The development of the 'Subject' category in first language acquisition
The concept of the 'Subject' is a central one in both formal linguistics and psychology. Formal linguistics tends to speak of 'Subject' as a purely grammatical object which has identity only in relation to that over which it predicates. Psychology on the other hand tends to consider 'the Subject' as more closely to do with notions of the 'Self' and meaningful activity. The difference of these views becomes most profound in the study of first language acquisition. This area seems to be one in which both perspectives are at a similar weakness, each displaying the drawbacks of its own mode of analysis. The rigidly fixed lexicon characteristic of formal linguistics finds the description of change problematic: psychology, which characteristically eschews 'theory' for empirical veracity can sometimes become too impressionistic to comfortably describe a tendency for systematicity. The critical review of literature which comprises Chapter 1 takes issue with the Chomskyan formal linguistic assertion that much linguistic ability including a formally defined Subject, must be innate. It is argued and demonstrated here that the assertion is not a conclusion based on well-founded empirical evidence, but is a consequence
Uemlianin, I. A.
The development of the 'Subject' category in first language acquisition. The concept of the 'Subject' is a central one in both formal linguistics and psychology. Formal linguistics tends to speak of 'Subject' as a purely grammatical object which has identity only in relation to that over which it predicates. Psychology on the other hand tends to consider 'the Subject' as more closely to do with notions of the 'Self' and meaningful activity. The difference of these views becomes most profound in the study of first language acquisition. This area seems to be one in which both perspectives are at a similar weakness, each displaying the drawbacks of its own mode of analysis. The rigidly fixed lexicon characteristic of formal linguistics finds the description of change problematic: psychology, which characteristically eschews 'theory' for empirical veracity can sometimes become too impressionistic to comfortably describe a tendency for systematicity. The critical review of literature which comprises Chapter 1 takes issue with the Chomskyan formal linguistic assertion that much linguistic ability including a formally defined Subject, must be innate. It is argued and demonstrated here that the assertion is not a conclusion based on well-founded empirical evidence, but is a consequence
development subject category first_language_acquisition concept subject central formal linguistics_psychology formal linguistics tend speak subject purely grammatical object identity relation predicate psychology hand tend consider the subject closely notion_self meaningful activity difference view become profound study first_language_acquisition area seem perspectives similar weakness display drawback mode analysis rigidly fix lexicon characteristic formal linguistics find description change problematic psychology characteristically eschew theory empirical veracity sometimes become impressionistic describe tendency systematicity critical_review literature comprise take_issue chomskyan formal_linguistic assertion much linguistic ability include formally define subject must innate argued demonstrate assertion conclusion base well founded empirical_evidence consequence