ThinkB4YouSpeak | One Equal World

These insights were to drive linguistic theorizing for the next fiftyyears, and it's worth emphasizing just how radical and exciting they were at the time. First, the idea that explaining language use involves attributing knowledge to speakers flouted the prevailing behaviorist view that talking about mental states was unscientific because mental states are unobservable. It also raised several pressing empirical question that linguists are still debating. For example, what is the content of speakers' knowledge of language?[] What sorts of facts about language are represented in speakers' heads? And how does this knowledge actually function in the psychological processes of language production and comprehension: what are the mechanisms of language use?

Think carefully before making a decision.

If we've ever made you laugh or think, we now have a way where you can thank and support us

Teaching Children to Think before Acting - Sandbox …

One explanation is certainly the Chomskyan one that they are consequences of speakers' innate knowledge of UG. Another is that they derive from other, non-linguistically-specific features of cognition, such as memory or processing constraints (e.g., Berwick and Weinberg 1983 trace certain constraints on movement to limitations on parsing imposed by the structure of human memory). Yetanother is that they derive from universal demands of the communication situation (e.g., Sapir 1921, argued that the distinction between nouns and verbs arises from the fact that language is used to communicate propositions, hence needs a way to bring an object subject to mind and a way to say something about it).Finally, as Putnam 1971 speculated, universals might be relics of anancestral Ur-language from which all other languages evolved. This last hypothesis has generally been rejected as lacking in empirical support. However, recent findings in genetics and historical linguistics are converging to suggest that all human populations evolved from a small group migrating from Africa in the fairly recentpast, and that all human languages have probably evolved from the language spoken by that group. (Cavalli-Sforza 1997.)

Teaching Children to Think before Acting

As further support for the critical period hypothesis, others have added the observation that although children are able to learn a second language rapidly and to native speaker fluency, adult learnersof second languages typically are not: the capacity to learn a secondlanguage tapers off after puberty, no matter how much exposure to thelanguage one has. (Newport 1990). Thus, it was speculated, the innate knowledge base for language learning (e.g., knowledge of UG) becomes unavailable for normal acquisition at puberty, and adult learners must rely on less efficient learning methods. (Johnson and Newport 1989.)

“We failed in our last selection,” the Chief Elder said solemnly

TRUMP: Peter, that’s all I did, was make those speeches about her. … I don’t think I added anything much different than I had been doing. … I’ve made some very strong speeches about the corrupt emails. The 33,000 emails being deleted and bleached, and all of the things she was doing. I would make those speeches routinely. … There wasn’t much I could say about Hillary Clinton that was worse than what I was already saying.

What You Can't Say (2004) - Paul Graham

Suppose, for example, that based on her experience of (1) and (2), a child were to adopt H1. How would she discover her error? There wouldseem to be two ways to do this. First, she could use H1in her own speech, utter a sentence like (3b), and be corrected by her parents or caregivers; second, she could hear a sentence like (3c) uttered bya competent speaker, and realize that that sentence is not generated by her hypothesis, H1. But typically parents don't correct their children's ill formed utterances (see §2.2.1(c) for more on this), andworse, according to Chomsky, sentences like (3c) — sentences that are not generated by the incorrect rule H1 and hence would falsify it— do not occur often enough in the pld to guarantee that every native English speaker will be able to get it right.

Jul 19, 2017 · But I think we are going to do O.K

First, older children — even those who have not succeeded in learning language previously — can substantially recover from left hemisphere trauma occurring well after the supposed closure of the ‘sensitive’ or ‘critical’ period; in effect, they learn language from scratch as adolescents. Vargha-Khadem et al. 1997, for instance, report the case of Alex, who failed to speak at all during childhood and whose receptive language was at age 3-4 level at age 9. After his left cortex was removed at age 9, Alex suddenly began to learn language with gusto, and by age 15, his skills were those of an 8-10 year old.