mental concepts, and some of the most stimu- on nurture" (p. 140). lating ideas in Patterns in the Mind attempt to grapple All students of language development concur that with the question how word and sentence meanings are pmting by children of what they hear plays much less actually encoded in the brain and used as a basis for of a role than one might suppose. Instead, children place thought and action. It is mind-boggling to even contem- Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 their own constructions upon the speech they are ex- plate how the child's brain copes with the phenomenal posed to and the uses to which it is put, especially in task of learning, on average, about 10 words every day the early stages of learning to speak-constructions in- between the ages of 2 and 5. That such a task could be dicating that, even at this early age, they are beginning achieved through learning by rote seems virtually incon- to act in accordance with the Universal Grammar. ceivable. One feels driven to the conclusion that it could Jackendoff is at his most original, and most specula- be accomplished only by the provision of elaborate tive, when he turns to other aspects of human behavior innate machinery that is actively and vigorously engaged than language. Music, a special preoccupation for him,is in the construction of concepts, and in the association another uniquely human behavior, if we set aside songs of those concepts with words, epitomizing Jackendoff's of birds and the humpbacked whale. Applying a weaker innate universal grammar of concepts. form of the Universal Grammar argument, he suggests By arguments such as these, Patterns in the Mind that once again we can discern universal rules of com- seeks to extend a nativistic interpretation of human position, although the crosscultural universals are less linguistic abilities to other aspects of behavior and men- compelling than in the case of language. Again, there is tal processes.Jackendoff expresses the fundamental con- evidence of processing specializations in the brain, gen- viction that, as we make progress in understanding how erally tending to focus in the right hemisphere, but with the brain works, a multiplicity of mechanisms will be the left becoming more involved in musicians. His major revealed, all designed to serve us by bringing a veritable point is a more discursive one, that music expresses armamentarium of innate predispositions to bear on our "some character of excitement or wit that in fact comes relationships with our environments, both physical and from within us, that is actively but unconsciously con- social. structed by our brain, using principals of auditory per- In a line of speculation that cultural anthropologists ception and musical grammar" (p. 171). In his view, may find naive and even infuriating, he suggests that "there is some innate 'grain' to our ability to construct universals may be much more widespread in culturally musical : we can extract some sorts of musical transmitted behavior than is commonly supposed, espe- patterns readily on the basis of experience, but not cially at the level of such basic concepts as kinship, others. As a consequence, some musical styles are more group membership, and codes of conduct (Barkow, Cos accessible (or more easily learnable) than others" (p. mides, & Tooby, 1992). If all of this seems to smack of 169). Music lovers who have difficulty with "twelve-tone" sociobiological predeterminism, this is not at all the compositions will be intrigued to hear from a musician flavor of Jackendoffs book. On the contrary, it is imbued that "even composers who use this technique often throughout with a humanistic orientation, taking the admit that they can't hear twelve-tone organization intui- position that if innate predispositions do indeed play a tively. And it is not a matter of just having sufficient ro1e.h the development of , it will surely exposure: from the experience of acquaintances, I can be of benefit to us to understand them well, however attest that children who grow up hearing lots of this we choose to bias the development of our own behavior. music in their own household still don't have a much We do not have to submit to whatever innate inclina- easier time with it than the general public" (p. 168). tions we may have, but our chances of becoming what Notions of a mental grammar can readily be extended we intend are surely enhanced if we understand them. to visual perception. A large body of sophisticated re- The message he wishes to leave with us is "that human search attests to the active nature of the process by nature has a rich and complicated organization that is which the brain constructs visual representations of the largely inaccessible to conscious introspection. It reveals external world, consistent with the view that "we learn itself only upon careful study. If we are trying to develop the patterns we do in part because our brains are geneti- social policy, it pays to attend to what such study can cally programmed with substantial aspects of these pat- reveal, instead of relying on oversimplified truisms about terns in advance" (p. 179). A similar argument can be what people want or need" (p. 222). advanced for the strong human predisposition to organ- The Language Instinct: In a formal sense, The Lan- ize our perceptions, visual or otherwise, into categories. guage Instinct with the subtitle How the Mind Cwates In the process of constructing them, we often seem to Language, covers some of the same ground as Patterns

Book Review 105 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021 in the Mind, but the style is radically different. Jack- speaking it for the children to copy. Rather it appears endoff’s prose is relatively austere, appropriate for what that they invented it, incorporating many of the charac- is essentially an advanced textbook on cognitive science teristics of Universal Grammar that were lacking from and language. Steven Pinker writes with the ebullient the original pidgin. Among other parallel cases, one of exuberance of a novelist or poet. He is clearly in love the most fascinating is a sign language apparently in- with language, and not merely in the intellectual sense. vented by deaf children quite recently in Nicaragua, At times he writes as if he is intoxicated with the rich- more or less spontaneously,beginning as the equivalent ness and diversity of its content. In making a point, he of a pidgin, but now showing signs in the next genera-

is just as likely to quote from All My Childen as from tion of transformation into a version with much more Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 The Bad. Pinker’s prose is a pleasure to read, laced enriched grammar, again the product of invention rather throughout with wit and humor. You might think that than tutelage. the entertainment would be bought at the price of Like Jackendoff, Pinker dwells especially on the sign sacrificing scientific precision, but Pinker has a rare abil- languages of the deaf, pointing out that “because the deaf ity to express profound, original reflections in a way that are virtually the only neurologically normal people to is frankly entertaining. As a consequence, although the make it to adulthood without having acquired a lan- book is packed full of new ideas, often on difficult and guage, their difficulties offer particularly good evidence challenging topics, it is simply a delight to read. that successful language acquisition must take place dur- Although he is a close student of Chomsky‘s work, ing a critical window of opportunity in childhood”(pp. who clearly reveres his mentor’s intellect and insights, 37-38). When a deaf child is born to hearing parents, the Pinker, like Jackendoff, departs quite radically from him signing environment that the child experiences is some- in many respects, and is explicit when he does so. He times rather depauperate. Often the parents have points out that all species universals are not necessarily learned to sign late in life to aid their child, and*their innate. He embraces a Darwinian approach to the evolu- signing may be almost the equivalent of a pidgin. Again,. tion of language with an enthusiasm that one searches there are welldocumented cases of deaf children going for in vain in the writings of Chomsky. Many of the novel far beyond the competence of their parents, as though insights in the book are a direct consequence of this they were transforming a pidgin into a creole (Feldman much broader approach to the biology of language. He et al., 1978). does not hesitate to criticize the arcane style in which The creativity of the child, operating along generally many of Chomsky’s ideas are expressed “based on tech- predictable lines, makes sense if there is a drive to realize nical analyses of word and sentence structure, often the innate potential of the Universal Grammar, a drive so couched in abstruse formalisms. His discussions of flesh- compelling that if one modality is unavailable, the poten- and-blood speakers are perfunctory and highly idealized” tial is realized effectively through another. The argument (p. 24). Perhaps as a reaction to Chomsky’s predilection of the poverty of the input is a persuasive one, just as for formalisms, evident in some of the quotations from apposite when applied to the normal processes of lan- Chomsky given earlier in this review, Pinker is at great guage development.The literature is abundant with illus pains to bring the innateness argument to bear on lan- trations of things said by children that they have never guage as it is actually used in real life, with all of its heard in quite the same form. Their versions are not blemishes and imperfections. His arguments are all the random utterances, however, but appear to result from more persuasive and compelling as a consequence. efforts to conform to the rules that they are seeking to The Language Instinct begins by running through the adhere to as their speech develops. various components of the innateness argument. Pinker Again it is salutory to remind ourselves that, compel- expands at length on Chomsky’s “argument from the ling though the innateness argument is, it is important poverty of the input.” Again and again we find changes not to overstate it. Even though children say lots of taking place in linguistic behavior, either in historical things not present in what they hear, the principles time, or in developmental changes from infancy to adult- underlying what they do say must in a sense be implicit hood, that make sense only if we invoke strong innate in what is heard, at some level of organization. The predispositions inherent in the human brain that are underlying principles may be deeply hidden, and it took being brought to bear. He recounts Bickerton’s fascinat- Chomsky‘s genius to reveal their presence, but they are ing if speculative reconstruction of the history of a there, and potentially available for the child to learn pidgin developed in the Hawaiian sugar plantations that them, if only it has the acumen to detect and abstract later became a creole (Bickerton, 1981). Workers from them. The rules are often applied, even if, as happens so China,Japan, Korea, Portugal, the Philippines,and Puerto often in early speech, using them means violating some Rico developed a primitive “pidgin”language to commu- of the conventions of that particular language. nicate with one another at a basic level. This was then In judging the validity of the modern innateness argu- transformed by the children of the next generation into ment, it is crucial to appreciate that no one believes for a more sophisticated creole. This was not learned from a moment in the complete endogeneity of language anyone, Bickerton tells us, because there were no adults development. Such a simple-minded notion would vio-

106 Journal of Cognitive Neumscience Volume 7, Number 1 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021 late what common sense tells us lies at the heart of the tions about what is going to happen next will leave process of normal language development, namely that a behind more babies designed just like it. Slicing space- child learns from others. The innateness argument comes time into objects and actions is an eminently sensible to bear as we uncover more and more compelling lines way to make predictions given the way the world is put of evidence that the learning process is a highly struc- together” (p. 154). Yet he then proceeds to what seems tured affair, driven by the child’s innate predispositions to be a contradiction, when he says that once we begin and understandable only if we assign to them a primary to view language “as a biological adaptation to commu- role in the learning process. Somewhat counterintui- nicate information, it is no longer as tempting to see tively, the structure derives as much from efforts of the language as an insidious shaper of thought” (p. 19). Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 pupil as of the tutor. Genetic influences clearly intrude, Of course, it is so obvious as to be hardly worth but the path from gene to behavior is a complex and mentioning that many aspects of thinking are not neces- devious one. sarily related to language at all; this seems an easy argu- Implausible as it may sound, there are some hints of ment to win. One cannot help wondering if there is direct genetic effects on language. A British family stud- more to be said, however, about the relationship be- ied by the linguist Myrna Gopnik has a clear familial tween concepts associated with words in the particular history of a speech defect of a particular grammatical language a person is using, and the way in which the type, hinting strongly at a genetically based impairment person thinks about those concepts. Thus while one may (Gopnik, 1990). And one is not inclined to question that agree that there is perhaps ”no evidence that languages neuroanatomical abnormalities impinging on linguistic dramatically shape their speakers’ ways of thinking” behavior are likely to have genetic bases. Like Jackendoff, (p. 58), some role seems probable, and more worthy of Pinker’s case for specific brain-based language mecha- the attention of researchers than The Language Instinct nisms leans heavily on the many strange ways in which sees fit to acknowledge. language behavior can be disturbed by lesions resulting Instead, as one may anticipate, overwhelming empha- from stroke damage and other forms of brain injury, sis is placed in The Language Instinct on grammar, especially those involving Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas. which is explained with a degree of engaging lucidity of One controversial subject that Pinker faces squarely is which Chomsky should be properly envious. Pinker the relationship between language and thought. This has makes clear, for example, the extraordinary degree to been strongly influenced in the past by the Sapir-Whorf which grammatical structure is governed by longdis hypothesis,proposing that thinking is determined by the tance dependencies, complications that wordchain meanings of the words used in their particular language. models of sentence structure have great difficulty deal- This is one of the few cases where Pinker abandons his ing with. Here and elsewhere one has the impression balanced, thoughtful appraisal of the evidence in favor that, in their intense preoccupation with syntax, Chom- of a more Chomskyan type of attack that borders on the skyites are sometimes prone to overlook the importance vicious. The famous case, that he ridicules, is the suppos of the surface structure of language, especially when it edly rich fund of Eskimo words for different types of comes to everyday usage and the communicative and snow. I suppose that there is special appeal for the other social functions that language serves. Admittedly, layman in the notion that the amazingly rich, vocabulary some of these functions relate not so much to language that, for example, interior decorators have for colors, per se but to such things as intonation, patterns of must surely influence the ways in which they think emphasis, and special modes of address. Pinker has hard about color, but perhaps that is naive. things to say about those who assert that the special Yet, in other contexts, Pinker seems to admit that form of speech used with children known as “mother- language can indeed shape thinking. In another dig at ese” is a significant teaching aid in language acquisition, Chomsky, Pinker is insistent that we should “begin to but his comments might have been tempered with some look at language not as the ineffable essence of human discussion of the alternative notion that motherese may uniqueness but as a biological adaptation to communi- be as much concerned with social interaction and the cate information” (p. 19). Enrichment of some sub development of bonding (Fernald, 1992), perhaps then domain within the lexicon of a language, along the lines having some bearing on the choice of a favorite tutor of Sapir and Whorf, surely occurs in response to commu- when instruction does become important in language nicative needs, and it seems natural to assume that acquisition? thought processes play some role. Pinker appears to The emphasis in much of The Language Instinct is concur when he says that there is an important sense in placed upon syntax, the component of grammar that which there really are things and kinds of things and arranges words into phrases and sentences, and it is here actions out there in the world, and our mind is designed that Chomsky’s insights have been most profound and to find them and label them with words. He continues revolutionary. The innateness argument, however, is this train of thought in an explicitly Darwinian direction taken by Pinker in a different direction, not to lend that is decidedly non-Chomskyan. ‘‘It’s a jungle out there, further emphasis to human uniqueness, but rather to and the organism designed to make successful predic- introduce an evolutionary point of view. Pinker regards

Book Review 107 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021 syntax as a Darwinian "organ of extreme perfection and typical style, having entertained us, Pinker uses monde- complication" @. 124). He acknowledges that "the idea greens to make a point to illustrate one of the many that the human mind is designed to use abstract vari- sources of confusion that bedevil computerized speech ables and data structures used to be, and in some circles analysis. He seems skeptical of the principles that engi- still is, a shocking and revolutionary claim, because the neers tend to favor in computerized speech processing, structures have no direct counterpart in the child expe- based on principles that they then assume must be rience" @. 125). The paradox arises, he suggests, because operating in the brain. Rarely do engineers seek inspira- in the case of language development "complexity in the tion from an understanding of what we know of how mind is not caused by learning; learning is caused by the brain does it, or at least how we think in principle Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 complexity in the mind" @. 125). it must do it, to accomplish the job. Pinker goes so far Given the preoccupation of both Patterns in the as to develop a neural network model that would do the Mind and The Language Instinct with cognition, it is job of decoding syntax, presenting it more as a fun not surprising that neither devotes much space to how diversion, based on toy neurons, than as a serious pro- the raw material of speech sounds is processed by our posal. But he makes it clear that, in principle, plausible ears and brains with such extraordinary precision. In networks can indeed be created. To determine whether addition to the sloppy and variable nature of our speech, they exist in the brain, and how the circuits are actually we have to cope with the striking individual differences put together, is a daunting challenge for the next genera- in how people speak. The speech of males and females, tion of neurobiologists.Pinker seems optimistic that they as well as young and old, differs radically; and when will be successful,perhaps fairly soon.Jackendoff, on the infants are learning to make sense of speech it is a other hand, is more of a pessimist. challenge to understand how they compensate for all of Patterns in the Mind gives what is perhaps a more these variations. We know from the research of people realistic appraisal of the enormous gap that remains such as Patricia Kuhl that here again we can make sense between the picture of brain function derived from the of the ineffable ease with which infants accomplish such effects of brain damage on language, and an under- feats only by invoking strong innate predispositions that standing of the microcircuitry that is responsible. This make it possible for infants to extract the speech mes- leap is an art that is only slowly being perfected, cur- sage. rently by neurobiologists using simple invertebrate ner- As Pinker reminds us, you only have to listen to the vous systems. They focus especially on systems made up lamentations of engineers trying to get their computers of a small number of individually identified neurons to process speech to appreciate that the ease with whose physiological properties can be studied in great which the ears of a baby do the job is another of the detail, and they are making remarkable progress. The biological miracles that makes up the language instinct. paradigmatic example is the stomatogastric ganglion of This is a theme illuminated in many ways by a generation crustaceans, which has yielded extraordinary insights in of researchers at the Haskins Laboratories, under the understanding how neural networks are actually put inspired leadership of Alvin Liberman and his colleagues together, and how they operate in real life (Harris-War- (Mattingly & Studdert-Kennedy,1991). Pinker does touch rick, Marder, Selverston, & Moulins, 1992). Investigation on some of the high points here, although one would of the circuitry responsible for language at this level of like to have seen mention of the remarkable phenome- analysis is presently almost inconceivable. Yet these are non of "categorical perception" by which, even in early the kinds of challenges that scientists thrive upon. The infancy, the boundaries heard between phonemes are battle is half won when researchers become convinced sharpened, helping the infant as it takes some of the first in principle that they have a meaningful set of hypothe- steps in breaking the speech stream down into segments ses and models amenable to testing at the cellular level for processing purposes. of analysis. That is where we stand now in the study of As we listen to speech and try to understand it, mis- the biology of language.It is up to the coming generation takes are always being made, and many of them continue to take the next giant step. Patterns in the Mind and to plague us into adulthood. The Language Instinct is The Language Instinct offer many pointers as to the full of entertaining illustrations.A neologism surely des- direction that this research might profitably take. tined for widespread adoption is the term "mondegreen" Attainment of a full understanding of how the brain that Pinker inherits from the columnist Jon Carroll. Car- generates language and thought is likely to have revolu- roll always thought that the last lines of the folk ballad tionary implications, not only for neuroscience as disci- 'The Bonnie Earl O'Moray" were "they have slain the Earl pline, but also for our own self-image. Will mechanistic of Moray and Lady Mondegreen," the last misheard in- analyses of the mind be in any way damaging to our stead of "and laid him on the green" @. 186). Among his viewpoints on human creativity and freedom? If Jack- list of mondegreens, the one that appeals to me the most, endoff and Pinker are acceptable as guides, there is little as a fellow sufferer, is the phrase from the Beatles song danger of this. Their science is deeply imbued with an "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds"-a girl with kaleido- appreciation of the joy to be had from indulging in the scope eyes, misheard as "a girl with colitis goes by." In creative side of human behavior, balanced with human-

108 Journal of Cognitive Neumscience Volume 7, Number 1 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021 istic concerns over possible misuse of concepts of in- and gesture: The emergence of language. New York: Aca- nateness in furthering the understanding of human be- demic Press. Fernald, A. (1992). Human maternal vocalizations to infants havior. Hopefully those who follow will be equally as biologically relevant signals: An evolutionary perspec- sensible in balancing scientific rigor with an apprecia- tive. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides,& J. Tooby (Eds.), me tion of the enormous creative potential with which adapted mind: and the genera- language, and the Universal Grammar, enriches the lives tion of culture. New York Oxford University Press. of members of our species. Goldin-Meadow, S., & Mylander, C. (1990). Levels of structure in a language developed without a language model. In Reprint requests should be sent to Peter Marler, Section of K. Gibson & A. Peterson (Eds.), The brain and behavioral Neurobiology, Physiology,and Behavior, University of California, development:Biosocial dimensions. Howthorn,Aldine Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/7/1/101/1755169/jocn.1995.7.1.101.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 Davis, CA 95616. PreSS. Gopnik, M. (1990). Dysphasia in an extended family. Nature (London), 344, 715. REFERENCES Greenberg,J. H. (Ed.), (1963). Universals of language. Cam- bridge, MA: MIT Press. Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (Eds.) (1992). The Harris-Warrick, R. M., Marder, E., Selverston,A. J., & Moulins, adapted mind:Evolutionary psychology and the genera- M. (Eds.) (1992). @namic bioIogicaI networks: The stoma- tion of culture. New York: Oxford University Press. togastric nervous system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bellugi, U., Poizner, H., & Klima, E. S. (1989). Language, modal- Klima, E. S., & Bellugi, U. (1979). The signs of language. Cam- ity, and the brain. Trends in the Neumsciences, 22, 380- bridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 388. Kuhl, I? (1993). Innate predispositions and the effects of ex- Bickerton, D. (1981). Roots of language.AnnArbor,MI: perience in speech perception: The native language mag- Karorna Publ. net theory. In B. de Boysson, s. de Schonen,l? Jusczyk, Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Verbal Behavior by B. E Skin- I? Macneilage, & J. Morton (Eds.),DeveIopmental neum ner. Language, 35, 26-58. cognition: Speech and face processing in the first year of Chomsky, N. (1972). . New York Har- lve. Dordrecht,Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. court, Brace Jovanovitch. Locke, J. L. (1993). The child’s path to spoken language. Chomsky, N. (1976). Reflections on language. New York Pan- Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. theon Books. Maaingly, I. G., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (Eds.) (1991). Modu- Chomsky, N. 1980. In M. Picatelli-palmarini (Ed.), Language larity and the motor theory of speech perception. Pro- and learning: The debate between Jean Piaget and ceedings of a conference to honor Alvin M. Libman. Noam Chomsky Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Feldman, H., Goldin-Meadow,S., & Gleitman, L. (1978). Be- Newport, E. (1990). Maturational constraints on language yond Herodotus: The creation of language by linguistically learning. Cognitive Science, 24, 11-28. deprived deaf children. In A. Locke (Ed.), Action, symbol

Book Review 109 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.1.101 by guest on 26 September 2021