1

I suspect Chomsky presumes an existence of the human condition for universal grammar. This in turn enables him to have confidence in his political beliefs by means of self reflection and knowledge of human history. In other words, I think Chomsky see's universal grammar (if correct) as a definite claim there is a human condition.

Of course, all this is mere speculation of my behalf based on the limited writings I've read. Am I being too speculative? Any references which prove or disprove this line of thought are welcome.

More Anonymous
  • 1,654
  • 6
  • 18
  • Not an answer because I don't have a reference, but I have read Chomsky using the facts of linguistics to argue against the blank slate hypothesis. – David Gudeman Aug 11 '22 at 12:02
  • There's something about language requiring shared experience, so a universal grammar would require that some experiences exist across all cultures. But that's as much as I have. – BillOnne Aug 11 '22 at 16:12
  • Chomsky's Universal grammar ist a model to describe constraints on the syntax of natural language given the particulars of human language acquisition. His political beliefs, more precisely their expression in natural language, however, belong to the realm of semantics. Unless there is a theory to reduce Syntax to semantics or vice versa, the notion that there was an extension of grammar to politics seems dubitable. – collapsar Aug 18 '22 at 22:58

0 Answers0