Discuss a feature that is claimed to be universal or near-universal in human language (e.g. nouns/verbs, recursion, response timing). What explanations have been proposed for why this is found in (nearly) every language?
In this essay, we focus on the feature of “nouns/verbs”
1.0 Introduction [150words]
There are estimated five thousand languages currently spoken globally. They seem to be different but share some unique principles like word order. For example, the word clause assumes the order of first the subject, then the verb, and lastly, the direct object is seen in English, Italian, and French languages. According to Sam (2016), the universal context refers to how certain basic principles are shared in all languages. The language universals are the ideal facts existing in every language globally. The different language and linguistic students need to appreciate the concept of the term universalism in every language. Referring to Evans and Levinson’s (2009) research, decades of cross-linguistic work by typologists and descriptive linguistics demonstrate the way few and unprofound the universal traits of language appear, a situation where we are to honestly confront the offered diversity levels to us by the world’s six thousand to eight thousand languages.
2.0 Why universal or near-universal in human language[250words]
The different discussion about linguistic universals has presented cognitive scientists with the impression that languages emerge from common patterns (Evans & Levinson, 2009). Similarly, they are vanishingly limited universals of language in the sense that every language is exhibiting them. On the contrary, diversity concepts can be witnessed in the majority of the linguistic organization levels. Even with the major recurrent patterns in an organization, they are better elaborating as a stable engineering solution to satisfy different design constraints that reflect human cognition and cultural-historical factors. However, Chomsky’s (2002) recent pursuit of the universalist goals rarely suggests that he views the context as incompatible. Increasingly, it seems that he denies the issue of diversity being in existence but presents in a form that hardly demands that we repudiate or downplay the assortment/multiplicity of certain languages.
Since particular languages are schemes of representational dialogue, there is a need to appreciate its plurality. They also hold certain things in common, like they are all systems of representation of a single language. The diversities are easily acknowledged without impugning the invariances and universality of the natural language due to the diversity not being linguistic but representational. According to Burton-Roberts (2004), general grammar (in Chomsky’s terms, the goal of Explanatory Adequacy) is to engulf what humans share as a common species in all languages. The process entails abstracting ways from diversity and detail. Consequently, the stated two goals are viewed in a state of tension. Pursuing the goal of universalists entails the act of risking handling every type of descriptive fact in a language fairly. Nevertheless, pursuing the various descriptive goals will entail ignoring what is shared, making people different. It the creates an avenue where the public will have unique patterns applied in analyzing a given word of communication pattern in public.
3.0 Why nouns/verbsclaimed to beuniversal or near-universal in human language [250words]
= refer to page 159 in
Hopper, P. J., & Thompson, S. A. (1985). The iconicity of the universal categories ‘noun’and ‘verb’. Iconicity in syntax, 151-183.
= Reading 4
Greenberg, Joseph. 1963. Some Universals of Grammar with Particular Reference to the Order of Meaningful Elements. In Joseph Greenberg, ed., Universals of Language, 73-113. London: MIT Press.
4.0 What explanations have been proposed for why this is found in (nearly) every language?
The following, refer to
(Evans & Levinson, 2009). 2.2.4. Syntax and word-classes.
Hopper, P. J., & Thompson, S. A. (1985).
Greenberg, Joseph. 1963. S
And you can find others on line
4.1 Explanation + Example 1 [400words]
4.2 Explanation + Example 2 [400words]
4.3 Explanation + Example 2 [400words]
5.0 Conclusion
Chomsky, N. (2002). On nature and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burton-Roberts, N. (2004). Linguistic diversity in a universalist context: Language thought and culture. Beyond barriers, fresh frontiers: Selected readings on languages, literatures, and cultures, 112124.
Greenberg, Joseph. 1963. Some Universals of Grammar with Particular Reference to the Order of Meaningful Elements. In Joseph Greenberg, ed., Universals of Language, 73-113. London: MIT Press.
Sam,A. (2016). 5 Real Language Universals In Today’s Linguistic, Retrieved from https://notesread.com/language-universals/
Evans, N., & Levinson, S. C. (2009). The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and brain sciences, 32(5), 429-448.
Hopper, P. J., & Thompson, S. A. (1985). The iconicity of the universal categories ‘noun’and ‘verb’. Iconicity in syntax, 151-183.
