UCONN LING 1010 EXAM QUESTIONS 2025, ALL
WITH DETAILED VERIFIED CORRECT ANSWERS
Linguistic Universals as a potential argument for the Innateness Hypothesis
.
The goal of linguistics:
description of languages and explanation of the pattern found
Linguists try to understand the structure of languages
There are two steps:
1. Description (gathering data)
- Gathering data is crucial (of course!), but not always so easy...
2. Explanation (formulating hypotheses, building theories)
The notions Endangered languages and language extinction (or language death)
Many languages are spoken in remote areas, without having a writing system
WORSE: many languages are going to disappear really soon...
How many languages?
7,000
Explain the logical status of a valid linguistic universal, i.e. a linguistic universal that can be
used to support the IH
The commonalities of all languages are grounded in the universal grammar
UG: the innate system that allows children to construct a mental grammar of the language
they're exposed to
,Aka Language Acquisition Device (LAD)
These properties are language-unique (contra-cognitive explanation)
Why we cannot say that any linguistic universal supports the IH
If a property X is innate it is universal
From this it does not follow that every universal property is innate
There could be other causes
Criteria for a good universal
Logical type of universal
Hiddenness of universal
Strength of Universals
One has to exclude other possible explanations
We have to show that for at least some universals there is no other plausible alternative
explanation
Problem: just because we cannot find an alternative explanation, that does not mean there is
none
The universal has to be language-specific
i.e. exclusive to language and not some broader class of cognitive systems
'true' language universals must be language-specific universals
, Language universals that are not language-specific are no good
Something that is true of all communication systems is necessarily true of all languages. As such
it is not a language specific universal and it cannot be used to support UG
The universal is specific to the cognitive domain that we call language
Language universals that might not be language-specific universals
Language universals that might not be language-specific universals
All non-artificial human communication systems can be used to expression emotions
Hierarchical structure (is not unique to human language)
Recursion (if there are other systems that use it too)
Possible alternative explanations for language-specific universals
historical explanations (monogenesis)
biological explanations (architecture of the brain, structure of articulatory organs)
historical explanations (monogenesis)
Monogenesis - all languages stem from one mother language
Evolution: all evolved things have hierarchical structure
biological explanations (architecture of the brain, structure of articulatory organs)
Neural architecture: all languages are implemented in the same brain design
WITH DETAILED VERIFIED CORRECT ANSWERS
Linguistic Universals as a potential argument for the Innateness Hypothesis
.
The goal of linguistics:
description of languages and explanation of the pattern found
Linguists try to understand the structure of languages
There are two steps:
1. Description (gathering data)
- Gathering data is crucial (of course!), but not always so easy...
2. Explanation (formulating hypotheses, building theories)
The notions Endangered languages and language extinction (or language death)
Many languages are spoken in remote areas, without having a writing system
WORSE: many languages are going to disappear really soon...
How many languages?
7,000
Explain the logical status of a valid linguistic universal, i.e. a linguistic universal that can be
used to support the IH
The commonalities of all languages are grounded in the universal grammar
UG: the innate system that allows children to construct a mental grammar of the language
they're exposed to
,Aka Language Acquisition Device (LAD)
These properties are language-unique (contra-cognitive explanation)
Why we cannot say that any linguistic universal supports the IH
If a property X is innate it is universal
From this it does not follow that every universal property is innate
There could be other causes
Criteria for a good universal
Logical type of universal
Hiddenness of universal
Strength of Universals
One has to exclude other possible explanations
We have to show that for at least some universals there is no other plausible alternative
explanation
Problem: just because we cannot find an alternative explanation, that does not mean there is
none
The universal has to be language-specific
i.e. exclusive to language and not some broader class of cognitive systems
'true' language universals must be language-specific universals
, Language universals that are not language-specific are no good
Something that is true of all communication systems is necessarily true of all languages. As such
it is not a language specific universal and it cannot be used to support UG
The universal is specific to the cognitive domain that we call language
Language universals that might not be language-specific universals
Language universals that might not be language-specific universals
All non-artificial human communication systems can be used to expression emotions
Hierarchical structure (is not unique to human language)
Recursion (if there are other systems that use it too)
Possible alternative explanations for language-specific universals
historical explanations (monogenesis)
biological explanations (architecture of the brain, structure of articulatory organs)
historical explanations (monogenesis)
Monogenesis - all languages stem from one mother language
Evolution: all evolved things have hierarchical structure
biological explanations (architecture of the brain, structure of articulatory organs)
Neural architecture: all languages are implemented in the same brain design
