Language, Creativity, and the Limits of Human Understanding

Key terms: Galilean Challenge, generative grammar/system, language capacity, language

emergence, universal grammar, biological discontinuity of evolution, poverty of the stimulus,
the theory of computability, conceptual-intentional interface, sensory-motor interfaces,
competence, performance, strong minimalist thesis, the structure dependence puzzle,
computational and communicative efficiency, filler gap problems.
Galilean Challenge=the challenge for the study of language and mind
Central Question: How structures come into existence in the mind of the speaker on the
basis of limited finite experience yielding a notion of structure that is definite enough to guide
him in framing sentences of his own, free expression that has never been produced before.
Subordinate Question: To what extent does the Galilean challenge fall within the reach of
potential human intelligence? Which parts are amenable to study and which parts lie beyond
reach?
Juan Huarte de San Juan: 16th-century Spanish physician-philosopher; the first to suggest
that human language and human thought have a fundamental creative aspect based on
generative process.
Language is core component of thought.
Languages change but they they dont evolve.
Michael Tomasello: American linguist-psychologist who denies the existence of the linguistic
capacity; UG is dead.
Biolinguistic Program: assumes that language capacity is real biological entity or
component of the brain
Eric Lenneberg: German linguist and neurologist who pioneered ideas on language
acquisition and cognitive psychology
--reviewed the sharp divergence between human language and animal communication
system
--reviewed the sharp divergence between linguistic capacity and other cognitive capacity
--discussed the possibility of biological discontinuity
Language Universality and Stability
Language did not emerge in small and gradual stages. It suddenly emerged. Language
capacity has undergone very little, if any, evolutionary change. No evidence exists that
language capacity existed prior to Homo Sapiens. Language capacity emerge pretty much
with Homo Sapiens and it hasnt change since. Moreover, it must be simple at its core due to
its rapid emergence in the evolutionary record and its resistance to modification.
Universal Grammar is not universal linguistic generalization of surface structures.
Poverty of the Stimulus: basic argument of UG is learnability; the complexity of the system
that arises is not traceable to the properties of the data that serve as its basis.
Influence of the ideas of the Computability Theory
Computability is the ability to solve a problem in an effective manner.The computability of a problem
is closely linked to the existence of an algorithm to solve the problem.Generative science is an
interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary science that explores the natural world and its complex behaviors
as a generative process. Generative science shows how deterministic and finite rules and parameters in
the natural phenomena interact with each other to generate seemingly unanticipated and infinite
behavior. Yet, these innumerable unforeseen generative patterns and unexpected generative behaviors
are fundamentally deterministic.
Prepared by: Francis B. Tatel

The language capacity that has evolved is a generative system that yields an infinite array of
structured expressions that constitute thoughts, linguistically expressed, and can be
externalized by sensory modality.
Two Internal Interfaces
1. Conceptual-intentional interface: provides linguistically formulated thought (language
of thought)
2. Sensory-motor interfaces: one or another modality that provides modes for
externalizing thoughts
Important Distinctions Between Concepts
1. Generative System (competence) vs. The Use of the System (performance)
Generation is not the same with distinction
The Galilean challenge is formulated in terms of production not generation.
Two Aspects of Performance
1. Input systems (parsing-perception; basically a reflex (Merrill Garrett, cognitive psychologist
fro the University of Arizona)
2. Output systems (productions)
The Strong Minimalist Thesis: It is the claim that language is an optimal solution to

interface conditions:
the human faculty of language FL [is] an optimal solution to minimal design
specifications, conditions that must be satisfied for language to be usable at allfor
each language L (a state of FL), the expressions generated by L must be legible to
systems that access these objects at the interface between FL and external systems
external to FL, internal to the person.
suggest the ideal that the generative system that emerged is close to perfect, thus satisfying
the general principles of computational efficiency
Science Standard Model: Greater simplicity translates deeper explanation
The Structure Dependence of Rules Puzzle: linguistic operations universally ignore the
very much simple computation of linear distance and use instead the much more complex
structural distance. Linear order is never entertained by a child learning a language in
computing language of thought. The internal computations that yield the linguistically
expressible thought have to be externalized by passing through the sensory-motor system.
Displacement Property of Phrases: disparity between whats generated at the thought
interface and whats produced at the sensory-motor interface
Computational Efficiency vs. Communicative Efficiency
Language seems to be designed for internal thought NOT for use (communication). The
internal linguistically constructed thought need not appear consciously in externalized form.
Conclusion: That communication is the prime function of language is incorrect. Language is
primarily an instrument of thought.
Fundamental Asymmetry Between the Two Interfaces

Prepared by: Francis B. Tatel

Generation of thought is the core of language. The mapping of the core of language to the
sensory-motor system is ancillary. Its properties are substantially reflex of the sensory-motor
system which evolved before language emerged and probably has little or nothing to do with
language. Therefore, externalization to the motor-system would be complex because its
relating to two unrelated systems.
Learning first or second language requires the task to acquire the externalization which
includes the arbitrary assignment of sound to lexical items, word order, morphological
pattern, etc.

Prepared by: Francis B. Tatel