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

Jeffrey Lidz*, Sandra R Waxman

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

16 Scopus citations


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 languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)157-165
Number of pages9
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jan 1 2004


  • 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

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reaffirming the poverty of the stimulus argument: A reply to the replies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this