You saw it before me!

In "Wired for Words," cognitive neuroscientist @gregoryhickok.bsky.social provides a critical synthesis of over 150 years of research on the brain’s networks that enable us to communicate through language: mitpress.mit.edu/978026255341...

Ok, I thought that's where you were going with this. I agree, but if Chomsky's right--and it's not a crazy idea--then it means that those features are not part of language, which renders my position true. Also, I'm talking specifically about the architecture, not the operations.

Brilliant. So a chunk of language is a species of sensorimotor control. What chunk is not, exactly?

Similarly, language architecture and sensorimotor architecture (e.g., visually guided grasping) descend from a common neurocomputational architecture. Both build on their ancestral plan and have evolved to solve domain specific problems.

The two cases are exactly the same: humans are a species of ape just like language architecture is a species of sensorimotor control architecture. (Chimp-monkey is a bad example; chimps are not monkeys, but both are primates.) The point is that chimps and humans descend from a common ancestor.

Of course! But that doesn’t justify your “no.” Humans are a species of ape. Would you say yes and no to that as well?

Wanna elaborate?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but it sounds like you're taking it a bit too far?

www.amazon.com/Wired-Words-...