Human Linguisticality and the Building Blocks of Languages

Area of Science:

• Linguistics
• Evolutionary Biology
• Cognitive Science

Background:

• The concept of an innate blueprint for Human Language is widely accepted.
• Confusing terminology like "language faculty" and "universal grammar" has obscured substantive issues.
• Human linguisticality, the biological capacity for language, is uncontroversial.

Purpose of the Study:

• To challenge the notion of innate linguistic building blocks.
• To propose a comparative approach to studying linguisticality.
• To re-evaluate the motivation for innate language structures.

Main Methods:

• Comparative analysis of languages, akin to cultural comparisons (Greenbergian type).
• Critique of the chemical-analogy approach to linguistic comparison.
• Examination of structural uniqueness across languages (lexicon, phonology, morphosyntax).

Main Results:

• Convergent cultural evolution of grammatical structures reduces the need for an innate blueprint.
• Structural uniqueness in languages supports a Greenbergian comparative approach.
• The Minimalist framework aligns with the idea of few domain-specific elements in language capacity.

Conclusions:

• The motivation for innate linguistic building blocks diminishes when convergent cultural evolution is considered.
• A comparative, Greenbergian approach is more suitable for studying linguisticality.
• Linguisticality, like other biological capacities, benefits from a broad comparative perspective.