Re: Gender in language

Nathan Sanders wrote:

John Flynn wrote:

Nathan Sanders wrote:

[snip]

Just because some linguistic feature (or more appropriately, the
*potential* for that feature) is "hard-wired" doesn't mean every
language must have that feature.

Which makes me wonder why it is believed to be "hard-wired" and not,
instead, a learned feature.

Are blue eyes learned? Not every human has them...

I'll ask again, but this time try to stick with language.

Why do you think that it is "hard-wired" and not a learned feature?

Remember, I'm talking about language here. Not physical features of an
organism. Language. The thing that takes children several years to
learn. The thing that newborns do not possess the moment they emerge
into the world.

See the decades-old debate between behaviorists and nativists for
more extensive arguments and evidence from both sides.

I'm painfully aware of the debate. However, that specific debate (of
nativist versus behaviorist) is not the one that is appropriate. There
are more positions to take than merely "behaviorist" if one believes
the nativists are naïvely simplistic in their view of biology.

I'm just saddened that people still leap immediately to the "It's all
in the genes, people!" approach to language as if merely wanting it
to be true makes it so. I think there is enough proof for and against
nativism to make anyone interested in the truth stand back and go "Hmmm,
it's a tough decision that can't be decided on yet." Anyone who can
decide one way or the other (and is not merely in thrall to some ideology
they picked up in their formative years) is either acting very rashly or
has some definitive evidence that no one else is aware of.

--
johnF
"Biology has moved on from the time when viruses were all the rage to a
time when genes are much more trendy."
-- _The Doctrine of DNA_, Richard C. Lewontin
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gender in language
    ... Why do you think that it is "hard-wired" and not a learned feature? ... Non-human animals do not use language, ... I'm painfully aware of the debate. ... Even the most ardent nativists would freely admit that huge portions ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
    ... If reading data that might be ill-formed, defining your language to ... to dismiss my concern about this issue as irrelevant and unimportant, ... This argument would apply to *any* proposed new feature, ... incompatibilities were simply the result of someone doing something ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Graphic GUI C
    ... features in C99) is also a feature of C++. ... expect the C language and the C standard library to do everything; ... nothing is more commonplace than the need for one or more libraries in ... The same is true inside of WSH where all of the functionality ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Gender in language
    ... Language is a physical feature of the human organism. ... the nativists are naïvely simplistic in their view of biology. ... Well, if we can say it's in the genes, we can look for it there. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Whats the deal with C99?
    ... be in the language. ... languages by itself speaks volumes about what programmers want. ... There's no feature added to C99 that addresses even one thing that has ... There's no controversy about memory management? ...
    (comp.lang.c)