Nativism: Noam Chomsky
Nativism
Main question: what is the cognitive code?
Infant is born with complete world knowledge
Infants count
Infants have a concept of objects
Infants have physics concepts
Infants have language
Nativism
Evidence for the claim of complete world
knowledge
Youngsters learn an extremely complex
system (language) effortlessly
Youngsters learn an extremely complex
system (language) in a short amount of time
Youngsters do not need instruction to learn
their mother tongue
Nativism
Do youngsters who are born deaf can learn
an impoverished language at a level that is
higher than the level they hear?
Youngsters develop Creole from pidgin
Infants do not hear grammar; they hear a
string of words and infer the syntactic rules
language (impoverishment of the stimulus)
Infants often hear ungrammatical
sentences, yet they learn the grammar
Nativism: Learning Paradox
Fodor’s learning paradox: one learns
something only if one knows it in advance
To learn a language you have to know that
language in advance
What you know is at a higher level than what
you learn
Nativism
In the case of language, infants are
born with:
a universal grammar (UG) - a data base of
grammar
language acquisition device (LAD) -
hypothesis tester
Nativism
If the child is born with a LAD and no
UG, he doesn’t have anything to
hypothesize on
If the child is born with a UG and no
LAD, he cannot hypothesize about the
language
Nativism
The UG is the cognitive code.
Unique to humans
Universal for humans
If one can describe it, one has cracked
the cognitive code.
Nativism
Relations between learning and
development
Only learning (deductive)
No development
Similar to classical behaviorism
Nativism: Language
Acquisition Device
hypothesize the grammar in the language you
are exposed to
see if the hypothesis fits the grammar
if yes, continue with the hypothesis
if no, make a new hypothesis
Nativism
If that is how children learn language, it
is impossible, in principle, to develop to
a higher level
How can you hypothesize something that is
not already there?
Nativists say you cannot
Nativism
As a consequence, it is best to build the
most powerful system so that it is there
in infancy
Argument between
Piaget and Chomsky
CHOMSKY’S POINT:
Chomsky: One cannot construct more
powerful structures because hypothesis
testing cannot take place at a level that is
higher than one’s highest level
e.g., conservation: a child cannot
hypothesize conservation if he is at the
intuitive stage
Argument between
Piaget and Chomsky
Chomsky: One cannot construct more
powerful structures because hypothesis
testing cannot take place at a level that is
higher than one’s highest level
Fodor’s learning paradox
e.g., conservation: a child cannot
hypothesize conservation if he is at the
intuitive stage
Piaget Rebuttal
Piaget: I don’t have to accept
hypothesis testing as the mechanism
for learning
I believe children learn and develop
through disequilibrium
Piaget Rebuttal
I can describe learning and development in
Child development (ontogeny)
History of disciplines (Piaget & Garcia; Kuhn)
My system allows me to describe two
disparate developments: ontogeny and
historical development
Piaget Rebuttal
You, the nativists cannot describe the
development of disciplines in history in
terms of innate modules within humans
Bottom line:
I can describe two developments and you
can describe one
I don’t believe the description you give to
language acquisition
Nativism: Modularity
1. Encapsulation - it is impossible to
interfere with the inner workings of a module.
2. Unconscious - it is difficult or impossible
to reflect on the operations of module.
3. Speed - modules are very fast.
4. Shallow outputs - modules provide
limited output, without information about
the intervening steps that led to that output.
Nativism: Modularity
5. Obligatory firing - modules operate
reflexively, providing predetermined outputs
for predetermined inputs regardless of the
context.
6. Ontogenetic universals - modules
develop in a characteristic sequence.
7. Localization - modules are mediated by
dedicated neural systems.
Nativism: Modularity
8. Pathological universals - modules
breakdown in characteristic fashion following
insult to the system.
9. Domain specificity - as discussed above.