Again, Chomsky's Universal Grammar doesn't preclude heterogeneity at all. The syntax remains essentially consistent but there can be as many slangs, dialects, vernaculars, languages as you like. And De landa's example, Labov's experiment re: variations of language at different department stores, has to do with pronunciation, not syntax. So there's zero need to attack Chomsky here. I'm not even a big chomsky fan..but it's such an infuriating mischaracterization.
Again, Chomsky's Universal Grammar doesn't preclude heterogeneity at all. The syntax remains essentially consistent but there can be as many slangs, dialects, vernaculars, languages as you like. And De landa's example, Labov's experiment re: variations of language at different department stores, has to do with pronunciation, not syntax. So there's zero need to attack Chomsky here. I'm not even a big chomsky fan..but it's such an infuriating mischaracterization.
CamSalisbury 1 year ago
thanks from morocco
MrBelaid123 1 year ago