Book contents
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I The Science of Language: Recent Change and Progress
- Part II The Human Mind and Its Study
- 7 The Influence of Chomsky on the Neuroscience of Language
- 8 Cognitive Science: What Should It Be?
- 9 Semantic Internalism
- 10 Faculties and Modules: Chomsky on Cognitive Architecture
- 11 Chomsky and Moral Philosophy
- Part III Chomsky on Politics and Economics
- Index
- References
10 - Faculties and Modules: Chomsky on Cognitive Architecture
from Part II - The Human Mind and Its Study
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 July 2017
By
Edited by
Book contents
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I The Science of Language: Recent Change and Progress
- Part II The Human Mind and Its Study
- 7 The Influence of Chomsky on the Neuroscience of Language
- 8 Cognitive Science: What Should It Be?
- 9 Semantic Internalism
- 10 Faculties and Modules: Chomsky on Cognitive Architecture
- 11 Chomsky and Moral Philosophy
- Part III Chomsky on Politics and Economics
- Index
- References
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky , pp. 217 - 234Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Berwick, R., Pietroski, P., Yankama, B., and Chomsky, N.. 2011. “Poverty of the Stimulus Revisited.” Cognitive Science 35:1207–1242.Google Scholar
Callebaut, W. and Rasskin-Gutman, D.. 2005. Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1980. Rules and Representations. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1984. Modular Approaches to the Study of the Mind. San Diego: San Diego University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1988. Language and the Problem of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000a. New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000b. “Linguistics and Brain Sciences.” In Marantz, A., Miyashita, Y., and O’Neil, W., eds. Image, Language, Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 13–28.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000c. “Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework.” In Martin, R., Michaels, D., and Uriagereka, J., eds. Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 89–155.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2003a. “Reply to Gopnik.” In Antony, L. M. and Hornstein, N., eds. Chomsky and His Critics. Oxford: Blackwell, 316–325.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2003b. “Reply to Lycan.” In Antony, L. M. and Hornstein, N., eds. Chomsky and His Critics. Oxford: Blackwell, 255–263.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2004a. “Language and Mind: Current Thoughts on Ancient Problems.” In Jenkins, L., ed. Variation and Universals in Biolinguistics. Oxford: Elsevier, 379–406.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2007. “Approaching UG from Below.” In Sauerland, U. and Gärtner, H.-M., eds. Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1–30.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2009. “Opening Remarks.” In Piatelli-Palmarini, M., Uriagereka, J., and Salaburu, P., eds. Of Minds and Language: A Dialogue with Noam Chomsky in the Basque Country. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 12–44.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2010. “Some Simple Evo Devo Theses: How True Might They Be for Language.” In Larson, R., Déprez, V., and Yakimido, H., eds. The Evolution of language: Biolinguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 45–62.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N., Cela-Conde, C. J., and Marty, G.. 1998. “Noam Chomsky’s Minimalist Program and the Philosophy of Mind. An Interview.” Syntax 1:19–36.Google Scholar
Clark, A. and Lappin, S.. 2011. Linguistic Nativism and the Poverty of the Stimulus. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Collins, John. 2003. “Cowie on the Poverty of Stimulus.” Synthese 136:159–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, John. 2005a. “Nativism: in Defence of a Biological Understanding.” Philosophical Psychology 18:157–177.Google Scholar
Collins, John. 2005b. “On the Input Problem for Massive Modularity.” Minds and Machines. 15:1–22.Google Scholar
Collins, John. 2014. “Representations Without Representa: Content and Illusion in Linguistic Theory.” In Stalmaszczyk, P., ed. Semantics & Beyond: Philosophical and Linguistic Inquiries. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 27–64.Google Scholar
Cowie, Fiona. 1999. What’s Within? Nativism Reconsidered. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry. 1981. “The Present Status of the Innateness Controversy.” In Representations: Philosophical Essays on the Foundations of Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 257–316.Google Scholar
Fodor, J., Bever, T., and Garrett, M.. 1974. The Psychology of Language: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics and Generative Grammar. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hauser, M., Chomsky, N., and Fitch, T.. 2002. “The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, and How Did It Evolve?” Science 298:1569–1579.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, J. 1987. “The Autonomy of Syntax and Semantics.” In Garfield, J., ed. Modularity in Knowledge Representation and Natural Language Understanding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 119–131.Google Scholar
Pullum, G. K. 1996. “Learnability, Hyperlearning, and the Poverty of the Stimulus.” Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 498–513.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. 1984. Computation and Cognition: Toward a Foundation for Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sampson, G. 1989. “Language Acquisition: Growth or Learning?” Philosophical Papers 18:203–240.Google Scholar