Against taking linguistic diversity at “face value”

Abstract Evans & Levinson (E&L) advocate taking linguistic diversity at “face value.” Their argument consists of a list of diverse phenomena and the assertion that no non-vacuous theory could possibly uncover a meaningful unity underlying them. I argue, with evidence from Tlingit and Warlpir...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Main Author: Pesetsky, David
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Cambridge University Press (CUP) 2009
Subjects:
Behavioral Neuroscience
Physiology
Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
tlingit
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x09990562
https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0140525X09990562
Description
Summary:Abstract Evans & Levinson (E&L) advocate taking linguistic diversity at “face value.” Their argument consists of a list of diverse phenomena and the assertion that no non-vacuous theory could possibly uncover a meaningful unity underlying them. I argue, with evidence from Tlingit and Warlpiri, that E&L's list itself should not be taken at face value – and that the actual research record already demonstrates unity amidst diversity.

Similar Items