CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 110

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What is the human language faculty? Two views

Jackendoff, Ray·2011·Language
DOI 10.1353/lan.2011.0063
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In addition to providing an account of the empirical facts of language, a theory that aspires to account for language as a biologically based human faculty should seek a graceful integration of linguistic phenomena with what is known about other human cognitive capacities and about the character of brain computation. The present discussion note compares the theoretical stance of biolinguistics (Chomsky 2005, Di Sciullo & Boeckx 2011) with a constraint-based parallel architecture approach to the language faculty (Jackendoff 2002, Culicover & Jackendoff 2005). The issues considered include the necessity of redundancy in the lexicon and the rule system, the ubiquity of recursion in cognition, derivational vs. constraint-based formalisms, the relation between lexical items and grammatical rules, the roles of phonology and semantics in the grammar, the combinatorial character of thought in humans and nonhumans, the interfaces between language, thought, and vision, and the possible course of evolution of the language faculty. In each of these areas, the parallel architecture offers a superior account both of the linguistic facts and of the relation of language to the rest of the mind/brain.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1353/lan.2011.0063

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 174

  1. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 · DOI
  2. Halle, 1993, The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger
  3. 10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.759 · DOI
  4. Langacker, 1998, The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, 1, 1
  5. Kayne, 1983, Connectedness, Linguistic Inquiry, 24
  6. 10.1386/stic.1.1.127/1 · DOI
  7. Schenker, 1935, Der freie Satz
  8. Jackendoff, 2010, Meaning and the lexicon: The parallel architecture 1975–2010
  9. Boou, 2002, Constructional idioms, morphology and the Dutch lexicon, Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 14
  10. Arbib, 2003, brain, Meaning, Grammar, evolution, [sic] Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26
  11. 10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2-4.135 · DOI
  12. 10.2307/415883 · DOI
  13. 10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2-4.429 · DOI
  14. Marler, 2004, Natures music: The science of birdsong
  15. 10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.676 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Wrangham, 1996, Demonic males: Apes and the origins of human violence
  17. 10.7551/mitpress/2867.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Katz, 2009, The identity thesis for language and music
  19. Gordon, 2003, The origin of argument structure in infant event representations, Proceedings of the Boston University Conference on Language Development, 26
  20. Sadock, 1991, Autolexical syntax: A theory of parallel grammatical representations
  21. 10.1016/j.cub.2008.01.040 · DOI
  22. 10.1017/CBO9780511620539 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1038/nature04675 · DOI
  24. Chomsky, 1963, Handbook of mathematical psychology, vol. 2, 323
  25. 10.1525/mp.2009.26.3.195 · DOI
  26. 10.3115/1117554.1117556 · DOI
  27. Jackendoff, 2011, A new hierarchy of grammars
  28. 10.2307/412891 · DOI
  29. 10.1007/BF00133686 · DOI
  30. Chomsky, 1975, Reflections on language
  31. 10.7551/mitpress/4735.003.0006 · DOI
  32. 10.1017/CBO9780511596919 · DOI
  33. 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.021103.105719 · DOI
  34. Chomsky, 1968, Language and mind
  35. 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Asher, 2003, Logics of conversation
  37. 10.1075/la.93.04pro · DOI
  38. Povinelli, 2000, Folk physics for apes
  39. Hofstadter, 1979, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An eternal golden braid
  40. Bybee, 2005, Alternatives to the combinatorial paradigm, The Linguistic Review, 22, 381
  41. 10.2307/414531 · DOI
  42. Chomsky, 1995, The minimalist program
  43. Goldin-Meadow, 2003, The resilience of language
  44. Marantz, 1997, No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon, University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics (Proceedings of the 21st annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium), 4
  45. Köhler, 1927, The mentality of apes
  46. 10.1017/CBO9780511811937 · DOI
  47. 10.1080/01638538709544656 · DOI
  48. Jackendoff, 1990, Semantic structures
  49. Chomsky, 1963, Handbook of mathematical psychology, vol. 2, 269
  50. Pinker, 1989, Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure
  51. Byrne, 1988, Machiavellian intelligence: Social expertise and the evolution of intellect in monkeys, apes, and humans
  52. 10.1093/oso/9780199227761.001.0001 · DOI
  53. Tinbergen, 1951, The study of instinct
  54. 10.1162/0024389052993655 · DOI
  55. Hultsch, 1999, Learning: Rule extraction and representation, 89
  56. Levin, 1990, Wiping the slate clean: A lexical semantic exploration, Cognition, 41
  57. O'Grady, 2010, The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis
  58. 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.04.004 · DOI
  59. Gee, 1984, Empirical evidence for narrative structure, Cognitive Science, 8, 59
  60. Goldberg, 1995, Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure
  61. Pollard, 1994, Head-driven phrase structure grammar
  62. 10.1126/science.7777863 · DOI · Paper page
  63. Tarski, 1956, Logic, semantics, metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938
  64. 10.7208/chicago/9780226102429.001.0001 · DOI
  65. Brody, 1995, Lexico-logical form
  66. Ford, 1982, The mental representation of grammatical relations
  67. 10.1353/lan.2008.0058 · DOI
  68. Jackendoff, 2012, A user's guide to thought and meaning
  69. 10.1207/s15516709cog2403_1 · DOI
  70. 10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.787 · DOI
  71. Cohn, Neil , Paczynski, Martin , Holcomb, Phillip , Jackendoff, Ray ; and Kuperberg, Gina . 2010. Impact of structure and meaning on sequential image comprehension. Paper presented at the 23rd annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, New York.
  72. 10.1515/9783110867589-005 · DOI
  73. Seuren, 2004, Chomsky's minimalism
  74. Bindiganavale, Rama , Schuler, William , Allbeck, Jan M. , Badler, Norman I. , Joshi, Aravind K. ; and Palmer, Martha . 2000. Dynamically altering agent behaviors using natural language instructions. AGENTS '00: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Autonomous Agents, 293–300. · DOI
  75. Lerdahl, 2006, The capacity for music: What's special about it?, Cognition, 100, 33, 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.11.005 · DOI
  76. 10.9793/elsj1984.19.113 · DOI
  77. Chomsky, 1981, Lectures on government and binding
  78. Badler, 2000, Embodied conversational agents
  79. Langacker, 1987, Foundations of cognitive grammar
  80. Bickerton, Derek . 2010. On two incompatible theories of language evolution. In Larson et al., 199–210. · DOI
  81. Weinreich, 1966, Current trends in linguistics, vol. 3: Theoretical foundations, 99
  82. Haegeman, 1992, Introduction to the theory of government and binding
  83. Chomsky, Noam . 2010. Some simple evo devo theses: How true might they be for language? In Larson et al., 45–62. · DOI
  84. Sag, 1992, Lenguajes naturales y lenguajes formales: Actas del VII congreso de lenguajes naturales y lenguajes formales (Vic-Barcelona, 23–27 de septiembre de 1991), 61
  85. 10.2307/411334 · DOI
  86. Crick, 1994, The astonishing hypothesis: The scientific search for the soul
  87. 10.1353/lan.2004.0129 · DOI
  88. 10.5964/bioling.8669 · DOI
  89. 10.1075/pc.4.1.03jac · DOI · Paper page
  90. 10.1191/026765897666879396 · DOI
  91. 10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2-4.183 · DOI
  92. 10.1007/978-94-010-0355-1_3 · DOI
  93. 10.1017/CBO9780511605765 · DOI
  94. Hochberg, 1978, Perception
  95. 10.7551/mitpress/6184.001.0001 · DOI
  96. 10.1073/pnas.0807191106 · DOI
  97. 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00007.x · DOI
  98. 10.7551/mitpress/4111.001.0001 · DOI
  99. Jackendoff, 1983, Semantics and cognition
  100. Jackendoff, 1987a, Consciousness and the computational mind
  101. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195305432.003.0005 · DOI
  102. Sag, 2011, Non-transformational syntax
  103. Bybee, 2003, The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, 2
  104. 10.1098/rspb.1999.0898 · DOI
  105. 10.1017/CBO9780511817755 · DOI
  106. Pinker, 2007, The stuff of thought
  107. Marr, 1982, Vision
  108. Koch, 2004, The quest for consciousness: A neurobiological approach
  109. Jackendoff, 1976, Toward an explanatory semantic representation, Linguistic Inquiry, 7, 89
  110. 10.1093/oso/9780195166712.001.0001 · DOI
  111. Shieber, 1986, An introduction to unification-based approaches to grammar
  112. Jackendoff, 1997a, The architecture of the language faculty
  113. Lorenz, 1952, King Solomon's ring
  114. 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.111 · DOI
  115. 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.08.004 · DOI · Paper page
  116. 10.1006/anbe.2001.1914 · DOI
  117. Culicover, 1972, OM-sentences: On the derivation of sentences with systematically unspecifiable interpretations, Foundations of Language, 8, 199
  118. 10.1177/10298649100140S103 · DOI
  119. 10.1038/scientificamerican0960-88 · DOI
  120. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001 · DOI
  121. Newmeyer, 2008, Review of Linguistic minimalism, Language, 84
  122. Postal, 1972, The goals of linguistic theory
  123. Flack, 2011, A ‘grammar’ for primate social behavior
  124. 10.7551/mitpress/4118.003.0007 · DOI
  125. Landau, 1993, ‘What’ and ‘where’ in spatial language and spatial cognition, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16
  126. Progovac, Ljiljana . 2007. Grammars within without recursion: Implications for evolutionary studies. Paper presented at the Illinois State University Conference on Recursion in Human Languages, Normal, IL.
  127. 10.2307/2216072 · DOI
  128. Fitch, W. Tecumseh . 2010. Three meanings of ‘recursion’: Key distinctions for biolinguistics. In Larson et al., 73–90. · DOI
  129. Di Sciullo, 2011, The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty
  130. Coen, 2006, Multimodal dynamics: Self-supervised learning in perceptual and motor systems
  131. Jackendoff, 1996a, Language and space, 1
  132. Fodor, 1975, The language of thought
  133. 10.1016/0010-0277(91)90031-X · DOI
  134. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271092.001.0001 · DOI
  135. Pullum, 2007, Proceedings of Model-Theoretic Syntax at 10 (part of ESSLLI 2007), 1
  136. Stromswold, Karen . 2010. Genetics and the evolution of language: What genetic studies reveal about the evolution of language. In Larson et al., 176–90. · DOI
  137. 10.1016/0010-0277(87)90026-6 · DOI
  138. 10.1006/jmla.1994.1014 · DOI · Paper page
  139. Tomasello, 2003, Constructing a language
  140. Gruber, 1965, Studies in lexical relations
  141. Lerdahl, 1983, A generative theory of tonal music
  142. 10.1111/j.1468-0017.1989.tb00243.x · DOI
  143. Patel, 2008, Music, language, and the brain
  144. Phillips, 2012, Directions in derivations
  145. Talmy, 2000, Toward a cognitive semantics
  146. Williams, 1994, The acquisition of the lexicon, 7
  147. Newmeyer, 2003, Review article on On nature and language, The language organ, 79
  148. 10.1017/CBO9781139166799 · DOI
  149. 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00035-4 · DOI · Paper page
  150. 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00128-1 · DOI
  151. Johnson, 1999, Local constraints vs. economy
  152. Jackendoff, 1972, Semantic interpretation in generative grammar
  153. 10.1017/S0140525X0999094X · DOI
  154. 10.7551/mitpress/3225.001.0001 · DOI
  155. Heinrich, 1989, Ravens in winter
  156. 10.1017/CBO9780511755040 · DOI
  157. 10.1353/lan.2005.0043 · DOI
  158. Cohn, 2011, You're a good experiment, Charlie Brown: Narrative structure in comic strips
  159. 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2002.tb01462.x · DOI
  160. 10.1515/9783110882339 · DOI
  161. 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1 · DOI · Paper page
  162. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 · DOI
  163. Liberman, 1993, Some assumptions about speech and how they changed, Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, SR113, 1
  164. 10.1080/01690965.2011.580143 · DOI
  165. 10.7208/chicago/9780226220949.001.0001 · DOI
  166. McCawley, 1968, Concerning the base component of a transformational grammar, Foundations of Language, 4
  167. Phillips, 2004, Foundational issues (Review article on Jackendoff 2002), Journal of Linguistics, 40
  168. 10.1016/j.tics.2010.04.005 · DOI
  169. Humphries, 2001, The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology: What deficits reveal about the human mind
  170. Dawkins, 1976, The selfish gene
  171. Cutler, 1999, The neurocognition of language
  172. 10.1002/9781444310498 · DOI
  173. Deacon, 1997, The symbolic species
  174. 10.1017/CBO9780511489969.007 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 110

Metadata

Authors
Jackendoff, R.
Venue
Language
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2011-09
Volume
87
Issue
3
Pages
586-624
ISSN
  • 0097-8507
  • 1535-0665
DOI
10.1353/lan.2011.0063
Cited by
110
References
5
Language
en
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 5285 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What is the human language faculty? Two views. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1353/lan.2011.0063
The paper
Jackendoff, R. (2011). What is the human language faculty? Two views. Language. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0063