In 1994, when Steven Pinker’s book “The language instinct” was published, the linguistic world was confronted with the renewed debate, whether language comes from innate ideas or is just the result of experiencing and learning. This important debate which concerns linguistics until today will be the topic of the following work. The important question is, if a language instinct really exists and which evidence one can provide to assume that our language ability is inherited. Until today, there is great discussion and speculation about innate language ideas and the most important proponent for them nowadays is Steven Pinker. To set his nativist ideas in an appropriate context, it is necessary to explain where the ideas of “nativism” and the opposite linguistic school “empiricism” come from and what characteristics they show. This constructs a context and prepares a base for the focus on Pinker’s book. The most important founder of today’s nativist thoughts is certainly Noam Chomsky, whose ideas were the basis for Pinker’s assumption of a language instinct. For this reason, I will present a short summary of Chomsky’s ideas as the last aspect of the first chapter. Pinker’s arguments put forward in his work “The language instinct” will form the main part and second chapter of my work. I will present his definition of a language instinct and his given evidence for its existence. Because of the complexity of the pieces of evidence put forward in his whole work, I will pick up two of his most important aspects for innate language ideas: Pidgin and creoles and the case of the KE-Family. Afterwards, I will focus on two of his critics, Geoffrey Samspon and Stefan Schaden, because they composed both works being direct responses to Pinker’s “The language instinct”. This will permit us to discuss the question about its existence and which of the arguments for and against it appear more convincing. To prepare this discussion at the end, I will particularly have a closer look at Schaden’s and Sampson’s explicit refutes concerning Pinker’s main points of evidence. As a last step, I will summarize and discuss the arguments of the two sides carefully and complete my work with drawing my personal conclusion about the important question, if a language instinct really exists.
Table of Contents
0. Introduction
1. Where does language come from?
1.1 Empiricist and nativist views
1.3 The return of the native – basic assumptions of Noam Chomsky
2. Steven Pinker - The language instinct
2.1 Definition of a language instinct
2.2 Pinker’s evidence for the existence of a language instinct
2.2.1 Pidgins and creoles
2.2.2 The example of the KE-Family
3. Counter arguments to Pinker’s view: Geoffrey Sampson and Stefan Schaden
3.1 Schaden concerning pidgins and creoles
3.2 Sampson’s view towards the case of the KE-Family
4. Summary and discussion
5. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This work examines the ongoing linguistic debate regarding whether language is an innate biological instinct or a cultural product acquired through experience. The primary research goal is to critically analyze the nativist arguments proposed by Steven Pinker, specifically his claims regarding a "language instinct," and to evaluate these against the empirical counter-arguments presented by critics Geoffrey Sampson and Stefan Schaden.
- The historical and theoretical foundations of the nature-nurture controversy in linguistics.
- Steven Pinker’s nativist theory and the concept of an autonomous language organ.
- Empirical evidence used by Pinker, including pidgin/creole development and the KE-Family study.
- Critical refutations by Geoffrey Sampson and Stefan Schaden regarding the language-specific nature of grammatical ability.
- A discussion of recent genetic findings (FOXP2) and their implications for the debate.
Excerpts from the Book
2.2.1 Pidgin and Creoles
At the beginning of chapter two, Pinker refers to the results of the linguist Derek Bickerton who is Professor at the University of Hawaii. For several years he had analyzed the language of the immigrants of Hawaii in the 1970s. These immigrants came from different countries all over the world and spoke different languages. Hence they did not understand each other but had to communicate with groups of other languages for necessary work and trade purposes. Neither groups of people with different languages had the time or opportunity to learn the other’s language properly. What did they do to make possible the understanding of the other?
They developed a makeshift language among them to communicate. This kind of language is called a “pidgin”. It consists of strings of words distinct to both languages or to languages of the environment. These words are mixed together in phrases which consist of a very simple grammar structure. Here is an example chosen by Pinker (1994:33) of a pidgin utterance of a ninety-two-year old Japanese immigrant: “Me capé buy, me check make.”
Chapter Summary
0. Introduction: The introduction outlines the central debate between nativist and empiricist views of language acquisition and provides an overview of the work's critical approach.
1. Where does language come from?: This chapter defines the historical nature-nurture controversy and introduces the foundational work of Noam Chomsky, whose theories underpin modern nativist arguments.
2. Steven Pinker - The language instinct: This section details Pinker’s argument that language is a specialized, innate biological adaptation, supported by evidence from pidgin-to-creole evolution and the KE-Family genetic study.
3. Counter arguments to Pinker’s view: Geoffrey Sampson and Stefan Schaden: This chapter presents systematic criticism from Sampson and Schaden, who argue that language is a cultural product and that Pinker’s evidence suffers from logical fallacies and narrow definitions.
4. Summary and discussion: This chapter synthesizes the arguments of both sides, incorporating recent genetic research regarding FOXP2 to evaluate the validity of an "autonomous language organ."
5. Conclusion: The author concludes that while innate abilities likely play a role in language acquisition, a more balanced "general nativist" view is more plausible than the concept of an isolated language organ.
Keywords
Linguistics, Nativism, Empiricism, Language Instinct, Universal Grammar, Pidgin, Creole, KE-Family, Specific Language Impairment, FOXP2, Nature-Nurture Controversy, Psycholinguistics, Steven Pinker, Noam Chomsky, Geoffrey Sampson
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper investigates the "nature-nurture" debate in linguistics, specifically questioning whether human language capacity is an inherited biological instinct or a result of social experience and learning.
What are the primary themes discussed?
Central themes include the evaluation of Steven Pinker’s nativist theory, the role of Universal Grammar, the formation of creole languages, and the critical responses from empiricist scholars.
What is the research goal?
The objective is to critically assess whether the evidence provided by Pinker is sufficient to support the claim of an innate, autonomous "language instinct" in the human brain.
Which methodologies are employed?
The work utilizes a comparative, analytical approach, examining primary texts by Steven Pinker, Geoffrey Sampson, and Stefan Schaden, alongside empirical studies on language disorders and evolutionary biology.
What does the main body focus on?
The main body focuses on Pinker’s evidence regarding pidgins and the KE-Family, followed by detailed refutations from Sampson and Schaden regarding the specific versus general cognitive origins of language.
Which keywords define this work?
Keywords include Nativism, Empiricism, Language Instinct, Universal Grammar, Pidgins, Creoles, and the KE-Family.
How does the author interpret the role of the KE-Family?
The author analyzes the KE-Family case as a focal point for the debate; while Pinker uses it to argue for specific grammar genes, the author highlights critics' arguments that the impairment is not exclusively language-specific.
What significance do recent genetic studies have in the conclusion?
The discovery of the FOXP2 gene is used to nuance the debate, suggesting that while genetics are involved, the gene is not a dedicated "grammar gene," thus challenging the extreme nativist view.
- Quote paper
- Magister Kommunikationswissenschaft Linda Neuhaus (Author), 2005, Does a language instinct exist? The language Instinct Debate., Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/41380
