Jean Aitchison's review ("Getting back to nature-nurture", THES, January 7) dismisses Geoffrey Sampson's argument about whether language is biologically in-built, but for all the wrong reasons.
She cites communication among honey bees as a parallel case. But it is not. Human beings have something bees, as far we know, lack: historically developed and culturally transmitted traditions. Aitchison suggests that Sampson's mistake is going "over the top" in favour of viewing language as nurture not nature.
Her solution is somewhere in between. Wrong again. As long as linguists debate in this antiquated way (or any of the genetic terminology), neither side will throw light on what makes language different from other forms of animal communication.
Roy Harris
Emeritus professor of general linguistics, University of Oxford
请先注册再继续
为何要注册?
- 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅?