Skip to main content

Noam Chomsky and Linguistics

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science
  • 367 Accesses

Synonyms

Chomsky and language evolution

Definition

The impact of Noam Chomsky on the field of linguistics, particularly the evolution of language.

Introduction

Noam Chomsky (born December 7, 1928) is one of the most influential contemporary thinkers. His huge impact surpasses linguistics to include psychology, philosophy, or computer science, among other fields. The advent of Chomsky’s generative grammar in the second half of the twentieth century challenged the traditional view that considered language to be a purely cultural trait deriving from our great intelligence and unlimited learning capacities, by claiming that language is an innate trait, part of the human biological endowment.

It would be hard to provide an overall presentation of Chomsky’s linguistic work, for it has been crucial in many topics: nativism, language and mind, universal grammar, the poverty of the stimulus, language acquisition, language structure, etc. All of these topics have been widely discussed and are...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Balari, S., & Lorenzo, G. (2013). Computational phenotypes. Towards an evolutionary developmental biolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balari, S., BenĂ­tez Burraco, A., Longa, V. M., & Lorenzo, G. (2013). The fossils of language: What are they, who has them, how did they evolve? In C. Boeckx & K. K. Grohmann (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of biolinguistics (pp. 489–523). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, P. (2001). Behavioral development and Darwinian evolution. In S. Oyama, P. E. Griffiths, & R. D. Gray (Eds.), Cycles of contingencies. Developmental systems and evolution (pp. 149–166). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berwick, R., & Chomsky, N. (2011). The biolinguistic program: The current state of its development. In A. M. Di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (Eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise. New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty (pp. 19–41). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berwick, R., & Chomsky, N. (2016). Why only us. Language and evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Berwick, R., Okanoya, K., Beckers, G., & Bolhuis, G. (2011). Songs to syntax: The linguistics of birdsong. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(3), 113–121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berwick, R. C., Friederici, A. D., Chomsky, N., & Bolhuis, J. J. (2013). Evolution, brain, and the nature of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(2), 89–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bickerton, D. (1990). Language and species. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1968). Language and mind. New York: Harcourt Brace.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (2007). Approaching UG from below. In U. Sauerland & H.-M. Gärtner (Eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky’s minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics (pp. 1–29). Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (2010). Some simple evo-devo theses: How true might they be for language? In R. Larson, V. Deprez, & H. Yamakido (Eds.), The evolution of language: Biolinguistic perspectives (pp. 45–62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D. C. (1995). Darwin’s dangerous idea. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D. C. (1996). Kinds of minds. Toward an understanding of consciousness. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, B. (1994). How the leopard changed its spots. The evolution of complexity. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (1997). Synthesizing nature-nurture. Prenatal roots of instinctive behavior. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, 1569–1579.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, F. (1977). Evolution and tinkering. Science, 196, 1161–1166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, L. (2000). Biolinguistics. Exploring the biology of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, T. (1987). The persistence of dichotomies in the study of behavioral development. Developmental Review, 7, 149–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, P. (2006). Toward an evolutionary biology of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longa, V. M. (2012). Lenguaje humano y comunicaciĂłn animal: análisis comparativo. Bucaramanga: Universidad Industrial de Santander.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longa, V. M. (2013). The evolution of the faculty of language from a Chomskyan perspective: Bridging linguistics and biology. Journal of Anthropological Sciences, 91, 15–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Longa, V. M., & Lorenzo, G. (2012). Theoretical linguistics meets development: Explaining FL from an epigenicist point of view. In C. Boeckx, M. C. Horno-ChĂ©liz, & J. L. MendĂ­vil-GirĂł (Eds.), Language, from a biological point of view. Current issues in biolinguistics (pp. 52–84). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longa, V. M., Lorenzo, G., & Uriagereka, J. (2011). Minimizing language evolution. The Minimalist Program and the evolutionary shaping of language. In C. Boeckx (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic minimalism (pp. 595–616). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, S., & Bloom, P. (1990). Natural language and natural selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 707–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallerman, M., & Gibson, K. (Eds.). (2012). The Oxford handbook of language evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay, P., & Dick, A. S. (2016). Broca and Wernicke are dead, or moving past the classic model of language neurobiology. Brain & Language, 162, 60–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wimsatt, W. (1999). Generativity, entrenchment, evolution, and innateness: Philosophy, evolutionary biology, and conceptual foundations of science. In V. Hardcastle (Ed.), Where biology meets psychology. Philosophical essays (pp. 139–179). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to VĂ­ctor M. Longa .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Section Editor information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry

Longa, V.M. (2017). Noam Chomsky and Linguistics. In: Shackelford, T., Weekes-Shackelford, V. (eds) Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_3621-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_3621-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16999-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16999-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics