Edward Gibson

Yeah, within a sentence. So here we're going to get to that. But the formal language stuff is a little aside. Chomsky wasn't proposing it for human languages even. He was just pointing out that human languages are context-free. Because that was kind of stuff we did for formal languages. And what he was most interested in was

Yeah, within a sentence. So here we're going to get to that. But the formal language stuff is a little aside. Chomsky wasn't proposing it for human languages even. He was just pointing out that human languages are context-free. Because that was kind of stuff we did for formal languages. And what he was most interested in was

human language, and that's like, the movement is where we, where he sort of set off on the, I would say, a very interesting, but wrong foot. It was kind of interesting, it's a very, I agree, it's a very interesting history. So he proposed this,

human language, and that's like, the movement is where we, where he sort of set off on the, I would say, a very interesting, but wrong foot. It was kind of interesting, it's a very, I agree, it's a very interesting history. So he proposed this,

human language, and that's like, the movement is where we, where he sort of set off on the, I would say, a very interesting, but wrong foot. It was kind of interesting, it's a very, I agree, it's a very interesting history. So he proposed this,

multiple theories in 57 and then 65 there they all have this framework though was phrase structure plus movement different versions of the of the phrase structure and the movement in the 57 these are the most famous original bits of chomsky's work and then 71 is when he figured out that those lead to learning problems that that there's cases where a kid could never figure out which rule um which set of rules was intended and and so and then he said well that means it's innate

multiple theories in 57 and then 65 there they all have this framework though was phrase structure plus movement different versions of the of the phrase structure and the movement in the 57 these are the most famous original bits of chomsky's work and then 71 is when he figured out that those lead to learning problems that that there's cases where a kid could never figure out which rule um which set of rules was intended and and so and then he said well that means it's innate

multiple theories in 57 and then 65 there they all have this framework though was phrase structure plus movement different versions of the of the phrase structure and the movement in the 57 these are the most famous original bits of chomsky's work and then 71 is when he figured out that those lead to learning problems that that there's cases where a kid could never figure out which rule um which set of rules was intended and and so and then he said well that means it's innate

It's kind of interesting. He just really thought the movement was just so obviously true that he couldn't... He didn't even entertain giving it up. It's just obvious. That's obviously right. And it was later where people figured out that there's all these subtle ways in which things which look like generalizations aren't generalizations across the category.

It's kind of interesting. He just really thought the movement was just so obviously true that he couldn't... He didn't even entertain giving it up. It's just obvious. That's obviously right. And it was later where people figured out that there's all these subtle ways in which things which look like generalizations aren't generalizations across the category.

It's kind of interesting. He just really thought the movement was just so obviously true that he couldn't... He didn't even entertain giving it up. It's just obvious. That's obviously right. And it was later where people figured out that there's all these subtle ways in which things which look like generalizations aren't generalizations across the category.

They're word-specific, and they kind of work, but they don't work across various other words in the category. And so it's easier to just think of these things as lexical copies. And I think he was very obsessed. I don't know. I'm just guessing. He really wanted this story to be simple in some sense. And language is a little more complicated in some sense. He didn't like words.

They're word-specific, and they kind of work, but they don't work across various other words in the category. And so it's easier to just think of these things as lexical copies. And I think he was very obsessed. I don't know. I'm just guessing. He really wanted this story to be simple in some sense. And language is a little more complicated in some sense. He didn't like words.

They're word-specific, and they kind of work, but they don't work across various other words in the category. And so it's easier to just think of these things as lexical copies. And I think he was very obsessed. I don't know. I'm just guessing. He really wanted this story to be simple in some sense. And language is a little more complicated in some sense. He didn't like words.

He never talks about words. He likes to talk about combinations of words. And words are... You know, if you look up a dictionary, there's 50 senses for a common word, right? The word take will have 30 or 40 senses in it. So there'll be many different senses for common words. And he just doesn't think about that. He doesn't think that's language. I think he doesn't think that's language.

He never talks about words. He likes to talk about combinations of words. And words are... You know, if you look up a dictionary, there's 50 senses for a common word, right? The word take will have 30 or 40 senses in it. So there'll be many different senses for common words. And he just doesn't think about that. He doesn't think that's language. I think he doesn't think that's language.

He never talks about words. He likes to talk about combinations of words. And words are... You know, if you look up a dictionary, there's 50 senses for a common word, right? The word take will have 30 or 40 senses in it. So there'll be many different senses for common words. And he just doesn't think about that. He doesn't think that's language. I think he doesn't think that's language.

He thinks that words are distinct from combinations of words. I think they're the same. If you look at my brain in the scanner while I'm listening to a language I understand, And you compare, I can localize my language network in a few minutes, in like 15 minutes.

He thinks that words are distinct from combinations of words. I think they're the same. If you look at my brain in the scanner while I'm listening to a language I understand, And you compare, I can localize my language network in a few minutes, in like 15 minutes.

He thinks that words are distinct from combinations of words. I think they're the same. If you look at my brain in the scanner while I'm listening to a language I understand, And you compare, I can localize my language network in a few minutes, in like 15 minutes.