Hostname: page-component-784d4fb959-mjqqg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-16T00:00:20.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The discovery of language invariance and variation, and its relevance for the cognitive sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Luigi Rizzi
Luigi Rizzi
Affiliation:
CISCL (Interdepartmental Centre for Cognitive Studies on Language), University of Siena, 53100 Siena, Italy. rizzil@unisi.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Modern linguistics has highlighted the fundamental invariance of human language: A rich invariant structure has emerged from comparative studies nourished by sophisticated formal models; languages also differ along important dimensions, but variation is constrained in severe and systematic ways. I illustrate this research direction in the domains of island constraints, word order restrictions, and the expression of referential dependencies. Both language invariance and language variability within systematic limits are highly relevant for the cognitive sciences.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 5 , October 2009 , pp. 467 - 468
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Chomsky, N. (1995) The minimalist program. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (2000) Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In: Step by step – essays in minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. Martin, R., Michaels, D. & Uriagereka, J.. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. (1990) Types of A'-Dependencies. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. (2005) Deriving Greenberg's universal 20 and its exceptions. Linguistic Inquiry 36:315–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crain, S. (1991) Language acquisition in the absence of experience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14:597–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (1963a) Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In: Universals of language, ed. Greenberg, J. H., pp. 72–113. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J. (1982) Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Available at:http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/15215.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H. (1989) Essays on anaphora. Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, H. & Saito, M. (1992) Move alpha. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. R. & Wexler, K. (1986) Parameters, binding theory and learnability. Linguistic Inquiry 18:413–44.Google Scholar
Moro, A. (2008) The boundaries of Babel. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, D. (2000) Phrasal movement and its kin. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T. (1976) The syntactic domain of anaphora. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1978/1982) Violations of the wh-island constraint in Italian and the subjacency condition. In: Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 11, ed. Dubisson, C., Lightfoot, D. & Morin, Y. C., pp. 155–90. Reprinted in L. Rizzi (1982) Issues in Italian syntax, pp. 49–76. Foris.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1990) Relativized minimality. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2006) Grammatically-based target-inconsistencies in child language. In: The Proceedings of the Inaugural Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition – North America (GALANA), ed. Deen, K. U., Nomura, J., Schulz, B. & Schwartz, B. D.. (UCONN/MIT Working Papers in Linguistics). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Starke, M. (2001) Move dissolves into merge. Doctoral dissertation, University of Geneva.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, A. (2006) Strong vs. weak islands. In: The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 4, ed. Everaert, M. & van Riemsdijk, H., pp. 479–532. Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tettamanti, M., Alkadhi, H., Moro, A., Perani, D., Kollias, S. & Weniger, D. (2002) Neural correlates for the acquisition of natural language syntax. NeuroImage 17:700–709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thornton, R. (2008) Why continuity. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26(1):107–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsai, W.-T. D. (1994) On economizing the theory of A-bar dependencies. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar