The Innateness and Modularity of Language

This article is an attempt to clarify what generative linguists mean by the "innateness" & "modularity" of language. It seems to me that generative linguists have been arguing for these ideas without clarifying what they really mean by them. To achieve this goal, I have found it helpful to look at the issue from the point of view of connectionism, which is a representative opponent of generative linguistics. According to Elman et al. (1996), a representative illustration of the connectionists' view of innateness & modularity of language, Universal Grammar, which generative linguists argue for, is innate in the sense that it is represented in some brain circuits. Elman et al. (1996) calls this innateness "representational innateness." When discussing the modularity of language, it is essential to distinguish between the module as a functional unit distinguished from the other cognitive functions & the module as localized in the brain (perhaps in the left hemisphere). Generative linguists, it seems to me, have been indifferent to this distinction, though most of them seem to believe that the language module is localized in the left hemisphere of the brain. Connectionists, of course, are against the innate language module as localized in a specific part of the brain. Figures, References. Adapted from the source document