Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Essentialism gives way to motivation

  • Adele E. Goldberg (a1)
Abstract

The recognition that contentful universals are rare and often “banal” does not undermine the fact that most non-universal but recurring patterns of language are amenable to explanation. These patterns are sensical or motivated solutions to interacting and often conflicting factors. As implied by the Evans & Levinson's (E&L's) article, linguistics would be well served to move beyond the essentialist bias that seeks universal, innate, unchanging categories with rigid boundaries.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Anderson, P. W. (1972) More is different. Science 177(4047):393–96.
Burzio, L. (2002) Missing players: Phonology and the past-tense debate. Lingua 112(3):157–99.
Christiansen, M. H. & Chater, N. (2008) Language as shaped by the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31(5):489509; discussion 509–58.
Coppock, E. (2008) The logical and empirical foundations of Baker's paradox. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
Croft, W. (2001) Radical construction grammar. Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford University Press.
Gelman, S. (2003) The essentialist child: Origins of essentialism in everyday thought. Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. & Boyd, J. K. (2009) Learning what not to say: Categorization, preemption and discounting in a-adjectives. Unpublished manuscript, Princeton University.
Haiman, J. (1985) Iconicity in syntax. Cambridge University Press.
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (2006) The tortuous route from genes to behaviour: A neuroconstructivist approach. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioural Neuroscience 6(1):917.
Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press.
Lander, E. S. (1994) Genetic dissection of complex traits. Science 265:20372048.
Mayr, E. (1975) Evolution and the diversity of life. Harvard University Press.
Tomasello, M. (2004) What kind of evidence could refute the UG hypothesis? Commentary on Wunderlich. Studies in Language 28(3):642–45.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences
  • ISSN: 0140-525X
  • EISSN: 1469-1825
  • URL: /core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed