Entangled Parametric Hierarchies: Problems for an Overspecified Universal Grammar

This study addresses the feasibility of the classical notion of parameter in linguistic theory from the perspective of parametric hierarchies. A novel program-based analysis is implemented in order to show certain empirical problems related to these hierarchies. The program was developed on the basis of an enriched data base spanning 23 contemporary and 5 ancient languages. The empirical issues uncovered cast doubt on classical parametric models of language acquisition as well as on the conceptualization of an overspecified Universal Grammar that has parameters among its primitives. Pinpointing these issues leads to the proposal that (i) the (bio)logical problem of language acquisition does not amount to a process of triggering innately pre-wired values of parameters and (ii) it paves the way for viewing language, epigenetic (‘parametric’) variation as an externalization-related epiphenomenon, whose learning component may be more important than what sometimes is assumed.

[1]  Henry Robert Stokoe.  The understanding of syntax , 1937 .

[2]  Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini,et al.  Language and Learning: The Debate Between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky , 1980 .

[3]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Lectures on Government and Binding , 1981 .

[4]  Mark C. Baker,et al.  The Polysynthesis Parameter , 1995 .

[5]  P. Niyogi,et al.  A language learning model for finite parameter spaces , 1996, Cognition.

[6]  Anne Vainikka,et al.  Empty Subjects in Finnish and Hebrew , 1999 .

[7]  Karen T. Kohl.  An analysis of finite parameter learning in linguistic spaces , 1999 .

[8]  Sarah L. Nesbeitt.  Ethnologue: Languages of the World , 1999 .

[9]  Michael Grüninger,et al.  Introduction , 2002, CACM.

[10]  Pierre Pica.  Introduction to the linguistic Variation yearbook , 2003 .

[11]  Mark C. Baker,et al.  Linguistic differences and language design , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[12]  Frederick J. Newmeyer,et al.  Against a parameter-setting approach to typological variation , 2004 .

[13]  Adele E Goldberg,et al.  But do we need universal grammar? Comment on Lidz et al. (2003) , 2004, Cognition.

[14]  Remarks on the relation between language typology and Universal Grammar , 2007 .

[15]  A. Brix.  Bayesian Data Analysis, 2nd edn , 2005 .

[16]  Noam Chomsky.  Three Factors in Language Design , 2005, Linguistic Inquiry.

[17]  Mark C. Baker,et al.  Mapping the Terrain of Language Learning , 2005 .

[18]  Edith A. Moravcsik.  Possible and probable languages , 2006 .

[19]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Bayesian Special Section Learning Overhypotheses with Hierarchical Bayesian Models , 2022 .

[20]  T. Biberauer.  The limits of syntactic variation , 2008 .

[21]  N. J. van Kampen,et al.  Parameter setting and input reduction , 2008 .

[22]  Martin Haspelmath,et al.  Parametric versus functional explanations of syntactic universals , 2008 .

[23]  Cristina Guardiano,et al.  Evidence for syntax as a signal of historical relatedness , 2009 .

[24]  V. M. Longa,et al.  Beyond generative geneticism: Rethinking language acquisition from a developmentalist point of view , 2009 .

[25]  John K Kruschke,et al.  Bayesian data analysis. , 2010, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[26]  Cristina Guardiano,et al.  Long-Range Comparison between Genes and Languages Based on Syntactic Distances , 2010, Human Heredity.

[27]  Cedric Boeckx,et al.  The biolinguistic enterprise : new perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty , 2011 .

[28]  Charlotte Galves.  Parameter Theory and Linguistic Change , 2012 .

[29]  Giuseppe Longobardi.  Convergence in parametric phylogenies , 2012 .

[30]  William Gregory Sakas,et al.  Disambiguating Syntactic Triggers , 2012 .

[31]  Robin Clark,et al.  A Computational Model of Language Learnability and Language Change , 2018, Diachronic and Comparative Syntax.