Re: Gender in language
- From: Nathan Sanders <nsanders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:48:05 -0400
In article <Xns984D917635D2Djohnpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
John Flynn <johnpf@xxxxxxxxxxx> 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...
See the decades-old debate between behaviorists and nativists for more
extensive arguments and evidence from both sides.
Nathan
--
Nathan Sanders
Linguistics Program
Williams College
http://wso.williams.edu/~nsanders/
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Gender in language
- From: John Flynn
- Re: Gender in language
- References:
- Re: Gender in language
- From: Picasso
- Re: Gender in language
- From: Richard Herring
- Re: Gender in language
- From: Nathan Sanders
- Re: Gender in language
- From: John Flynn
- Re: Gender in language
- Prev by Date: Re: Gender in language
- Next by Date: Re: Gender in language
- Previous by thread: Re: Gender in language
- Next by thread: Re: Gender in language
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|