is pretty much taken as a given in Chomskyan linguistics
That he believes in it is irrelevant. His linguistics do not require the feature to be absent in animals, only that humans have it.
Chomsky is famous for having some extremely insightful ideas that are important in several areas; and also for holding a lot of extremely stupid ones that are ridiculed by several areas. We don't throw the first set away because of the second.
Chomsky’s reputation isn’t helped by the fact that he has a public email address and can and will answer more or less anything anyone asks him.
It’s nice he has a lot of energy for a 93 year old but I’m not sure WSJ writers really need to ask him for comment on everything. You kind of already know what he’s going to say.
Comments
That he believes in it is irrelevant. His linguistics do not require the feature to be absent in animals, only that humans have it.
Chomsky is famous for having some extremely insightful ideas that are important in several areas; and also for holding a lot of extremely stupid ones that are ridiculed by several areas. We don't throw the first set away because of the second.
Chomsky’s reputation isn’t helped by the fact that he has a public email address and can and will answer more or less anything anyone asks him.
It’s nice he has a lot of energy for a 93 year old but I’m not sure WSJ writers really need to ask him for comment on everything. You kind of already know what he’s going to say.
Being right more often than a stopped clock doesn't make you a good timepiece either, though.