Comments on: don’t bother arguing with Chomsky… http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/ MostlyLisa.com - The adventures of Lisa Bettany aka Mostly Lisa, a Vancouver-based photographer, multimedia producer and blogger Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:32:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: MostlyLisa.com: Lisa Bettany. Canada’s Sexy Geek Blog » Blog Archive » Brain Freeze Blamed on the Internet. http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-8927 MostlyLisa.com: Lisa Bettany. Canada’s Sexy Geek Blog » Blog Archive » Brain Freeze Blamed on the Internet. Wed, 26 Mar 2008 04:38:02 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-8927 [...] the best Canadian post-secondary education their money could buy in the hopes that I would become the next Chomskette, has. failed. the. [...] [...] the best Canadian post-secondary education their money could buy in the hopes that I would become the next Chomskette, has. failed. the. [...]

]]> By: MostlyLisa.com: Lisa Bettany. Canada’s Sexy Geek Blog » Blog Archive » Things that are neat about me http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-8352 MostlyLisa.com: Lisa Bettany. Canada’s Sexy Geek Blog » Blog Archive » Things that are neat about me Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:41:25 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-8352 [...] know a lot about linguistics, especially phonetics, specifically articulatory, acoustic phonetics, and the productive mechanisms [...] [...] know a lot about linguistics, especially phonetics, specifically articulatory, acoustic phonetics, and the productive mechanisms [...]

]]> By: Mostly Lisa » Blog Archive » What kind of Geek are you? http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-7801 Mostly Lisa » Blog Archive » What kind of Geek are you? Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:32:24 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-7801 [...] is combining multivariate calculus and baking. I will however provide something equally geeky in my mastered academic subject of linguistics where I hilariously intertwine syntactic trees with sustainability, Denis Quaid, Nim Chimpsky, and [...] [...] is combining multivariate calculus and baking. I will however provide something equally geeky in my mastered academic subject of linguistics where I hilariously intertwine syntactic trees with sustainability, Denis Quaid, Nim Chimpsky, and [...]

]]> By: mcpaige http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6944 mcpaige Mon, 24 Sep 2007 06:10:39 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6944 So I read this (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_colapinto?currentPage=1) The Interpreter, Has a remote Amazonian tribe upended our understanding of language?, by John Colapinto (AKA Kaaxáoi) and for some reason it was very interesting and captivating. In a non-demeaning use of the tribal name Pirahã (pronounced pee-da-HAN), I'm going to start using it to describe people I work with that resist change. I have compiled a list of the greatest Linguist and Anthropologist in this field (descending order) Lisa Bettany Dan Everett Noam Chomsky Tecumseh Fitch David Pesetsky Marc Hauser Kenneth L. Pike Peter Gordon Curt Nimuendajú Peter Gordon Steve Sheldon Brent Berlin Paul Kay Marco Antonio Gonçalves B. F. Skinner Edward Sapir Benjamin Lee Whorf Franz Boas Herbert Simon Stephen Levinson Anna Wierzbicka Andrew Nevins Cilene Rodrigues Michael Tomasello Steven Pinker Ray Jacken-doff Brent Berlin Also I have a number of questions and statements.... I really like your prosody, it's pretty. Lets play tagmemics, you're it ! This rap song has phonology, morphology, syntax, and sentences, but no recursion. You're a crooked head! Will you show me your descended larynx? I speak six thousand languages, how many do you? Get my knife, i need to whittle these nouns down to single syllables. Have you ever been in a monolingual field situation? Teacher I cannot do my homework, I do not possess the requisite neurological architecture to do so. "Fuck that, I’m going to get on the river and take my canoe." -Dan Everett So I read this (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_colapinto  ?currentPage=1) The Interpreter, Has a remote Amazonian tribe upended our understanding of language?, by John Colapinto (AKA Kaaxáoi) and for some reason it was very interesting and captivating. In a non-demeaning use of the tribal name Pirahã (pronounced pee-da-HAN), I’m going to start using it to describe people I work with that resist change.

I have compiled a list of the greatest Linguist and Anthropologist in this field (descending order)

Lisa Bettany
Dan Everett
Noam Chomsky
Tecumseh Fitch
David Pesetsky
Marc Hauser
Kenneth L. Pike
Peter Gordon
Curt Nimuendajú
Peter Gordon
Steve Sheldon
Brent Berlin
Paul Kay
Marco Antonio Gonçalves
B. F. Skinner
Edward Sapir
Benjamin Lee Whorf
Franz Boas
Herbert Simon
Stephen Levinson
Anna Wierzbicka
Andrew Nevins
Cilene Rodrigues
Michael Tomasello
Steven Pinker
Ray Jacken-doff
Brent Berlin

Also I have a number of questions and statements….

I really like your prosody, it’s pretty.
Lets play tagmemics, you’re it !
This rap song has phonology, morphology, syntax, and sentences, but no recursion.
You’re a crooked head!
Will you show me your descended larynx?
I speak six thousand languages, how many do you?
Get my knife, i need to whittle these nouns down to single syllables.
Have you ever been in a monolingual field situation?
Teacher I cannot do my homework, I do not possess the requisite neurological architecture to do so.

“Fuck that, I’m going to get on the river and take my canoe.” -Dan Everett

]]> By: mcpaige http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6947 mcpaige Sun, 23 Sep 2007 23:41:32 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6947 What in the h* did I just read all of that for..... All I know about monkeys is this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem) and this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_Monkey), but that has nothing to do with this. * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nim_Chimpsky Go Radars !!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar What in the h* did I just read all of that for…..

All I know about monkeys is this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem) and this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_Monkey), but that has nothing to do with this.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nim_Chimpsky

Go Radars !!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar

]]> By: Things that are neat about me « they mostly come out at night… mostly http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6945 Things that are neat about me « they mostly come out at night… mostly Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:11:03 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6945 [...] know a lot about linguistics, especially phonetics, specifically articulatory, acoustic phonetics, and the productive mechanisms [...] [...] know a lot about linguistics, especially phonetics, specifically articulatory, acoustic phonetics, and the productive mechanisms [...]

]]> By: Vitor Zimmerer http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6946 Vitor Zimmerer Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:45:34 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6946 No problem. I would actually love to edit that reply. I wrote it in such a rush, and it's got mistakes all over the place. Oh well. Very nice photos btw. No problem.

I would actually love to edit that reply. I wrote it in such a rush, and it’s got mistakes all over the place. Oh well.

Very nice photos btw.

]]> By: Lisa Bettany http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6949 Lisa Bettany Tue, 14 Aug 2007 02:16:50 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6949 Thanks Vito for your thoughtful comment. It doesn't happen very often. so thanks! I have been trying to think of an intelligent reply for two weeks. Unfortunately, this is what i came up with: 0. see that's the thing with being out of school for over two years... brain has turned a bit mushy in places (especially in the syntactic areas...) I think syntax lost me somewhere around the CP node. what a frightfully awful reply. i apologize. give me another week. maybe i'll come up with something. Thanks Vito for your thoughtful comment. It doesn’t happen very often. so thanks!

I have been trying to think of an intelligent reply for two weeks. Unfortunately, this is what i came up with: 0.

see that’s the thing with being out of school for over two years… brain has turned a bit mushy in places (especially in the syntactic areas…) I think syntax lost me somewhere around the CP node.

what a frightfully awful reply.

i apologize. give me another week. maybe i’ll come up with something.

]]> By: Vitor Zimmerer http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6948 Vitor Zimmerer Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:25:28 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6948 Chomsky's attempts at generative grammar, while being elegant and potent, always had little empirical backup. His strongest argument for why languages need to be recursive is drawn from sentences no one produces "Men women children dogs bit like marry hate pets", and while there certainy is something to the distinction between competence and performance, we have to keep in mind that sentences that don't exist are very poor evidence. I personally think that these days will be remembered as very naive days, where linguistics were heading to the right direction in general, but in which the theories themselves were pulled out of very thin air. Chomsky knows this, and his reply to Everett (you can read it on wikipedia when you go to the Chomsky page) are telling. Chomsky doesn't even consider universal grammar a theory anymore, it is a "topic". Gone are the days in which UG was attached to claims you could falsify. This is not called "not being wrong", it's called "immunizing". As for Everett, his data is interesting, but it is still work in a very early phase for such a strong claim (no clausal embedding in Piraha - though it is not the only language where it seems to be the case). But in general I agree that you should have utter respect for the work of his man, both in linguistics and in politics. Chomsky’s attempts at generative grammar, while being elegant and potent, always had little empirical backup. His strongest argument for why languages need to be recursive is drawn from sentences no one produces “Men women children dogs bit like marry hate pets”, and while there certainy is something to the distinction between competence and performance, we have to keep in mind that sentences that don’t exist are very poor evidence. I personally think that these days will be remembered as very naive days, where linguistics were heading to the right direction in general, but in which the theories themselves were pulled out of very thin air.

Chomsky knows this, and his reply to Everett (you can read it on wikipedia when you go to the Chomsky page) are telling. Chomsky doesn’t even consider universal grammar a theory anymore, it is a “topic”. Gone are the days in which UG was attached to claims you could falsify. This is not called “not being wrong”, it’s called “immunizing”.

As for Everett, his data is interesting, but it is still work in a very early phase for such a strong claim (no clausal embedding in Piraha - though it is not the only language where it seems to be the case).

But in general I agree that you should have utter respect for the work of his man, both in linguistics and in politics.

]]> By: Lisa Bettany http://mostlylisa.com/2007/06/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6951 Lisa Bettany Sun, 08 Jul 2007 00:22:24 +0000 http://www.mostlylisa.com/2007/06/23/dont-bother-arguing-with-chomsky/#comment-6951 thank you :cool: thank you :cool:

]]>