|
Adelaide Research and Scholarship
:
Schools and Disciplines
:
School of Humanities
:
Philosophy
:
Philosophy Publications
Permanent link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/2440/16148
|
| Type: | Article |
| Title: | Nativism and neuroconstructivism in the explanation of Williams syndrome |
| Author: | Gerrans, Philip Simon |
| Citation: | Biology and Philosophy, 2003; 18 (1):41-52 |
| Publisher: | Springer |
| Issue Date: | 2003 |
| ISSN: | 0169-3867 |
| School/Discipline: | School of Humanities : Philosophy |
Statement of
Responsibility: | P. Gerrans |
| Abstract: | Nativists about syntactic processing have argued that linguistic processing, understood as the implementation of a rule-based computational architecture, is spared in Williams syndrome, (WMS) subjects – and hence that it provides evidence for a genetically specified language module. This argument is bolstered by treating Specific Language Impairments (SLI) and WMS as a developmental double dissociation which identifies a syntax module. Neuroconstructivists have argued that the cognitive deficits of a developmental disorder cannot be adequately distinguished using the standard gross behavioural tests of neuropsychology and that the linguistic abilities of the WMS subject can be equally well explained by a constructivist strategy of neural learning in the individual, with linguisitic functions implemented in an associationist architecture. The neuroconstructivist interpretation of WMS undermines the hypothesis of a double dissociation between SLI and WMS, leaving unresolved the question of nativism about syntax. The apparent linguistic virtuosity of WMS subjects is an artefact of enhanced phonological processing, a fact which is easier to demonstrate via the associationist computational model embraced by neuroconstructivism.
Nativists about syntactic processing have argued that linguisticprocessing, understood as the implementation of a rule-basedcomputational architecture, is spared in Williams syndrome, (WMS)subjects – and hence that it provides evidence for a geneticallyspecified language module. This argument is bolstered by treatingSpecific Language Impairments (SLI) and WMS as a developmental doubledissociation which identifies a syntax module. Neuroconstructivists haveargued that the cognitive deficits of a developmental disorder cannot beadequately distinguished using the standard gross behavioural tests ofneuropsychology and that the linguistic abilities of the WMS subject canbe equally well explained by a constructivist strategy of neurallearning in the individual, with linguisitic functions implemented in anassociationist architecture. The neuroconstructivist interpretation ofWMS undermines the hypothesis of a double dissociation between SLI andWMS, leaving unresolved the question of nativism about syntax. Theapparent linguistic virtuosity of WMS subjects is an artefact ofenhanced phonological processing, a fact which is easier to demonstratevia the associationist computational model embraced byneuroconstructivism. |
| Keywords: | Nativism; neuroconstructivism; Williams syndrome; specific language impairment |
| Description: | The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com |
| RMID: | 0020030698 |
| DOI: | 10.1023/A:1023396800448 |
Links to content
(authorised users): | Check full text options |
| Appears in Collections: | Philosophy Publications
|
| View citing articles in: | Google Scholar
Scopus
|
Unless expressly stated otherwise, all items in Adelaide Research and Scholarship are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
