Article

2016-09-12 Science & Technology

Evidence Rebuts Chomsky's Theory of Language Learning

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2016-09-12 09:13|| || Front Page|| [11132 views ] Top

#1 News Flash - another lefty is exposed as a bullshit artist.

Posted by Raj 2016-09-12 11:14|| 2016-09-12 11:14|| Front Page Top

#2 Not exactly--it sounded reasonable, and if it had panned out it would have been a legitimate claim to fame. It wouldn't have excused his vitriolic dishonesty in other fields, of course.

Posted by james 2016-09-12 11:38|| http://idontknowbut.blogspot.com 2016-09-12 11:38|| Front Page Top

#3 Numb Chimpsky is more of a BS artist and hypnotist than he is a language theorist. I assume now that whenever the Chimpster speaks, he is engaging in another cunning plan.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2016-09-12 15:26|| 2016-09-12 15:26|| Front Page Top

#4 Then again, I think a lot of people thought Das Kapital sounded reasonable. I read that book three fucking times and finally decided it was bullshit. It took me long enough...

Posted by Raj 2016-09-12 15:47|| 2016-09-12 15:47|| Front Page Top

#5 It seems to me his work was useful to those developing computer languages, which must be some sort of comfort as his place in the pantheon crumbles to dust.

Posted by trailing wife 2016-09-12 17:46|| 2016-09-12 17:46|| Front Page Top

#6 @TW
No not at all useful.
The most used programming languages have nothing chumpsky about them

If anything putting more "language" into code harms quality, readability and performance.

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2016-09-12 17:54|| 2016-09-12 17:54|| Front Page Top

#7 Thank you, Bright Pebbles. I've learnt something useful today, so I'm happy.

Posted by trailing wife 2016-09-12 22:54|| 2016-09-12 22:54|| Front Page Top

#8 The thing isn't that his theory is wrong that has been well established for over 30 years (despite what the article says). It is that he constantly twisted his theory to try and fit the contrary evidence. Much like his political theories.

Posted by phil_b 2016-09-12 23:08|| 2016-09-12 23:08|| Front Page Top

23:49 anon1
23:44 George Gurly-Brown7324
23:31 Crusader
23:21 Crusader
23:16 newc
23:08 phil_b
22:59 Glenmore
22:54 trailing wife
22:44 Crusader
22:37 Jack salami
22:32 Jack salami
22:31 Crusader
22:18 Frank G
22:13 USN, Ret.
21:52 USN, Ret.
21:50 USN, Ret.
21:34 Blossom Unains5562
21:28 Blossom Unains5562
21:20 newc
21:18 newc
21:04 Anguper Hupomosing9418
20:59 SteveS
20:58 Pappy
20:53 Blossom Hupager6063