/ 0
Table of contents

Document in text mode:

Linguistics, Psychology, and the Ontology of Language Noam Chomsky’s well-known claim that linguistics is a “branch of cognitive psychology” (Chomsky 1972, 1) has generated a great deal of dissent, not from linguists or psychologists, but from philosophers. Jerrold Katz, Scott Soames, Michael Devitt and Kim Sterelny have offered a number of arguments, all intended to show that this Chomskian claim is incorrect. In the view of these philosophical critics of Chomsky, there is a significant break between the disciplines of linguistics and psychology. On both sides of this debate, two distinct issues tend to be treated as equivalent: the issue of whether linguistics is a subfield of psychology and the issue of the ontological status of language. Chomsky’s philosophical critics have provided several arguments in support of the idea that the objects in the domain of linguistics—what linguistics studies—are not within the domain of psychology. If these arguments are sound, Chomsky is incorrec...