Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

The Linguistic Review

Editor-in-Chief: Hulst, Harry

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 0.676
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.831

CiteScore 2016: 0.52

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.662
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.573

Online
ISSN
1613-3676
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 18, Issue 1-2 (Jun 2002)

Issues

Understanding stimulus poverty arguments

Janet Dean Fodor / Carrie Crowther
Published Online: 2008-02-27 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.105

Abstract

The argument from the poverty of the stimulus as Pullum and Scholz define it (their APS) is undeniably true, given that all language learners acquire the ability to generate more sentences of the target language than they have heard. Uniformity across learners with respect to the additional sentences they project suggests that grammar induction is guided by general principles, which must be innate. What remains to be established is exactly which sentences can be projected on the basis of which others. The details of this are important to linguistic theory and to the psycho-computational modelling of natural language acquisition. They are not of great significance to the generic issue of nativism versus empiricism, except that they may clarify the extent to which the innate knowledge in question is specific to language. The argument for linguistic nativism appears to be solidly supported by the distinctive patterns of generalization that learners adopt in the absence of systematic negative evidence (a limitation that Pullum and Scholz exclude from APS). We argue that innate knowledge of how to represent natural language facts is necessary in order for learners to extract from their input the information that it does contain. Pullum and Scholz themselves rely on Universal Grammar in just this role when they make specific suggestions as to how learners arrive at the right generalizations.

About the article

Published Online: 2008-02-27

Published in Print: 2002-06-26


Citation Information: The Linguistic Review, ISSN (Online) 1613-3676, ISSN (Print) 0167-6318, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.105.

Export Citation

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Adam H. Marblestone, Greg Wayne, and Konrad P. Kording
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 2016, Volume 10
[2]
CLIFTON PYE
Journal of Child Language, 2012, Volume 39, Number 03, Page 611
[3]
Nick Chater and Paul Vitányi
Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 2007, Volume 51, Number 3, Page 135
[4]
Víctor M. Longa and Guillermo Lorenzo
Linguistics, 2008, Volume 46, Number 3

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in