Universal Grammar: Wittgenstein Versus Chomsky

Abstract

The motivations for the claim that languageLanguageis innate are, for many, quite straightforward. The innateness of language is seen as the only way to solve the so-called logicalLogicproblem of language acquisitionLanguage acquisition: the mismatch between linguistic input and linguistic output. In this paper, I begin by unravelling several strands of the nativistNativistargument, offering replies as I go along. I then give an outline of Wittgenstein’sWittgensteinview of language acquisitionLanguage acquisition, showing how it renders otiose problems posed by nativistsNativistlike ChomskyChomsky, Noam—not least by means of Wittgenstein’s own brand of grammar which, unlike Chomsky’s, does not reside in the brain, but in our practicesPractice.