Behavioral and Brain Sciences

Table of Contents - 2008 - Volume 31, Issue 05  

Open Peer Commentary

On language and evolution: Why neo-adaptationism fails

Eric Reulanda1

a1 Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS, 3512 BL, Utrecht, The Netherlands. eric.reuland@let.uu.nl

Abstract

I identify a number of problematic aspects of Christiansen & Chater's (C&C's) contribution. These include their suggestion that subjacency and binding reflect non-domain-specific mechanisms; that proto-language is a “cultural product”; and that non-adaptationism requires overly rich innate structures, and is incompatible with acceptable evolutionary processes. It shows that a fully UG (Universal Grammar)-free version of the authors' neo-adaptationism would be incoherent.

Related Articles

    Language as shaped by the brain Morten H. Christiansen and Nick Chater Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, and Santa Fe Institute, Santa Fe, NM 87501 christiansen@cornell.edu http://www.psych.cornell.edu/people/Faculty/mhc27.html; Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom n.chater@ucl.ac.uk http://www.psychol.ucl.ac.uk/people/profiles/chater_nick.htm