The Language Myth
 The Language Myth (first edition) | |
| Author | Vyvyan Evans |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Genre | Popular science |
| Published | 2014 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| ISBN | 978-1107619753 |
| Followed by | The Crucible of Language |
| Website | www |
The Language Myth is a 2014 book by Vyvyan Evans, written for a general audience. It is a direct rebuttal of Steven Pinker's 1994 book The Language Instinct. Evans argues against Noam Chomsky's claim that all human languages provide evidence for an underlying Universal Grammar. Evans posits, instead, a language-as-use thesis[1][2] to account for the nature of language, how it is learned and how it evolves.
Reception
[edit]The Language Myth caused considerable controversy upon publication among supporters of Chomskyan universal grammar. David Adger argued that the "attack on generative linguistics misrepresents the field".[3] Another vocal critic, Norbert Hornstein attacked the book for presenting caricatures of Chomskyan generative grammar and of providing inadequate arguments to support its main claims.[4] Others have attacked the book for its polemical style and what are claimed to be Evans' misunderstandings of Universal Grammar.[5]
Evans responded by claiming that it is exactly critics of the book who misunderstand.[6] He argues that his critics do not provide a coherent argument that is falsifiable as they posit Universal Grammar as a theoretical axiom,[7] which does not require proof or evidence to support it.[8] He also argues that the Universal Grammar perspectives makes a claim that is biological rather than linguistic in nature,[9] and hence one that cannot be substantiated on the basis of linguistic evidence.[10][11]
Controversy
[edit]In 2016, Language, the flagship academic journal of the Linguistic Society of America published a series of "Alternative (Re)views"[12] by six leading linguists, all addressing The Language Myth. Evans was originally invited to contribute a response to those articles. However, his submission was rejected by the journal's review editor.[13] Evans wrote an open-letter to the linguistics community claiming that he was being censored.[14]
References
[edit]- ^ Anderson, Alun (15 October 2014). "Why language is neither an instinct nor innate". New Scientist.
- ^ "The Language Myth: Why Language Is Not an Instinct, by Vyvyan Evans". Times Higher Education (THE). 13 November 2014.
- ^ Adger, David (April 2015). "Mythical myths: Comments on Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth". Lingua. 158: 76–80. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2015.02.006.
- ^ Norbert (6 May 2015). "Faculty of Language: My (HOPEFULLY) last ever post on Vyvyan Evans and his endless dodging of the central issues". Faculty of Language. Retrieved 18 November 2021.[user-generated source?]
- ^ Allott, Nicholas; Rey, Georges (28 January 2017). "The many errors of Vyvyan Evans' The Language Myth". The Linguistic Review. 34 (3): 1–20. doi:10.1515/tlr-2017-0011. hdl:10852/65338. S2CID 171572986.
- ^ "188: The Language Myth (featuring Vyvyan Evans)". Talk the Talk. Retrieved 18 November 2021.
- ^ Evans, Vyvyan (4 January 2015). "The Shape-Shifting Malleability of 'Universals' in UG". Psychology Today.[non-primary source needed]
- ^ Evans, Vyvyan (24 February 2016). "Why Only Us: The language paradox". New Scientist.[non-primary source needed]
- ^ Behme, Christina; Evans, Vyvyan (July 2015). "Leaving the myth behind: A reply to". Lingua. 162: 149–159. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2015.05.004.[non-primary source needed]
- ^ Evans, Vyvyan (20 April 2015). "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions". Psychology Today.[non-primary source needed]
- ^ Evans, Vyvyan (20 July 2015). "Joining the Dodo". Psychology Today.[non-primary source needed]
- ^
- Ackerman, Farrell; Malouf, Robert (2016). "Beyond caricatures: Commentary on Evans 2014". Language. 92 (1): 189–194. doi:10.1353/lan.2016.0008. S2CID 147369677. Project MUSE 612058.
- Berent, Iris (2016). "Evans's (2014) modularity myths: A mental architecture digest". Language. 92 (1): 195–197. doi:10.1353/lan.2016.0012. S2CID 146864404. Project MUSE 612059.
- Deen, Kamil Ud (2016). "Myths, magic, and poorly drawn battle lines: Commentary on Evans 2014". Language. 92 (1): 197–200. doi:10.1353/lan.2016.0015. S2CID 147307297. Project MUSE 612060.
- Goldberg, Adele E. (2016). "Another look at the universal grammar hypothesis: Commentary on Evans 2014". Language. 92 (1): 200–203. doi:10.1353/lan.2016.0018. S2CID 147096248. Project MUSE 612061.
- Hinzen, Wolfram (2016). "Is our mental grammar just a set of constructions?: Commentary on Evans 2014". Language. 92 (1): 203–207. doi:10.1353/lan.2016.0021. hdl:10230/42475. S2CID 146874829. Project MUSE 612062.
- Wijnen, Frank (2016). "Not compelling: Commentary on Evans 2014". Language. 92 (1): 207–209. doi:10.1353/lan.2016.0003. hdl:1874/339379. S2CID 147305487. Project MUSE 612063.
- ^ "The Language Myth".[self-published source?]
- ^ "The Language Myth".[self-published source?]