TY - JOUR
T1 - Ever since language and learning
T2 - afterthoughts on the Piaget-Chomsky debate
AU - Piattelli-Palmarini, Massimo
N1 - Funding Information:
Correspondence to: Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini, Dipartimento di Scienze Cognitive, Istituto San Raffaele, Via Olgettina 58. Milano, 20132, Italy. I am in debt to Thomas Roeper for his invitation to give a talk on the Piaget-Chomsky debate to the undergraduates in linguistics and psychology, at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, in April 1989. The idea of transforming it into a paper came from the good feedback I received during that talk, and from a suggestion by my friend and colleague Paul Horwich, a philosopher of science, who had attended. Steven Pinker reinforced that suggestion, assuming that such a paper could be of some use also to the undergraduates at MIT. Noam Chomsky carefully read the first draft, and made many useful suggestions in the letter from which I have quoted some passages here. Paul Horwich, Morris Halle and David Pesetsky also offered valuable comments and critiques. Jerry Fodor stressed the slack that has intervened in the meantime between his present position and Chomsky’s. inducing me to revise sections of the first draft (perhaps the revisions are not as extensive as he would have liked). The ideas expressed here owe a lot to a lot of people, and it shows. I wish to single out, however, my special indebtedness to Noam Chomsky, Jerry Fodor, Jacques Mehler, Jim Higgin-botham, Luigi Rizzi. Ken Wexler, Laura-Ann Petitto, Lila Gleitman, Steve Gould and Dick Lewontin. The work I have done during these years has been generously supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Kapor Family Foundation, the MIT Center for Cognitive Science, Olivetti Italy and the Cognitive Science Society. I am especially indebted to Eric Wanner for initial funding.
PY - 1994
Y1 - 1994
N2 - The central arguments and counter-arguments presented by several participants during the debate between Piaget and Chomsky at the Royaumont Abbey in October 1975 are here reconstructed in a particularly concise chronological and "logical" sequence. Once the essential points of this important exchange are thus clearly laid out, it is easy to witness that recent developments in generative grammar, as well as new data on language acquisition, especially in the acquisition of pronouns by the congenitally deaf child, corroborate the "language specificity" thesis defended by Chomsky. By the same token these data and these new theoretical refinements refute the Piagetian hypothesis that language is constructed upon abstractions from sensorimotor schemata. Moreover, in the light of modern evolutionary theory, Piaget's basic assumptions on the biological roots of cognition, l language and learning turn out to be unfounded. In hindsight, all this accrues to the validity of Fodor's seemingly "paradoxical" argument against "learning" as a transition from "less" powerful to "more" powerful conceptual systems.
AB - The central arguments and counter-arguments presented by several participants during the debate between Piaget and Chomsky at the Royaumont Abbey in October 1975 are here reconstructed in a particularly concise chronological and "logical" sequence. Once the essential points of this important exchange are thus clearly laid out, it is easy to witness that recent developments in generative grammar, as well as new data on language acquisition, especially in the acquisition of pronouns by the congenitally deaf child, corroborate the "language specificity" thesis defended by Chomsky. By the same token these data and these new theoretical refinements refute the Piagetian hypothesis that language is constructed upon abstractions from sensorimotor schemata. Moreover, in the light of modern evolutionary theory, Piaget's basic assumptions on the biological roots of cognition, l language and learning turn out to be unfounded. In hindsight, all this accrues to the validity of Fodor's seemingly "paradoxical" argument against "learning" as a transition from "less" powerful to "more" powerful conceptual systems.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028412132&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028412132&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90034-5
DO - 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90034-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 8039367
AN - SCOPUS:0028412132
SN - 0010-0277
VL - 50
SP - 315
EP - 346
JO - Cognition
JF - Cognition
IS - 1-3
ER -