Lexicon of Arguments

 

I 278
Method/theory/Chomsky: requirement: we must be able to describe what the person receives. - The percept itself is a construction of the first order. - Its properties are determined experiment.
Grammar: Grammar is a construction of the second-order. For this one must abstract from the other factors involved in the use and understanding of language and refer to internalized knowledge of the speaker. VsBehaviorism: excludes the concept of "what is perceived" and "what is learned" from the outset.
>Behaviorism.
I 297ff
Method/theory: PutnamVsChomsky: certain ambiguities can only be discovered through routine, therefore their postulated explanation by Chomsky's grammar is not that impressive.
ChomskyVsPutnam: he misunderstands it, in fact this refers to competence and not to performance - routine does not matter here, but the inherent correlation between sound and meaning.
>Ambiguity.
I 303
Chomsky: my universal grammar is not a "theory of language acquisition", but one element of it. - My thesis is an "all-at-once" proposal and does not try to capture the interplay between the tentative hypotheses constructed by the child and new data interpreted with them.
>Grammar, >Hypotheses.
---
II 316
Method/theory/Chomsky: "association", "reinforcement", "random mutation ": hide our ignorance.
((s) Something dissimilar may also be associated.)
II 321
Method/theory/ChomskyVsQuine: his concept of "reinforcement" is almost empty. - If reinforcement is needed for learning, it means that learning cannot happen without data.
Cf. >Psychological theories on reinforcement and reinforcement sensitivity, >Learning.
II 323
Language Learning/ChomskyVsQuine: he does not explain it: if only association and conditioning, then the result is merely a finite language.
>Language acquisition.
II 324
VsQuine: concept of probability of a sentence is empty: the fact that I utter a particular German sentence is as unlikely as a particular Japanese sentence from me.
>Probability.