Abstract

The Minimalist Program in generative linguistics is predicated on the idea that simplicity is a defining property of the human language faculty, on the one hand; on the other, a central aim of linguistic theorising. Worryingly, however, justifications for either claim are hard to come by in the literature. We sketch a proposal that would allow for both shortcomings to be addressed, and that furthermore honours the program’s declared commitment to naturalism. We begin by teasing apart and clarifying the different conceptions of simplicity underlying generative inquiry, in both ontological and theoretical capacities. We then trace a path towards a more robust justification for each type of simplicity principle, drawing on recent work in cognitive science and in philosophy of science, respectively. The resulting proposal hinges on the idea that simplicity is an evolved, virtuous cognitive bias—one that is a condition of our scientific understanding and, ultimately, of successful scientific practice. Finally, we make a case for why minimalists should take this proposal seriously, on the one hand; and for why generative linguistics would make for an interesting case study for philosophy of science, on the other.

Highlights

  • Simplicity1 is widely hailed across science and philosophy as a desirable trait of our theories, models, explanations, etc

  • We make a case for why minimalists should take this proposal seriously, on the one hand; and for why generative linguistics would make for an interesting case study for philosophy of science, on the other

  • Ludlow argues that simplicity, as this notion applies to scientific theories in general, and linguistic theories in particular, is nothing more than a pragmatic criterion, narrowly construed as synonymous with ‘easy to use’: “when we look at other sciences, in nearly every case, the best theory is arguably not the one that reduces the number of components from four to three, but rather the theory that allows for the simplest calculations and greatest ease of use” (Ludlow 2011, p. 158)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Simplicity is widely hailed across science and philosophy as a desirable trait of our theories, models, explanations, etc. Generative linguistics is no exception, on the contrary going so far as to elevate simplicity to the status of high priority research goal.. Generative linguistics is no exception, on the contrary going so far as to elevate simplicity to the status of high priority research goal.2 It is striking, given the purported centrality of this notion, that generativists have yet to offer satisfactory answers to the fundamental questions of how simplicity is to be defined, measured, traded-off and—above all—justified. The second and main part of the paper is devoted to showing that the issues of justification and convergence become much more tractable as long as generativists embrace a more naturalistic methodology; importantly, our proposal will be conciliatory rather than antagonistic.4

Simplicity double-act: theory selection and grammar selection
Simplicity internalised: from internal metric to innate endowment
From Plato’s problem to Darwin’s problem
Galileo meets Ockham: the purported convergence of simplicities
Taking the third-factor hypothesis to the next level
Theory-simplicity: a compatibilist alternative
Scientific understanding: a brief overview of the debate
Theoretical values and scientific understanding
Barrios and Ludlow on simplicity in generative linguistics
Everybody wins: talking points for future dialogue
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.