Proximate and ultimate explanations of individual differences in language use and language acquisition

Jan Hulstijn

doi:10.1075/dujal.19027.hul

Abstract

AbstractI evaluate three schools in linguistics (structuralism; generative linguistics; usage based linguistics) from the perspective of Karl Popper’s critical rationalism. Theories (providing proximate explanations) may be falsified at some point in time. In contrast, metatheories, such as Darwin’s theory of evolution and the theory of Language as a Complex Adaptive System (LCAS) (providing ultimate explanations) are falsifiablein principle, but not likely to be falsified. I then argue that LCAS provides a fruitful framework for the explanation of individual differences in language acquisition and use. Unequal frequency distributions of linguistic elements constitute a necessary characteristic of language production, in line with LCAS. However, explaining individual differences implies explaining commonalities (Hulstijn, 2015,2019). While attributes such as people’s level of education and profession are visible in knowledge of the standard language (declarative knowledge acquired in school), they may be invisible in the spoken vernacular (linguistic cognition shared by all native speakers).

Highlights

I evaluate three schools in linguistics from the perspective of Karl Popper’s critical rationalism
I conclude that Language as a Complex Adaptive System (LCAS) is “the” ultimate metatheory for phenomena of language acquisition, language use, and language change
Your third beacon is that the metatheory of Language as a Complex Adaptive System is falsifiable in principle but that the essential claims of Language as a Complex Adaptive System are not likely to be falsified

Summary

Three paradigms in linguistics and psychology

The first beacon consists of this broad picture of three paradigms (schools) in linguistics and psychology (Figure 1). Popper (1959) argued that it is best to start with a puzzle or problem, which has to be solved. The findings may provide a new understanding of what we believed to be the puzzling phenomena or problem with which we started, indicated by arrow 2.2. See Hulstijn (2015), Chapter 1 With respect to both the problem and the findings of the investigation, it is best not to use the word facts but rather the term observations, to remind ourselves of the need to interpret our findings. At that point in time, that is in the 1970s, I believed that there was no end in the chain of theories following each other This is a crucial point, to which I will come back

Chomsky

Usage-based linguistics

Theory and metatheory

Explaining individual differences under the view of LCAS

Vernacular versus standard language

Language assessment

Findings

Conclusions