The reviewer criticizes Steven Pinker's 'The Language Instinct' for promoting Chomskyan linguistics, which they argue lacks empirical evidence and relies on circular reasoning. The book is described as frustrating and pretentious, dismissing other valid linguistic studies without proper consideration.
The reviewer finds 'The Language Instinct' by Steven Pinker deeply frustrating due to its promotion of Chomskyan linguistics, which posits the existence of Universal Grammar—a theory the reviewer argues is unsupported by empirical evidence. The book is criticized for its circular logic and the author's dismissive attitude towards other linguistic studies. The reviewer also takes issue with the pretentiousness of the prose, which they feel presents the ideas as if they are divine truths rather than scientifically proven facts. Overall, the book is seen as misleading and unconvincing, relying heavily on speculative reasoning rather than solid evidence.
Quick quotes
Language is a complex, specialized skill, which develops in the child spontaneously without conscious effort or formal instruction, is deployed without awareness of its underlying logic, is qualitatively the same in every individual, and is distinct from more general abilities to process information or behave intelligently.
These ideas are completely speculative (also known as — “pure bullshit”), but they illustrate Pinker’s leap of faith and circular logic.
Calling “Motherese” — which is a seriously studied and empirically proven phenomenon — “folklore” doesn’t make it so.