Generally, we are so familiarized with language that we dont realize just how

special and unique it is. We have the ability to utter and understand sentences of
great complexity that we have never heard before. We are capable of talking not
only about the present, but about the past and the future. We can describe with
detail things that we dream or imagine. We can lie and make jokes, and even
make mistakes. Because we take for granted these things and we do them
without efort everyday of our lives, is not always obvious how complex they are,
nor their signifcance as part of human nature.
A focus on the diferent features mentioned above would lead us to diferent
questions about language, but lately what amazes linguists most is languages
variety and creative use. This feature manifests especially when you observe
languages other than your mother tongue. For example, in Mohawk, words can
be arranged in a sentence in various orders without changing its meaning. This is
possible because words carry so much information within them that the order is
not so signifcant. Mohawk speakers combine diferent pieces of sounds with
meaning called afxes in a stem (the core of the word) in order to encode a great
variety of data. For instance, a verb like sarn:tat (you shoot), means shoot
again if we add the afx sa, and shoot there if we add the afx ia. Moreover, there
are afxes to distinguish singular, dual and plural number, to indicate an ongoing
action, to mark possession when the stem is a noun, and many other
possibilities. Also, Mohawk initiates must learn how each prefx will appear with
the diferent types of stems. As a result, in Mohawk, not only the number of
sentences is infnite, but also the number of possible words.

Thus, how is it that speakers can utter and understand an infnite number of
sentences they never heard before? They cant have all of them stored in their
large (but limited) brains. Consequently, as Jackendofs argument asserts,
language must be a productive system, with rules that combine stems and afxes
in order to generate and interpret new sentences. This system is internal; each of
us has one of his own. In general, we intuitively assume that we all can
understand one another based on our shared language. However, if we look
closely, we discover that there is no actual evidence of such an entity. Our ability
to communicate only accounts for the fact that our languages, because we grew
up in similar environments, are very much alike. And this knowledge, our internal
productive system or grammar, is also unconscious. Mohawk speakers create
brand new sentences all the time without being aware of the rules that produce
them. Even if they were asked to make such rules explicit, they would have a
hard time doing it, and in many cases they wouldnt succeed. In conclusion, the
fact that we can communicate with such creativity is a feature of human nature,
something we are usually not even aware of. This feature is shared by all
humans, but it manifests in the most diverse and unexpected ways.
Generally, we are so familiarized with language that we dont realize
just how special and unique it is. We have the ability to utter and
understand sentences of great complexity that we have never heard
before. We are capable of taling not only about the present, but about
the past and the future. We can describe with detail dreams or
products of our imagination. We can lie and mae joes, and even
mae mistaes. !owever, because we tae all of this for granted and
we do it without e"ort everyday of our lives, it is not always obvious
how complex it is, nor its signi#cance as part of human nature.
$ocusing on the di"erent features mentioned above would lead us to
di"erent questions about language, but at the moment what amazes
linguists most is languages variety and creative use. %his manifests
especially when you observe di"erent languages. $or example, in
&ohaw, words can be arranged in a sentence in various orders
without changing its meaning. %his is possible because words carry so
much information within them that the order is not so signi#cant.
&ohaw speaers combine di"erent pieces of sounds with meaning
called afxes in a stem 'the core of the word( in order to encode a
great variety of data. $or instance, a verb lie )sar*n+tat, 'you shoot(,
means shoot again if we add the a-x sa, and shoot there if we add the
a-x ia. &oreover, there are a-xes to distinguish singular, dual and
plural number, to indicate an ongoing action, to mar possession when
the stem is a noun, and many other possibilities. .lso, &ohaw initiates
must learn how each pre#x will appear with the di"erent types of
stems. .s a result, not only the number of sentences is in#nite, but
also the number of possible words.
%hus, how is it that speaers can utter and understand an in#nite
number of sentences and words they never heard before/ %hey cant
have all of them stored in their large 'but limited( brains.
0onsequently, as 1acendo"s argument asserts, language must be a
productive system, with rules that combine stems and a-xes in order
to generate and interpret new sentences. %his system is internal '2i&(3
each of us has one of his own. 4n general, we intuitively assume that
we all can understand one another based on our shared language.
!owever, if we loo closely, we discover that our ability to
communicate only accounts for the fact that our )languages,, because
we grew up in similar environments, are very much alie. .lso, this
nowledge, our internal productive system or grammar, is unconscious
'2i&(. &ohaw speaers create brand new sentences all the time
without being aware of the rules that produce them. 5ven if they were
ased to mae such rules explicit, they would have a hard time doing
it, and in many cases they wouldnt succeed.
4n conclusion, the fact that we can communicate with such creativity is
a feature of human nature, something we are usually not even aware
of. %his feature is shared by all humans, but it manifests in the most
diverse and unexpected ways.
Generally, we are so familiarized with language that we dont realize
just how puzzling and unique it is. We have the ability to utter and
understand sentences of great complexity that we have never heard
before. We are capable of taling not only about the present, but about
the past and the future. We can describe dreams or products of our
imagination in detail. We can lie and mae joes, and even mae
mistaes. !owever, because we tae all of this for granted and we do it
without e"ort every day, it is not always obvious how complex it is, nor
its signi#cance as part of human nature.
$ocusing on the di"erent features mentioned above would lead us to
di"erent questions about language, but at the moment what amazes
linguists most is languages variety and creative use. %his manifests
especially when you observe di"erent languages. $or example, in
&ohaw, words can be arranged in a sentence in various orders
without changing its meaning. %his is possible because words carry so
much information within them that the order is not so signi#cant.
&ohaw speaers combine di"erent pieces of sounds with meaning
called afxes in a stem 'the core of the word( in order to encode a
great variety of data. $or instance, a verb lie )sar*n+tat, 'you shoot(,
means shoot again if we add the a-x sa, and shoot there if we add the
a-x ia. &oreover, there are a-xes to distinguish singular, dual and
plural number, to indicate an ongoing action, to mar possession when
the stem is a noun, and many other possibilities. .lso, &ohaw initiates
must learn how each pre#x will appear with di"erent types of stems.
.s a result, not only the number of sentences is in#nite, but also the
number of possible words.
%hus, how is it that speaers can utter and understand an in#nite
number of sentences and words they never heard before/ %hey cant
have all of them stored in their large 'but limited( brains.
0onsequently, as 1acendo"s argument asserts, language must be a
productive system, with rules that combine stems and a-xes in order
to generate and interpret new sentences. %his system is internal '2i&(3
each of us has one of his own. 4n general, we intuitively assume that
we all can understand one another based on our shared language.
!owever, if we loo closely, we discover that our ability to
communicate only accounts for the fact that our )languages,, because
we grew up in similar environments, are very much alie. .lso, this
nowledge, our internal productive system or grammar, is unconscious
'2i&(. &ohaw speaers create brand new sentences all the time
without being aware of the rules that produce them. 5ven if they were
ased to mae such rules explicit, they would have a hard time doing
it, and in many cases they wouldnt succeed.
4n conclusion, the fact that we can communicate with such creativity is
a feature of human nature, something we are usually not even aware
of. %his feature is shared by all humans, but it manifests in the most
diverse and unexpected ways.