Throwing fuel on the embers: Probability or Dichotomy, Cognitive or Linguistic?

Prof. Robert Berwick's abstract for his forthcoming invited talk at the ACL2016 workshop on Cognitive Aspects of Computational Language Learning revives an ancient debate. Entitled "Why take a chance?", Berwick seems to refer implicitly to Chomsky's critique of the statistical approach of Harris as well as the currently dominant paradigms in CoNLL. Berwick avoids Chomsky's use of "innate" but states that "the debate over the existence of sophisticated mental grammars was settled with Chomsky's Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory (1957/1975)", acknowledging that "this debate has often been revived". This paper agrees with the view that this debate has long since been settled, but with the opposite outcome! Given the embers have not yet died away, and the questions remain fundamental, perhaps it is appropriate to refuel the debate, so I would like to join Bob in throwing fuel on this fire by reviewing the evidence against the Chomskian position!

[1]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  The methodology of scientific research programmes: Contents , 1978 .

[2]  D. Palmer.  Chomsky’s Nativism: A Critical Review , 2000, The Analysis of verbal behavior.

[3]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Minimalist Program , 1992 .

[4]  Alexander Clark,et al.  Towards a Statistical Model of Grammaticality , 2013, CogSci.

[5]  K. Popper,et al.  Conjectures and refutations;: The growth of scientific knowledge , 1972 .

[6]  M. Tomasello.  Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition , 2003 .

[7]  E. Mark Gold,et al.  Language Identification in the Limit , 1967, Inf. Control..

[8]  S. Pinker.  How the Mind Works , 1999, Philosophy after Darwin.

[9]  A. Goldberg.  Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language , 2006 .

[10]  S. Stich,et al.  The cognitive basis of science , 2002 .

[11]  S. Anderson.  The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory , 2009 .

[12]  M. Pickering,et al.  Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension? , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[13]  Why Take the Chance , 1997 .

[14]  David M. W. Powers,et al.  Goals, Issues and Directions in Machine Learning of Natural Language and Ontology (Bibliography) , 1991, SIGART Bull..

[15]  Andreas Stolcke,et al.  Miniature Language Acquisition: A Touchstone for Cognitive Science , 2002 .

[16]  James Jay Horning,et al.  A study of grammatical inference , 1969 .

[17]  Steven Bird,et al.  One-Level Phonology: Autosegmental Representations and Rules as Finite Automata , 1994, Comput. Linguistics.

[18]  S. Pinker.  The Language Instinct , 1994 .

[19]  David M. W. Powers,et al.  The Problem with Kappa , 2012, EACL.

[20]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1978 .

[21]  Geoffrey Sampson,et al.  Linguistic universals as evidence for empiricism , 1978, Journal of Linguistics.

[22]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Metaphors We Live By , 1980 .

[23]  Kenneth L. Pike,et al.  Phonetics: A Critical Analysis of Phonetic Theory and a Technique for the Practical Description of Sounds , 1943 .

[24]  Alexander Clark,et al.  Measuring Gradience in Speakers' Grammaticality Judgements , 2014, CogSci.

[25]  L Pike Kenneth,et al.  Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of human , 2017 .

[26]  A. Knott.  Sensorimotor Cognition and Natural Language Syntax , 2012 .

[27]  K. Popper,et al.  Conjectures and refutations;: The growth of scientific knowledge , 1972 .

[28]  Adele E. Goldberg,et al.  Universal Grammar? Or prerequisites for natural language? , 2008 .

[29]  K. Pike,et al.  The intonation of American English , 1946 .

[30]  W. Marsden.  I and J , 2012 .

[31]  Rens Bod,et al.  Constructions at work or at rest? , 2008 .

[32]  Geoffrey Sampson,et al.  The "Language instinct" debate , 2005 .

[33]  David M. W. Powers,et al.  Neurolinguistics and psycholinguistics as a basis for computer acquisition of natural language , 1983, SGAR.

[34]  Kenneth L. Pike,et al.  Tone languages : a technique for determining the number and type of pitch contrasts in a language, with studies in tonemic substitution and fusion , 1950 .

[35]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind , 1988 .

[36]  Kenneth L. Pike,et al.  Phonemics: a technique for reducing languages to writing / Kenneth L. Pike , 1947 .

[37]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Supplementary Information for Natural Speech Reveals the Semantic Maps That Tile Human Cerebral Cortex , 2022 .

[38]  Thomas Nagel,et al.  Mind and cosmos : why the materialist neo-Darwinian conception of nature is almost certainly false , 2012 .

[39]  Stevan Harnad,et al.  Categorical Perception and the Evolution of Supervised Learning in Neural Nets , 1991 .

[40]  David M. W. Powers,et al.  The Present Use of Statistics in the Evaluation of NLP Parsers , 1998, CoNLL.

[41]  Steven Finch,et al.  Finding structure in language , 1995 .

[42]  Gary James Jason,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1988 .

[43]  Steven Pinker,et al.  Language learnability and language development , 1985 .

[44]  Patrick J. Hayes,et al.  The Naive Physics Manifesto , 1990, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[45]  Stevan Harnad.  The Symbol Grounding Problem , 1999, ArXiv.

[46]  J. Piaget.  The construction of reality in the child , 1954 .

[47]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Computer Simulation of a Language Acquisition System: A First Report , 1975 .

[48]  David M. W. Powers,et al.  Evaluation Evaluation a Monte Carlo study , 2008, ArXiv.

[49]  T. Broadbent,et al.  Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge , 1972 .

[50]  H. D. Block,et al.  Natural Language Acquisition by a Robot , 1975, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[51]  Barbara C. Scholz,et al.  Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments , 2002 .

[52]  Alexander Clark,et al.  Statistical Representation of Grammaticality Judgements: the Limits of N-Gram Models , 2013, CMCL.

[53]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Words in the brain's language , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[54]  S. Harnad.  Categorical Perception: The Groundwork of Cognition , 1990 .

[55]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Poverty of the Stimulus? A Rational Approach , 2006 .

[56]  V. Slaughter,et al.  Comprehensive Longitudinal Study Challenges the Existence of Neonatal Imitation in Humans , 2016, Current Biology.

[57]  Christina Sanchez-Stockhammer,et al.  2003 Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. , 2022 .

[58]  P. M. M. David M. W. Powers ThC,et al.  Machine Learning of Natural Language , 1989, Springer London.

[59]  Alexander Clark,et al.  Unsupervised Prediction of Acceptability Judgements , 2015, ACL.

[60]  J. Piaget.  The Language and Thought of the Child , 1927 .

[61]  Kenneth L. Pike,et al.  Phonetics : a critical analysis of phonetic theory and a technic for the practical description of sounds / Kenneth L. Pike , 1944 .

[62]  Shalom Lappin,et al.  Linguistic Nativism and the Poverty of the Stimulus , 2011 .

[63]  K. Maccorquodale.  ON CHOMSKY'S REVIEW OF SKINNER'S VERBAL BEHAVIOR , 1970 .

[64]  David C Palmer,et al.  On Chomsky’s appraisal of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior: A half century of misunderstanding , 2006, The Behavior analyst.