126

'femle' turns out to be not qite I ,l ofi"ste for that oe side of a fdiliar recogDiz-
ble distinction.) Aswerability is, Perhaps, the mosi cenrat cocept
in our thinking'
anl thus a sception to the
le that concepts alone do not make things true (!or
there to be such; thing s being F nd for sch d-such propositions to
be true CHAPTER 5
n. dcor r
Drricular ;ircm(tance\' nol just rlvo tides of nnglc coi ' One need

nor doubt an*oalili$ . ,eDlral:ry Onr mrSIt dobr lhrr the nortl
pt'liciry ol
Lbotrshtoteihe' i rhe ia(eotlhat (enirlirv when rt (ome' to lhinkjngboul dv'
xhili; ro e exlenl
p.y.lorogi"-.
lht il doe' nor, Treee; pi.le of logic i' a vn suhde lorm of LANGUAGE AS
INTERNAL
RE!ERBNcES

Dmett. M.A. t. (1993). \ ht is a Th6rv of M@ingi" (r he 545 ofLanguag'

'a\)'T
Ordord: ford
Freg, Gortlob. (
UnivdsrtY Pre$-
1950). T i,,tiols of Antheric A$a) l' L Austin, trans ' oxford: B6il ANNE L. BEZUIDENHOUT
n, B^ Lor' "J,{nt t v l (1s93) M Fr tnns ' Berkelq and ros
te|.
The Unirdirv of cliforn ia Pre$'
- aeel6:
irsr-rs,. p* d",nl., Bti,7ilz? tu'P4ilaoPhP a 1dt'h ld?albr \' 2' AccoRDINc to inte.nalist conceptions of lmguge, laryuages are properties of the
.'rloZor. nitrd,/brains of indiduals ad superee entirely on the iterl states of these
loei. rlSa-t Poir,-,o W'ina8. H Hmec l Kmbtll l Kulbdn mind/brains. Hence, languages re p.imarily to be studied by the mind and/or
eds., (Xord: Bas tlacksll
vr'. (1966). N Essvs Ok Hundn Uadstdrdi| (175r)' Par: Gmier- bri sciences-psychology, euoscience, d the cognirive scieces more generaly
L.ib;iz. G.
(including linguistics nd philosophy). This is not to deny tht other siences may
I "O' ro.k"\ sav on Huan undeBtandig" (i696t in Nry aJar O"
rtgsg)- contribute to o udestanding too (.g. evolutionay biology). The intelist
Huian Undetsnning, t" c Langle, trns , ra sale; oPen colrt conception of languge is most Nociated with Chornsk)', who has rgdfor in
r.o"*lr.l. lrssO. Uigr', rt'*. " L{teinal Reasons?", Wond' Miftd a d Ethi6' many of his Mitings. See Chonsry (1986, 19904, 1993, 1995, 2000). Chortsky
Lr.l.Alih,m d,r Po*'len'on "d'.(_b dge: I 4bnds' t niveairv P(P's Lqe5 cas this conception 'I languse' (where 'I' stands fo 'internal' and 'indidual')
vatu? dad RPohtu Cmbrid8" \{ Hld
fp. i*, os '."p't'"a . v"ooweu Min and he contrasts it with a conception tht he labls 'Elnguage' (where'E stands
for 'extemal'). Chomsky thik that only l-laguages ae pmper objects for scientifrc
_ 1'oo6; r"o sorr, or \turl:.-. vuP at,/ R,aoal RHurtqu'e. cMinl' lMen'e'
Vol e study. (For more on what ChonslV rakes to be the prospcts for and th require-
Vr'. ui;, eds., oford: ofoid Univsrtv Pre$, Pp 149-79 kep141i
ments on a sciene of language, see entry by stainton on 'Meanig and Reference:
irsssi.
_A",i.*r- and e Epto1osl ol Unde6tandi9"' Ma'ig a"d sone chonskan Themes'.)
--IkAedmtm. H Pdrrei nd J Bo\ere'*. edq Ber|n: de CruPr' l08 PP 25 8 Chonsky rgues tbat oe part of the huan bain is specialized for l'anguage.
L'.p,* ,i v.o"*"1. u"atr& Kno\kc| a''J nPdlr' (abtdse vA: Hqrd This lguage s'stem has d inte specifiction. All nomal hunaN, i vitue of
their menbership in the species Hono sapiens, tebon with their loguage slt-
Mfe,A. (1997) Points ofview, o'fod: orford univesitv Pre$' tems cofiged in the same wy. CaI the initil state of the lguge slstem So.
w,. i. . . r tszel.b.., n6' rhe tuaject of PlrcEhquiry, Hamondsvort!: PensuiD
A universl gIljrar (IrG) is a theory of S0. Laguge acquisitio on this viM is
wittgensrei, L- (1952) Pioropnol"w5igdri", Oxf'r'l: Bac!vel-
the developmet dd naturatidn of tbe languge system in th brai. A lguage is

Thakto Robed M. I{misn forre.igneoaerdffsoftnb.try dofierinsexclle.radce

fr idptuvinS the prc*nt lion of my agmenb. The. . udoubtedly *i pla.s wn.E he wold
se oo', for inprovenmt,6i this is. much belter pi(e for h,vig d h oiricl q pa* om it.
Tb'k alo to Rob St.inlon Dd nie Lepore fd tieir sggestion. Tne, too aft not ia be blaed for
l2E
129

simply the mture st.te of an indieidual's laguage slstem. C.11 this mature state S.. Inre.nli\t. Cre r4ar hd onr\ e\?erienle been difie,.r
ole wutd h,e ended
Of cours, lagDage ddelopment requies erposure to lingutic input. A child glow- ut Mrn ,leren( tang!Be _wirb djfrernl S,. Bul wo peopte
hve .imil tn_
ing up in aD EngljshlangMge envnonment wil end up speaking English, a child i guSA rfthev,hde..omerling inlerut. nor ifrq hve ,hijr
experienrial hino, ie,.
a Iapanese lmguase enronment wil en up spealing tapaese, and so o. (Talk of prrhp\ r\ posjbte in \ome ce\ for differenl hr\torie,
't ro tea lo the.me irrnJ
English'lnguee speakers is simply a shorihand way of talkig of a goup ofspealers state Sm. Then these people would shde a taguage,
whose language systems are very similr. Lasuages are more ploperly thought ofs
despite h""i,g dif"*"r;;;;;;
idiol.' A lmsuage a "wy to speak d understmd" (Cbonsl<y, 1993: 49)). wlat
is rorted bout in a ghmnd for one's lnsuase is what one kor* when oe
knows ldguase-i.e. one's lingistic conpetence. (o nore on th, see Snith's 5.1 INrnnNlrsM vs. ExTERNALTsM
nty, 'Wlt I ktrow when I kow Language'). That is, a grmnar for one's lan-
guage is a teory ofs-, the mature state ofone's lagage rystem Thse rr triosvis\
bour rhe nture or rngudse rnd mearins rhr (an
connectionists, sch s Elrnan (1999); Seiderberg (1997)j Seidenberg. McDo enerndr.r ( hom,tn h( been.n.t otthpm
. nd
be tabcte,l
,lt. lr i, GrtuJ ,o,ee.hom.kl.
a14 and Saftan (2002), hle bee critical of various dpects of Choinsl<y's ews. aneneralm as direcied towards rwo distinct targets, which
They are ot persuaded by Chomsky s "poverty of the stimuius" agument fo the .an be caited ta;,
gMge dtcali,a d ."aanr aremaiz respeane\.
innateness of what is described by UG. Ths, they thik that far moe of language
1r.g."g.."*"r.u ll
rnal rnguger e_obiecr, who\e properje( .up(^ene
hd to be leaned and far less is pre programDed tha Chonsky dsumes. Ihey also ,ndrqdul mrnd,bruin. E tnsuge. re nor p*crrotosj.dl
o" ," ir"_rl ,"". .f."
tink that Chonsv's fo.us o linguistic competence is oispla.ed. They thinl that
" objc.r,. bur si,; ;d;
pende,th .t tanguage 6ers. Semtic exrernlisl.
on e orhe hrd denv lhr Lhe
langge acquisition must be stdied i the conterl oflinguiric peformatce (i.e. of ol Drei.nn
ldguage production ad conprehension). This is beetrse facto$ that influence pr- llenrl,
rnepen'lenLly of lropenie\ of rhe eorelion. ; , r""s,,s" ;" r;-i"")
rh. phy\(dt nd/or ,ocrt enronmenr, ot rt.,peke6 ut rh,
formnce e also importnt in acqsition. Ior example, sensitivity to the tunctional
o. prgnatic loles ofxpressions is import nt in acqisitio- Mormver. the statistical It is posible to be a lDgrage tnatist bur a semanric jteist. Io! instace,
propefies ofwords that hve been shoM to atrect performn.e, such s ftequocies e might hold rhat.lngxge. re b,rracl obiecr. and .o nor
ofuse, aiso play a role in acquisition (see Strm et al., t 996). psychorogica, ;
bu al,o hold linsu. er?rcsion. hv rhei, ."t",""," Ltl"c p,;p.,,,;,
Hoiever, it is importdt to note that thse critia of Chonskl are as conrnitted l1ure
DdeDpnded) olrh'dr ph)ricl rdror.o.idt colrert{ or tar&rge
to a intemlist conceptio oflanguage d is Chomsky. lnguages are sti]l propeties ff, a single er"re$ion-q"e wodd have the sme refe,",."-*i,C u,er..
p....,
On rhi,
of the nindAnins of individuals according to this connectionist N. It is just that ditre, r,phnk&scjdt correxl,. ft b t,o pos,ibte ro ac,epr r j;Jl
mod""..,, fie,l
the matuie stte of a competet speaker of a langMge is achi*.d via a rote ditrd rorm ol lJrrgge injrmJi.m nd ler ro be a semnr. qr.n.r.
t ftom te oe ensged by Cholst7. Mltiple costraiDt, are t wo <, and sone wr(h r.g!bly rhe v hetd by lodor rjqS/, tcs0,. t,nCuge,Onrethb ew,
sy(lm,
of the necbanisms ivolved in langudge lerning (e.9. those involved in learring to or menlJ repre\enrrtron\ in lhr minbrjro of indidu\.
segment a stream of speech into wordr, or the ones involved in perceiving pho- cmputational d conceptul role propefies ofrhese representatios
o**,, .11" ,"
emic contrsts) are the same mechanisms that are at work in learning and petforming superene on
the jreral srares of individuats, the referetial or
intensional properties of *s
other r linguistic pe.cptul tdks. Nevertheles, these conectioists wotild not mentat representations depend on the der ph)sical -.-"-
dey that the chases being Mought are chdges to an indidual brair, and that
cont"*
"fl";ds;;,;;.
th dd lesult of this p.ocess wil be a competent adult speker of a ldguage in the

5.1,1 Chornslqy's CritiqueoflanguageExternalism

Connectionists think that Chosrys enphasis on conpetene, opposed to per
formance, is nisplaed. Howder, thei conception ofpelformce is s iternalist as
Chomskyt conception of competence- Lingristic performdce involves the iterc- lIl'!:,"-*"r.* .'! lhar rangrase. r"ei. ,rem,
auons. r thc @\ in whi(h.,epe\enrarion
or irern merrt repre\er_
here unde.rood i, b,o,d en;ugh ro
tion ofnultiple cognitive "systems" perceptual s''stems, geeral lerning systens, cover both e rraditional sFnbol
system view .cording to which the rhtngs wiJ
motor sFtms, memory rystems, etc. But all of these re ternally ididuated repBcnr';oaJ pjoptrric\ d,e menrt syhof, nd *,..."*"o",.r
Also, althoush these coectioists emphasize the rcle of er"eriece i language D8ro wrah ohRlr\ d.properiies de.efr,cnred ir. ";"* i.-J
drJribJred qdy b) ,c
acquisition, this does not make them efiernalists. Choslry too sees a role for er"er- wot ol t" r ancdd aots. l t-u, bo aho J<] \ ew
cnd rhe conne. rioni.r s
ience. All parties to rhis debate agree tht use6 of a lguage are mbedde in a ^s n rnlernrtt
(ounr ,orreption.
of tfguag. I Ac.ordrnS ro ne teFion olttuapc
wider wold, and that this wider world ipinses on lnsuage ules in sorne way e\1enar.. lntur8e. re .vnem, o, rb(.r.r rJte.. whrre
the iute, r"r h1;;
 iiliiifi Eii; :ii;fi jii ?i;iliiii;lfi:
sil [3isg E;
:=;iii:

ii?*iiiiiiii iiii;i:iiii:iiiff

Eii ii?: iii:i i: ii iiiiiii t iliiil?iiiiii

iE

illri' 1?uliiilgili1311 *1*111i1!*iii

Hslri ialiliiiaffi *
j 11n*ii:t*111181
t Eiii iiliieai*s ; 3i + e **:' i*i i?iii
ijilii ruiiiii?ii:g;;i;., iji

isiiiii:i iii*iiiiiiiiilisiii;
iiiii E

iiiiii;iffii9:iiiiiii;iiiiiiii:ii F iiii;

i;;;;iEEi

:'il;?=;c=#;ii;iiiii;iEi:i;iA
;iilE;giit: ;i;fiial;i;
=!i;;';iii
i:i: rEi:i;-;
=i: iiiriiifuii;eieie;
ii:ii;iiii iii i:;iiliiiiii;;i;i
 iilffi;ii jiii;j:iE;,iiii ijs:Et
jji jijiii
ffi :ii; iii:iji;3i3i

ff iiiii {i i;i fu
giieiji ii;j i ; ijj
jiiiif
i iff iiiiiiff iiig;i; iff E;;;

iii,iiliiiiiii*:iiiiiiiiEiii
'**
gl
iiiiiii rii ii i;i i
ii i i lii ! iiEI iiii : fi ii
j

tiiiiiii:iii?tiii:iiiliiiiiiii:ii;
 g.::T:.9.-.!6
E=i:l-!9
::4x9 r=
=Y.F=.9..
r t=P;! F"i
giE:pici 3=
g!"EiPiEi
:.ErEt!; s.3
;Elitgt
F
! f
l5
Fr

jiij;ii
33:trrf q9 iiiiff ;;;iffiiii;
t:i ?i E
r6!P!
.! ? d 9 -i
+i

AE
r-
u
'I 9;e.c3:..i 2Z^
a g;tfrc* 2: :ig i iff jiii
; i;i
++-paii6.5;
=+e=Ei:? Hi
iE tE:,i a z
EFJ:;;:EE* ^It z
y9":"zuEt E

":.s_q":as!r*
. . "^,v'c.t i v
EE:;;EEE i iiiiiiiii iii;i ;i

i;:{iti Er;;ii;;i,ii;?i;: ;ti;i;ig i

; ii;;i;ii,i;ii;iii:iiiiiii ;!iiiiig ii
Ei t E; ; ;
i ii iii ii ; iE i; ! i i i : ii iii? i i
i 1111ii

i iiii ii iii ii iiii i ?iii aii iiii iiiie:

 i, siiii s: * i;i :: ;; si
i.i i ii
:ijq iiiE:i i ii: r; i;: sF

i;ii iii; is: ;;i s; iii iii i i ii

siisi,i;iii,iii:gii*;
i:ii i:iliiii

tr
"lo
iE E:
iiiiii :iiiEiiiiiiii itisii: $-3 t ,q

.!s !
Eisii : i:iici i: i ;EE
jr 99 o
E

r
i:E::+E;
gi
i: liil;t; E i ; i i!i 9 . -:

g:iiEi gi : ii;; E ;t;;ii;,?: E!E q. '.

e i: c
E:i?;itEiiir9i .6 < b=-:
j
:!
?tii{ii::i,, >

;;iiii::iii!!;;!?';r:E g o R 9e