The Update of the Biolinguistic Agenda

  • Antonino Pennisi
  • Alessandra Falzone
Part of the Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology book series (PEPRPHPS, volume 12)


This chapter is devoted to the reconstruction of the criticisms and internal reviews of Chomskyan biolinguistics. In particular, it deals with Balari and Lorenzo’s positions, who support the often extreme acceptance of the Evo-Devo, and those of Cedric Boeckx. The latter, especially, deeply reflects the need for the pre-existence of the lexicon so that one is able to apply the computational mechanisms provided by the minimalist position.


  1. Aitchison, J. (2006). The Articulate Mammal. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, S. R., & Lightfoot, D. W. (2002). The language organ. Linguistics as cognitive physiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balari, S., & Lorenzo, G. (2010). ¿Para qué sirve un ballestrinque? Reflexiones sobre el funcionamiento de artefactos y organismos en un mundo sin funciones. Teorema, XXIX(3), 57–76.Google Scholar
  4. Balari, S., & Lorenzo, G. (2013). Computational phenotypes. Towards an evolutionary developmental biolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Balari, S., & Lorenzo, G. (2015). The end of development. Biological Theory, 10(1), 60–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berent, I. (2013). The phonological mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Boeckx, C. (2011). Biolinguistics: A brief guide for the perplexed. Language Science, 5, 449–463.Google Scholar
  8. Boeckx, C., & Grohmann, K. K. (2007). The biolinguistics manifesto. Biolinguistics, 1, 1–8.Google Scholar
  9. Bouchard, D. (2013). The nature and origin of language. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Canguilhem, G. (1965). La connaissance de la vie. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  11. Culicover, P., & Jackendoff, R. (2005). Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Di Sciullo, A. M., & Boeckx, C. (2011). The biolinguistic enterprise. New perspective on the evolution and nature on the human language faculty. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Fitch, W. T. (2005). The evolution of language: A comparative review. Biology and Philosophy, XX(2–3), 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fitch, W. T. (2008). Glossogeny and phylogeny: Cultural evolution meets genetic evolution. Trends in genetics, 24(8), 373–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fitch, W. T., Hauser, M. D., & Chomsky, N. (2005). The evolution of the language faculty: Clarifications and implications. Cognition, 97(2), 179–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foucault, M. (1961). Histoire de la folie à l’âge classique: Folie et déraison. Paris: Plon.Google Scholar
  17. Givón, T. (2002). Bio-linguistics. The Santa Barbara lectures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hauser, M. D., & Bever, T. (2008). A biolinguistic agenda. Science, 322(5904), 1057–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298(5598), 1569–1579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hurford, J. R. (2014). Origins of language: A slim guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Jackendoff, R. (1987). Consciousness and the computational mind. Cambridge: Bradford Books/The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. Jackendoff, R. (2007). A parallel architecture perspective on language processing. Brain research, 1146, 2–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jackendoff, R., & Pinker, S. (2005). The nature of the language faculty and its implications for evolution of language (Reply to Fitch, Hauser, and Chomsky). Cognition, 97(2), 211–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marcus, G. (2008). Kluge. Boston: Houghton Miffin.Google Scholar
  25. Mithen, S. (1996). The prehistory of the mind: A search for the origins of art, science and religion. London/New York: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
  26. Pinker, S., & Jackendoff, R. (2005). The faculty of language: What’s special about it? Cognition, 95(2), 201–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Searle, J. R. (1995). The construction of social reality. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  28. Tallerman, M. (2014). No syntax saltation in language evolution. Language Sciences, 46, 207–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonino Pennisi
    • 1
  • Alessandra Falzone
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cognitive ScienceUniversity of MessinaMessinaItaly

Personalised recommendations