14 Replies to “Steven Pinker on Noam Chomsky’s theory of Linguistics & Politics (Part 1)”

  1. i think chomsky is saying that the different meanings of sentences will still be inherent to children when you switch words around or delete words. i never heard him say that different tenses were inherent. that would definitely be impossible…

  2. The link has changed for the full video: video . mit . edu / watch / pinkers-farewell-9040 / If the link changes again, go to video . mit . edu and search for “pinker’s farewell”.

  3. the entire vowel-shift system did not arise out of a series of orthographic and political coincidences. that power structures a priori structured language is one of those weak uninformed arguments that gets tired fast.

  4. Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY White country and ONLY into White countries. Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-Whites. They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-White. Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

  5. What of the external forces (physical, military, power structures, geography, happenstance, mistakes in writing/printing etc.) that made run, ran, run the most common verb forms regardless of how the brain interprets and stores and becomes fluent in modern language forms?

  6. Yes Data driven analysis. Truth is to be sought in does and doesn’t. Science: On Chomsky’s Appraisal of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior: A Half Century of Misunderstanding

Leave a Reply