Language and the Mind Revisited - The Biolinguistic Turn

[Foneticaable]

Sorry, what's the word he said in .... 0;00;49. "And the.....has been learnt in the...

[kokopelli314]

Halfway through his lecture Prof. Chomsky mentions the ecological concept of "umwelt" and again alludes to it in his answer about a "language acquisition device" and talks about the differing responses to a flower that his granddaughter, a chimp and a bee might have. The implication being that different species are hard-wired toward divergent bio-semiotic cues. Please someone correct me if I'm missing something, but isn't this putting the cart before the horse? Language emerges from biology.(?)

[atreyu1210]

@kokopelli314 Psychology and linguistics describe this "language acquisition device" as a mechanism that onsets from birth to puberty. This is a so-thought-of "critical period" in which a child can nearly effortlessly acquire, process, memorize, etc language, definitions, phonemes, etc. This theory has not (to my knowledge) been supported by any discoveries pointing to an actual mechanism. After puberty, one may see for him or herself that language requires a high amount of effortful processing.

[atreyu1210]

@atreyu1210 Please excuse the chain response (I ran out of characters). This critical period comes into effect for a child as long as there is some form of exposure to language; this is even applicable for non-spoken languages (e.g. sign language). This theory was originally ground-breaking, as it offset B.F. Skinner's (father of operant learning and conditioning) belief that humans may acquire language via rewards, and punishments associated with the use of language.

[kokopelli314]

@atreyu1210 Wouldn't any kind of "language acquisition device" require language, as a functional component? This would seem to be supported by the difficulty feral children have in acquiring language. It seems a bit of a chicken and egg problem in that language and it's generative functions are interdependent. At least up to a point.

[Neilgs]

affect to bring it to life. There are no "mechanisms" as such defines or homonculous sitting in the center of the pineal gland winding the gears of the body.Syntax, semantics, pragmatics are separated for purposes of reductionistic theorems. In reality cannot be parsed as such (analogous the atom, atomus cannot be separated into subatomic particles). Interpenetration (Heisenberg's principle will do) NOT of parts but in part (tongue in cheek) where we enter the system for purposes of description.

[Neilgs]

attains proficiency from caregiver/child engagement; affect gesturing somatic and facial, which then allows for a mediation if you will or hemispheric coordination between the the executive functions (prefrontal cortex, ideation, motor planning and execution) and the more primitive limbic system (e.g., amygdala, all or nothing reactions) that allows for representional ideas (symbolization) or free-standing ideas apart from fixed modalities of perception (all or nothing). At that point language

[Neilgs]

(pragmatic arrangement of novel sentences) becomes possible. This follows the evolutionary past of our ancestors. Obviously you are not caught upon in primate language studies since Nim Chimpsky. Look at the last two decades of work with Bonobos (Sue Savage Rumbaugh); they have the language pragmatic equivalency of advanced 7-8 year olds. Also look at the work of Dr. Stanley Greenspan/Stuart Shanker 2004 First Idea., which essentially CHANGES the entirety of the nature/nurturance controversy.

[cryptickripke]

@Neilgs This is not the forum to debate the efficacy of primate language studies, which is and always has been a very contentious area, indeed Savage-Rumbaugh's work has been strongly criticized by cognitive scientists and linguists and is by no means widely received. But in any...

[cryptickripke]

@cryptickripke ...But in any case I will repeat what I said in the first comment I wrote that you replied to, which remains true: "The fact that human genes partially determine the development of language necessitates that there be some features of the language system that are genetically determined and do not vary due to experience. Those genetically determined features are "universal grammar."

[Neilgs]

@cryptickripke Ah! But they do vary. It is called potentiation to actualization. You cannot separate Any bio-genetic substrate from the social-emotional environment. It will not produce. It does not produce and it is an illusion of Deus ex machina. Formula is nice but it does NOT produce actualization. Knowing the chemical composition and geographical locale of pigment that compromises a Rembrandt to him or her will not be given the title of artist let alone paint by number child, lol

[cryptickripke]

@Neilgs Look. Nobody is claiming that you can have a child grow up in a darkened room with no contact and he'll walk out at age 11 speaking Russian. That seems to be the position you're arguing against but I'm tired of repeating the basic truths that you haven't countered. If ONE feature of human language is invariant, then there is a UG. Unfortunately you don't understand this, but I won't keep repeating it.

[Neilgs]

@cryptickripke What you brilliantly fail to understand is that CODE is meaningless; syntax is meaningless without all the preceding developmental levels of engagement that are required. Hence a developmental systems theory approach that make UG "invariably interesting" but a more explicated and glorious form of 19th C. phrenology. Not only will he not speak Russian; the placement of nouns and verbs (vis a vis UG will be along the lines of an autistic child) Not only will he not speak...

[Neilgs]

Russian, "Colurless green ideas sleep furiously" will make PERFECT SENSE, as what is required for the organizational meaningful pragmatic use which cannot be separated or teased our from function, or it can for purposes of argument, counting angels on a pin, but how utterly and pathologically distorted!

[cryptickripke]

@Neilgs The reason I expressed exasperation is because you seem to think I disagree with this: "syntax is meaningless without all the preceding developmental levels of engagement that are required"

I totally agree with that. Syntax without acquired language, which in turn requires socialization, which in turn requires all the interesting developmental mechanisms you mentioned, is indeed meaningless. But that's compatible with, and in fact follows from, the thesis that UG exists. ...

[cryptickripke]

@cryptickripke Chomsky is rather like Kant, who said "concepts without intuitions are empty"--we might say, "UG without language/society is empty." But Kant's next sentence was "intuitions without concepts are blind." Mere socialization may yield primitive communication, but it won't get you anything approaching language--for evidence, see every nonlinguistic animal society in natural history. You clearly need a special kind of brain to know a language. Whatever the "specialness" is, that's UG.

[Neilgs]

@cryptickr. Pardon moi! For the exasperation but it perchance may be bode well to stir thine tides of potential non-reflective syntax and mental-emotional agility. This sounds like the knee bone is connected to the thigh bond the thigh bone is connected to the hip bone... I am coming from a SYSTEMS THEORY perspective. We do not deny genetic faculty but syntax like planets without certain certain ingredients will remain Lifeless. Word-order flow however potentially embedded REQUIRES .....

[cryptickripke]

@cryptickripke Also keep in mind that even if a researcher 1) with great pains and effort and 2) with the most intelligent and willing animals in an environment, is able to help them partially acquire 3) extremely limited linguistic abilities, that only serves to underscore the myriad ways in which human language acquisition and use is VERY different from that. You might be able to teach me to mimic the mating call of a cardinal, but it doesn't teach you much about cardinals.

[stoprainingonme]

OMG! Chomsky's a linguist? 

[ToddAldrich]

@stoprainingonme He was a truly brilliant linguist.  Unfortunately he used his skill at this to fool a lot of people with his lies designed to undermine freedom and to promote marxism.

[HoffaInExile]

Either i got lost or he repeated about 5 minutes of his speech at 38:00. Honestly I wish I was capable of following his train of thought through his sometimes detailed examples. I will have to go to the books so I can get a sense of continuity. Thanks for posting this.

[fringeelements]

boilinguistics has failed so spectacularly and stunted the development of the field of linguistics. People are afraid to challenge chomsky because he deals in character assassination. Look up "The Linguistics Wars" by Randy Allen Harris. Interactionism can explain how language actually works, biolinguistics cannot. Syntactic deep structure doesn't exist, but chomsky is too invested in this. I think linguistics will only progress once chomsky dies.

[cryptickripke]

@fringeelements Biolinguistics=the study of language as a property of biological organisms, with all that entails (e.g., product of evolution, physical state or structure of a neurological system, partially determined by genetics). The fact that human genes partially determine the development of language necessitates that there be some features of the language system that are genetically determined and do not vary due to experience. Those genetically determined features are "universal grammar."

[Neilgs]

@cryptickripke But the genetic or bio-genetic correlates imprinted and symbolically represented as universal grammar is perfectly meaningless without affect preverbal emotional signaling which has to do with millions of years of non-human and human primate Nurturance based infant/caregiver practices. Language, e.g., as the manipulation of verbal pattern recognition (symbols) that only have social prominence (meaning) in the exchanges of shared symbols of a particular culture will not emerge

[Neilgs]

spontaneously. Let us take non-typical developing children, such as autism, where the pre-verbal levels or two-way emotional signaling have not or insufficiently developed, along with ideation of symbolization, symbolic play apart from fixed representation). Only when that develops, and as developmental therapist who works with this population, will the pragmatics of expressive language usage, or syntactic pragmatically meaningful utterance become possible. Translation: It is not genes but

[Neilgs]

Nurturance based practices (over millions of years or rekindled through deepening affect-based relationships) that allows the hierarchical convergence of meaning, translation and usage to happen. Self-contained imprinted modules in the brain (the bio-genetic bete machine -bio-genetic modular language faculty) is a BIG fallacy.

[cryptickripke]

@Neilgs There's no fallacy. It's just a recognition of the fact that the generation of sentences from constituent words happens according to a set of sentence-construction principles or rules, some of which are learned and some of which are not. Your theory of Nurture-with-a-capital-n is by no means an accepted or prevailing theory of how language is acquired, and obviously YouTube comments are not a place to present new scientific ideas.

[Neilgs]

@cryptickripke The pragmatic or meaningful use of language/communication, the ability to create novel sentences requires, granted lots of potential (i.e. a genetic substrate, a brain/nervous system, fully developed pharynx and larynx). But it is nurturance based practices over the course of millions of years of non-human to human primate nurturance based practices that led to "spoken language". What appears to be evolutionary predetermined faculty is quite otherwise. Human babies are....

[Neilgs]

..essentially born six months premature. Billions of neurons; a few primitive reactive circuits and primitive emotional (all or nothing responses). What is REQUIRED for this process to evolve is, yes, that little thing call nurturance. Language does not happen until the child acquires through lots of back and forth emotional dyadic signaling (engagement); vagus nerve come in here, as it is connected to the pharynx, larynx, vestibular receptors and facial gestures; It is only once the child

[cryptickripke]

@Neilgs But other animals that can send nonverbal emotional signals still don't have language. Why when we try to teach them languages are they unable to learn them? Human language is informed by a number of human characteristics, some of which, like emotional signaling, are shared with other animals. But the interesting ones from a linguistic point of view are the unique ones, like the ability to form complex sentences one has never heard at just 2 years old.

[carsanookdotcom]

A true academic.

John K.Lindgren

Kingdom of Thailand

[WastedTourist]

He also loves talking about worms and insects and bees a lot, I've noticed.

I wonder if he keeps bees at all, it seems the type of thing he would be interested in.

[danski86]

does he repeat himself around 39:08?

[mmuldoor]

@danski86 YEah... I think it was an overlap of the tape. I mean it was an exact reptition of every word for like a minute. I don't think he's that robotic,

[WastedTourist]

Chomsky is like a juggernaught whenever he challenged about any point. He always immediately dismisses his challenger then proceeds on an amazing diatribe. Every time!

[emotionalinvalid]

@WastedTourist thanks for reminding us Mr. Dick Cheney. I really like your anon i.d. though

[1cSn3]

he is clearly into his bees.haha

[xfigbearx]

Did he say his grand daughter had a pet Chimp? 9:08  I find that hard to believe.

[mistermoen]

A few of the questions seemed to come from people who disagree with Chomsky's theories. They must be some of the Searl dick suckers from Cal.

[PeeteyP]

~12:50 he goes on about how the boundaries of psychological investigations of the brain versus physiological ones are somewhat fluid ( or "convenient")- then he launches into a tangental discussion of blurring of the boundaries of physics and chemistry- one would think that giving an example of what he's talking about (psychological approaches vs. physiological ones) would have been more germane.

When he's talking politics he's very lucid- what's wrong? why can't I understand one paragraph?

[Kegofbeer]

what did the guy in the audience say at the beginning?

[tryanjohnson]

@Kegofbeer He said Chomsky looked hot and sexy.  Chomsky was well happy about that.

[Kegofbeer]

@tryanjohnson as he should be. chomsky is a sex icon

[ParkLeeNa]

@Kegofbeer "You're good looking"

[mix22magic]

Anyone know what year this event took place?

[1989kheir]

@mix22magic 2003 it says it in info

[mixxyovilson3]

cant.

[mixxyovilson3]

write a book.

[mixxyovilson3]

what do i have to do to make you beleve me.

[mixxyovilson3]

and the relevance theory is a good approach to START with.

[mixxyovilson3]

it just needs educating. with a sender & reciever visualy & audibly = mind

[mixxyovilson3]

and i SEE it my way.

[mixxyovilson3]

i see it.

[mixxyovilson3]

trust me.

i know.

[mixxyovilson3]

its a good

discovery

im a laptop too.

[mixxyovilson3]

i fooking CRACK it m8.

you will see

[NoGuff]

Biolinguistics = NewSpeak

[Diosibundo]

@NoGuff

What do you mean Newspeak?

[NoGuff]

I hope you're only asking what I mean by the comparison.

"biolinguistics - the study of relations between physiology and speech"

Newspeak is the elimination of selected words/elements for the false goal of making speech easier, quicker, less cumbersome. The idea being speech should come from the ease of the mechanics of speaking it instead of from the expression of complex ideas.

The problem being the elimination of complex ideas (dissent & original thought) from mainstream discussion.

[Diosibundo]

@NoGuff

Well yeah, I know what Newspeak is from Orwell and I guess "Biolinguistics" is refering to Chomsky's approach to the language faculty being innate (though I never heard him use that term).

I still don't get what you mean by

Biolinguistics = NewSpeak

I thought maybe you meant something I like

"I can't understand what this guy's talking about, therefore it must be bullshit"

Was that it?

[NoGuff]

I could've sworn I answered your question. But that's my error.

Biolinguistics studies the relationship between physiology & speech. Newspeak utilizes that supposed relationship to eliminate dissent, individualism, & new ideas.

And a note about that alleged relationship: I'm guessing Chomsky's whole thesis of his work is meant to suggest Humans developed a vocal language because of our physiology. Well, its been shown that apes, esp. gorillas, should also speak, but they don't. Why?

[Diosibundo]

@NoGuff

Youre GUESSING what Chomsky's thesis is?

How about you listen to the lecture and figure out what he's saying. It has nothing to do with "Developing vocal language because of our physiology"

Are you on meds? Stop listening to Palin dude, she's turning your brain into cottage cheese.

[Diosibundo]

See? Science is hard, isn't it?

[NoGuff]

@Diosibundo

Should I keep waiting for that example of Palin's comments on this subject? Or should I accept your silence as an acknowledgment that you were just bullshitting in a lame attempt at an insult? A canned one, at that.

[Diosibundo]

@NoGuff

I refudiate that remark! We need to focus on putting food on our children and keep asking... is our Children Learning? God Bless Amershicha... oh wait, my palm is sweaty, my crib notes are runniing! I'll get back to you...

Support the troops!

[NoGuff]

@Diosibundo

"I refudiate that remark!"

--Don't you mean "I resemble that.. nyuk-nyuk-nyuk!"

"my crib notes are runniing"

--Yours and Diane Feinstein's.

[johnvattic1234]

@NoGuff When humans became bipedal beings the entry point of the spine into the skull changed; our larynx dropped and we were permitted greater articulation of vocal sounds. Gorillas aren't completely bipedal meaning their larynx, whilst preventing them from choking on their food, does not allow them a great deal of control over the sounds they can make.

[cryptickripke]

@NoGuff "Physiology" in this context doesn't mean the shape of your mouth or something like that--it means the state of the nervous system, especially the brain, that is correlated with linguistic competence. It hasn't been "shown" that animals have this physiological state, because if they did, they would be language users.

[NoGuff]

@cryptickripke

You should be telling these dipweeds all of this, since you're essentially agreeing with me.

[cryptickripke]

@NoGuff "And a note about that alleged relationship: I'm guessing Chomsky's whole thesis of his work is meant to suggest Humans developed a vocal language because of our physiology. Well, its been shown that apes, esp. gorillas, should also speak, but they don't. Why?"

[1888junkteam]

excellent work!

[jjgfun]

He wears velcro shoes :) that is funny!!!

[jhonick12345678910]

Hello, where can I find this with english subtitled

[STEPHENWRAYSFORD33]

thanks for uploading.

[vijaen1919]

Its so lively and informative!

[polymath7]

(chuckle) It's nice to hear Chomsky actually talk about linguistics for once. :-)

[Iecerint]

doublelike

[cryptickripke]

@polymath7 He's written around 40 books on the subject!

[alwayswilling1232000]

A long shot here but does anyone know what is the guys shouts out at 1.06??

[polymath7]

Oddly enough, he says, "You're good-looking!".

[balrenun]

person: (not clear)

noam: pardon?

person: we love you!

noam: oh, thankyou.... always nice to have a friend in the audience

[METR0D0ME]

Did you find a copy? It's available as a PDF/eBook on torrent sites, not as good as an actual book in my opinion but that's purely aesthetic.

[ThreeMarrons]

Language is something we cannot intuitively explain but that we can descriptively explain

[mjmcnult]

Chomsky has been arguing many of these ideas for a long time and repeats them in almost every guest lecture. Hopefully, someday, it will all sink in and people will finally get it. Chomsky is right on about the innateness of language.

[dim12trav]

Chomsky may be brilliant but he is a poor speaker does he not know how to use his voice to keep people awake?

[tmac2000]

He's a little more "lively" when talking politics and making comments on current affairs.

[SmokiSounds]

Why don't you go to sleep, then come back and watch it when you're fresh? Chomsky's voice is perfectly smooth, but even if it wasn't, if I'm interested in the topic I won't be bothered by a voice.

[newfan7]

This man is one of the leading intellectual figures since the 70's.

[TheGamingWeasel]

Submarines don't swim. They dive.

[BanderHM]

Speaking linguistically, they swim (metaphorically)

;)

[BanderHM]

It's still mysterious and . I mean the I-Language and proofs of the innateness hypothesis.

[Xenu]

Why does the video repeat at :37??

[onurozkaynak35]

always nice to have a friend in the audience:)

[lGnossos]

lol did that person say "good looking"? haha

[tokotokotoko3]

I love the Q&A in the end. He's doing the verbal Bruce Lee again.

[johannsteve]

It all seems to boil down to the mystery that we are. Furthermore, at some point humankind took a detour from the intimate knowing of the direct experience of reality that is rooted on direct self knowledge. And now we have scientists chasing their own tails trying to rationalize a multidimensional Universe in terms of nebulous mental abstraction. I rather party.

[PuppyHate]

Its a little like flying a statistic.

[luxou812]

Cool jacket. He has a nice collection of sweaters as well.

First time I've heard him as a linguist. Wonderful.