The Language Myth
2014 non-fiction book
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Language Myth is a 2014 book by Vyvyan Evans, written for a general audience. It is a direct rebuttal of Steven Pinker's 1994 book The Language Instinct. Evans argues against Noam Chomsky's claim that all human languages provide evidence for an underlying Universal Grammar. Evans posits, instead, a language-as-use thesis[1][2] to account for the nature of language, how it is learned and how it evolves.
The Language Myth (first edition) | |
| Author | Vyvyan Evans |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Genre | Popular science |
| Published | 2014 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| ISBN | 978-1107619753 |
| Followed by | The Crucible of Language |
| Website | www |
Reception
The Language Myth caused considerable controversy upon publication among supporters of Chomskyan universal grammar. David Adger argued that the "attack on generative linguistics misrepresents the field".[3] Another vocal critic, Norbert Hornstein attacked the book for presenting caricatures of Chomskyan generative grammar and of providing inadequate arguments to support its main claims.[4] Others have attacked the book for its polemical style and what are claimed to be Evans' misunderstandings of Universal Grammar.[5]
Evans responded by claiming that it is exactly critics of the book who misunderstand.[6] He argues that his critics do not provide a coherent argument that is falsifiable as they posit Universal Grammar as a theoretical axiom,[7] which does not require proof or evidence to support it.[8] He also argues that the Universal Grammar perspective makes a claim that is biological rather than linguistic in nature,[9] and hence one that cannot be substantiated on the basis of linguistic evidence.[10][11]
Controversy
In 2016, Language, the flagship academic journal of the Linguistic Society of America published a series of "Alternative (Re)views"[12] by six leading linguists, all addressing The Language Myth. Evans was originally invited to contribute a response to those articles. However, his submission was rejected by the journal's review editor.[13] Evans wrote an open-letter to the linguistics community claiming that he was being censored.[14]