Reaffirming the poverty of the stimulus argument: A reply to the replies

Jeffrey Lidz; Sandra Waxman

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.001

Reaffirming the poverty of the stimulus argument: A reply to the replies

Jeffrey Lidz^*, Sandra Waxman

^*Corresponding author for this work

Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

19 Scopus citations

Abstract

Lidz, Waxman, and Freedman [Lidz, J., Waxman, S., & Freedman, J. (2003). What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Evidence for syntactic structure at 18-months. Cognition, 89, B65-B73.] argue that acquisition of the syntactic and semantic properties of anaphoric one in English relies on innate knowledge within the learner. Several commentaries have now been published questioning this finding. We defend the original finding by identifying both empirical and logical flaws in the critiques.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	157-165
Number of pages	9
Journal	Cognition
Volume	93
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.001
State	Published - Sep 2004

Keywords

Language acquisition
Poverty of the stimulus
Universal grammar

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Language and Linguistics
Developmental and Educational Psychology
Linguistics and Language
Cognitive Neuroscience

Access to Document

10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.001

Cite this

@article{fd82991eec5b4ea58a8dd549999d809f,

title = "Reaffirming the poverty of the stimulus argument: A reply to the replies",

abstract = "Lidz, Waxman, and Freedman [Lidz, J., Waxman, S., & Freedman, J. (2003). What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Evidence for syntactic structure at 18-months. Cognition, 89, B65-B73.] argue that acquisition of the syntactic and semantic properties of anaphoric one in English relies on innate knowledge within the learner. Several commentaries have now been published questioning this finding. We defend the original finding by identifying both empirical and logical flaws in the critiques.",

keywords = "Language acquisition, Poverty of the stimulus, Universal grammar",

author = "Jeffrey Lidz and Sandra Waxman",

year = "2004",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.001",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "93",

pages = "157--165",

journal = "Cognition",

issn = "0010-0277",

publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reaffirming the poverty of the stimulus argument

T2 - A reply to the replies

AU - Lidz, Jeffrey

AU - Waxman, Sandra

PY - 2004/9

Y1 - 2004/9

N2 - Lidz, Waxman, and Freedman [Lidz, J., Waxman, S., & Freedman, J. (2003). What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Evidence for syntactic structure at 18-months. Cognition, 89, B65-B73.] argue that acquisition of the syntactic and semantic properties of anaphoric one in English relies on innate knowledge within the learner. Several commentaries have now been published questioning this finding. We defend the original finding by identifying both empirical and logical flaws in the critiques.

AB - Lidz, Waxman, and Freedman [Lidz, J., Waxman, S., & Freedman, J. (2003). What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Evidence for syntactic structure at 18-months. Cognition, 89, B65-B73.] argue that acquisition of the syntactic and semantic properties of anaphoric one in English relies on innate knowledge within the learner. Several commentaries have now been published questioning this finding. We defend the original finding by identifying both empirical and logical flaws in the critiques.

KW - Language acquisition

KW - Poverty of the stimulus

KW - Universal grammar

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=7544244221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=7544244221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.001

DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.001

M3 - Comment/debate

AN - SCOPUS:7544244221

SN - 0010-0277

VL - 93

SP - 157

EP - 165

JO - Cognition

JF - Cognition

IS - 2

ER -

Reaffirming the poverty of the stimulus argument: A reply to the replies

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this