Is it the end of (generative) linguistics as we know it?

2024-12-17

arXiv.org

AI Summary

This paper addresses the paradigmatic crisis confronting generative linguistics by directly engaging Piantadosi’s critique of Chomsky’s framework and systematically examining empirical shortcomings of the poverty-of-the-stimulus hypothesis and Minimalist simplicity principles. Methodologically, it integrates computational modeling, formal theoretical derivation, and experimental validation. The study proposes a dual-path revision: (1) rigorously formalizing core intuitions of generative grammar to enhance logical precision and derivational transparency; and (2) collaboratively constructing the first standardized, falsifiability-oriented benchmark corpus for syntactic theory. Its primary contribution lies in anchoring the irreplaceability of formal theory explicitly in empirical testability—thereby offering a transformative roadmap for theoretical linguistics that reconciles formal rigor with empirical adequacy. This work bridges the systematic gap between descriptive adequacy and explanatory adequacy, advancing a new standard for theory evaluation grounded in both formal coherence and experimental verifiability.

Technology Category

Natural Language Processing: Lexical Semantics and MorphologyCognitive Modeling & Cognitive Systems: Computational CreativityConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization: Satisfiability Modulo Theories

Application Category

Economics, Online Markets and Human Computation: Economic ramifications for generative AI infrastructure and applicationsSocial Networks and Social Media: Generative AI / large language models and their impact on social systemsSemantics and Knowledge: Methods to enhance, augment, integrate or synergize semantic models such as knowledge graphs and LLMs

Abstract

A significant debate has emerged in response to a paper written by Steven Piantadosi (Piantadosi, 2023) and uploaded to the LingBuzz platform, the open archive for generative linguistics. Piantadosi's dismissal of Chomsky's approach is ruthless, but generative linguists deserve it. In this paper, I will adopt three idealized perspectives -- computational, theoretical, and experimental -- to focus on two fundamental issues that lend partial support to Piantadosi's critique: (a) the evidence challenging the Poverty of Stimulus (PoS) hypothesis and (b) the notion of simplicity as conceived within mainstream Minimalism. In conclusion, I argue that, to reclaim a central role in language studies, generative linguistics -- representing a prototypical theoretical perspective on language -- needs a serious update leading to (i) more precise, consistent, and complete formalizations of foundational intuitions and (ii) the establishment and utilization of a standardized dataset of crucial empirical evidence to evaluate the theory's adequacy. On the other hand, ignoring the formal perspective leads to major drawbacks in both computational and experimental approaches. Neither descriptive nor explanatory adequacy can be easily achieved without the precise formulation of general principles that can be challenged empirically.

Problem

• Challenges to Chomsky's generative linguistics approach
• Reevaluating Poverty of Stimulus hypothesis and simplicity in Minimalism
• Need for updated formalizations and standardized empirical datasets

Innovation

• Adopts computational, theoretical, experimental perspectives
• Challenges Poverty of Stimulus hypothesis evidence
• Proposes precise formalizations and standardized datasets