Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures

Current Studies in Linguistics

by Noam Chomsky

Language and Problems of Knowledge is Noam Chomsky's most accessible statement on the nature, origins, and current concerns of the field of linguistics. He frames the lectures with four fundamental questions: What do we know when we are able to speak and understand a language? How is this knowledge acquired? How do we use this knowledge? What are the physical mechanisms involved in the representation, acquisition, and use of this knowledge? Starting from basic concepts, Chomsky sketches the present state of our answers to these questions and offers prospects for future research. Much of the discussion revolves around our understanding of basic human nature (that we are unique in being able to produce a rich, highly articulated, and complex language on the basis of quite rudimentary data), and it is here that Chomsky's ideas on language relate to his ideas on politics.The initial versions of these lectures were given at the Universidad Centroamericana in Managua, Nicaragua, in March 1986. A parallel set of lectures on contemporary political issues given at the same time has been published by South End Press under the title On Power and Ideology: The Managua Lectures.Language and Problems of Knowledge is sixteenth in the series Current Studies in Linguistics, edited by Jay Keyser.

Genres: Linguistics, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Science, Language, Psychology, Reference

216 pages, Perfect Paperback

First published January 1, 1987

About the author

Avram Noam Chomsky is an American professor and public intellectual known for his work in linguistics, political activism, and social criticism. Sometimes called "the father of modern linguistics", Chomsky is also a major figure in analytic philosophy and one of the founders of the field of cognitive science. He is a laureate professor of linguistics at the University of Arizona and an institute professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Among the most cited living authors, Chomsky has written more than 150 books on topics such as linguistics, war, and politics. In addition to his work in linguistics, since the 1960s Chomsky has been an influential voice on the American left as a consistent critic of U.S. foreign policy, contemporary capitalism, and corporate influence on political institutions and the media.
Born to Ashkenazi Jewish immigrants in Philadelphia, Chomsky developed an early interest in anarchism from alternative bookstores in New York City. He studied at the University of Pennsylvania. During his postgraduate work in the Harvard Society of Fellows, Chomsky developed the theory of transformational grammar for which he earned his doctorate in 1955. That year he began teaching at MIT, and in 1957 emerged as a significant figure in linguistics with his landmark work Syntactic Structures, which played a major role in remodeling the study of language. From 1958 to 1959 Chomsky was a National Science Foundation fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study. He created or co-created the universal grammar theory, the generative grammar theory, the Chomsky hierarchy, and the minimalist program. Chomsky also played a pivotal role in the decline of linguistic behaviorism, and was particularly critical of the work of B.F. Skinner.
An outspoken opponent of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, which he saw as an act of American imperialism, in 1967 Chomsky rose to national attention for his anti-war essay "The Responsibility of Intellectuals". Becoming associated with the New Left, he was arrested multiple times for his activism and placed on President Richard M. Nixon's list of political opponents. While expanding his work in linguistics over subsequent decades, he also became involved in the linguistics wars. In collaboration with Edward S. Herman, Chomsky later articulated the propaganda model of media criticism in Manufacturing Consent, and worked to expose the Indonesian occupation of East Timor. His defense of unconditional freedom of speech, including that of Holocaust denial, generated significant controversy in the Faurisson affair of the 1980s. Chomsky's commentary on the Cambodian genocide and the Bosnian genocide also generated controversy. Since retiring from active teaching at MIT, he has continued his vocal political activism, including opposing the 2003 invasion of Iraq and supporting the Occupy movement. An anti-Zionist, Chomsky considers Israel's treatment of Palestinians to be worse than South African–style apartheid, and criticizes U.S. support for Israel.
Chomsky is widely recognized as having helped to spark the cognitive revolution in the human sciences, contributing to the development of a new cognitivistic framework for the study of language and the mind. Chomsky remains a leading critic of U.S. foreign policy, contemporary capitalism, U.S. involvement and Israel's role in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and mass media. Chomsky and his ideas are highly influential in the anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist movements. Since 2017, he has been Agnese Helms Haury Chair in the Agnese Nelms Haury Program in Environment and Social Justice at the University of Arizona.

Reviews

[-uht! · Rating 3 out of 5]

I bought this book for the title and then was delighted to discover it was the first half of Noam's Managua lectures, the second half being On Ideology and Power, one of my favorite books of all time.

It was a very interesting read. The concept of a genetic predisposition for learning language is interesting, and Chomsky couldn't have stated his belief stronger. Particularly fascinating was the discussion of a universal grammer that becomes realized in the specifics of the one or more languages we learn. Chomsky compares the specifics of any one language to switches that are toggled to one position or another in universal grammer. The examples he gives in Spanish and English are very evocative but ultimately unsatisfying to me. I was wishing he could include more languages so I could see more how universal grammer holds for all languages. These lectures were given over 20 years ago, though, so I imagine a lot of progress has been made in this area.

I also found the idea very evocative that the capacity for mathematics arose as an abstraction from the language ability. That mathematics was not necessary for our survival but that the mechanisms in the brain for representations of "discrete infinity" could also be abstracted for mathematics.

There was also a very brief discussion of the relationship between language and thought at the end of the book, which has always fascinated me to the point of near obsession. This was really the reason I bought the book (thinking that the relationship between the two would be the entire focus of the book), but, alas, I found it was about something else.

Anyway, he says: "The fact is that if you have not developed language, you simply don't have access to most of human experience..."

Favorite Quotes:

"It is a traditional insight, which merits more attention than it receives, that teaching should not be compared to filling a bottle with water but rather to helping a flower to grow in its own way. As any good teacher knows, the methods of instruction and the range of material covered are matters of small importance as compared with the success in arousing their interest in exploring on their own. What the student learn passively will quickly be forgotten. What students discover for themselves when their natural curiosity and creative impulses are aroused not only will be remembered but will be the basis for further exploration and inquiry and perhaps significant intellectual contributions. The same is true in connection with questions that I have been addressing in the concurrent series of lectures on political issues (see preface). A truly democratic community is one in which the general public has the opportunity for meaningful and constructive participation in the formation of social policy: in their own immediate community, in the workplace, and in the society at large. A society that excludes large areas of crucial decision-making from public control, or a system of governance that merely grants the general public the opportunity to ratify decisions taken by the elite groups that dominate the private society and the state, hardly merits the term "democracy."

"Work of true aesthetic value follows canons and principles that are only in part subject to human choice; in part, they reflect our fundamental nature."

[Isak · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Language and Problems of Knowledge" is a mixed bag. It's equal parts the development of a theory of language and knowledge, linguistic analysis of grammar and sentences, and very Chomskian rants on philosophy, science, history, and even politics. While there are great parts, the book is overall only ok; there's bound to be a better scientific update to contemporary philosophy of language.

The first two chapters focus mostly on an investigation of language and knowledge. This is by far the best part, mainly for two reasons. The first is a valiant challenge to Oxford/Wittgensteinian conceptions of language that were all the rage in the 50s and beyond. The second is an exceptionally clear formulation of the "universal grammar" hypothesis, which is too often dumbed down and pruned of its most radical features. These two components go hand in hand - indeed, I was surprised to see how much Chomsky's theory developed as a reaction to the "ordinary language" status quo.

The following two chapters dive deep into the weeds of grammatical analysis. Even as someone who likes grammar and has studied it in multiple languages, I found these sections too technical and tedious. While they do make for a thorough example of Chomsky's revolutionary analysis, and may be much more engaging for linguistics students and scholars, these chapters feel somewhat disconnected in content to the rest of the book.

The book ends with a relatively lengthy rant by Chomsky on various things he's interested. I guess it may be interesting to Chomsky fans, but as someone who doesn't care too much about the man, I found it a little self-indulgent. It doesn't help that most of the science he mentions, of which he was an expert, is now outdated by almost 35 years. There's a final session on Q&A which is surprisingly insighful, for the most part.

Aside from considerations on linguistics, what shocked me most about the books is how much the guy's politics and linguistics are similar. Most people who know nothing about his work in linguistics but roll their eyes at his politics claim that he is a genious in the former and an amateur in the latter, and that is the only difference. I think this assessment is wrong. In discussing politics, all the historical facts are right, but he can't resist hyperbolies and important omissions, resulting in an informed, but one-sided account. His linguistics are not that much better. While he may be more of an expert, he is prone to the same exagerrations, claiming that a rival theory is, for example, broken beyond repair, rather than merely implausible given a counterexample.

Overall, I would recommend the first two chapters to anyone studying philosophy of language, or simply anyone intersted in the "universal grammar" hypothesis. They are basically a five. I can't say I recommend anything else.

[Jalal · Rating 5 out of 5]

عنوان الكتاب اكثر تشويقاً من محتواه!
ليس لضعفٍ في المحتوى، والذي بدوره غني جدا، لكن بسبب صعوبة السؤال!

كيف تسنى لبني البشر ان يعرفوا ما يعرفوه على الرغم من قصر تجربتهم في الكون؟ ما الذي يمكّن الانسان من ان يبدع وينتج؟

الأول من السؤالين يسمى بمشكلة افلاطون والآخر بمشكلة ديكارت!!

الدكتور تشومسكي يستنتج ان اللغة هم اهم مظهر يمكن من خلاله الاجابة عن هاذين السؤالين. فهي ميزة خاصة بالبشر (اما ما يوجد عند بقية المخلوقات فهو تواصل فقط) وهي سبب نجاح الانسان.

ولكي يصل الى هذا الاستنتاج، يستدل الدكتور بتعلّم الطفل اللغة. فالطفل ينمو في بيئة تزوده بمطيات لغوية محدودة، ولكن ينمو لينتج تراكيب لغوية لا محدودة. وهذا ينطبق على كل لغة بشرية. هذه القدرة الفكرية لابد أن تكون موجوده عند كل طفل، لا ان لغة معينه محفوظة في الذهن، ولا انها محدودة بما تعلمه.

ولذلك يضع الكتاب نظرية وجود ملكة لغوية، كجزء من التكوين البيولوجي للانسان (وهنا إشارة الى الخلل في نظرية الانتقاء الطبيعي الداروينيه). مع وجود معطيات أولية ومحيط محفز، تتولد اللغة من هذه الملكة،،، عربية او اسبانية الخ.. الإبداع الملاحظ في اي لغة، اي قدرة الانسان على الاتيان بعدد غير محصور من التراكيب اللغوية والتي تحمل معانٍ محدده، هي ذاتها القدرة التي تعتمد عليها قدرته في العد والرياضيات..

القدرة الفكرية، كملكة اللغة، لطالما كانت موجودة كجزء من التكوين البيولوجي، ولكن تحتاج بيئة ومحفّز لتقوم بوظيفتها بشكل الكامل. قد تكون البيئة والمعطيات محدودة او مغلوطة، وهذه الجزئية تفسّر تفاوت القدرات بين العصور، وبين بعض الشعوب، وحتى تجاوب الطلبة في المدرسة.

شخصياً لا أجد في نفسي اهتمام في اللسانيات وعلومها، ولذلك تثاقلت في قراءة بعض أجزاء الكتاب. عدا ذلك، فالكتاب رائع..

[Mattias Ehatamm · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not only was this my first work by Chomsky, but it was also the first real work in Linguistics I have read, and I feel blown away by how much I learned in just a series of lectures. Chomsky's focus on his "4 significant questions" regarding language are topics debated by philosophers since literally the beginning of philosophy, but the lucidity with which Chomsky explains them in each chapter of the book make his tentative answers, likened to the early study of chemistry before chemists had proper observational technology, seem like all but a quantitative science. For years I had heard brief snippets of his opinions regarding the predisposition of humans towards language which on the surface level had seemed far-fetched, but through simple analogous examples of determining which sentences are grammatically correct, it becomes clear that there are "universal" rules surrounding our grammar present in all languages. The technical difficulty of the book increases significantly the deeper he delves into UG specificities, but all is built from a starting point accessible to anyone who knows simple grammatical concepts, and can be understood through careful examination.

If any portion of this book failed to resonate with me, it is ironically the final chapter which presents the concept of ideas beyond human comprehension. Chomsky proposes strong possibilities regarding the inability of our human psychology to grasp certain properties of language, and perhaps due to certain limitations of my own psychology I found myself unable to accept such a concept. Regardless, Chomsky approaches a seemingly subjective field such as linguistics and applies both a philosophical and mathematical lens in an intersection I am not used to viewing so lucidly, and I think I may need to delve even deeper into this subject.

[Jack Weggeland · Rating 3 out of 5]

Chomsky bro 😭

[Rishabh Malviya · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is, without a doubt, the most interesting non-fiction I have ever read. For anyone planning on reading this, I must warn you that it is a fairly challenging prospect - especially if you've never been exposed to linguistics as a subject before. Following the line of thought in the third and fourth chapters will require you to actively think about the examples given. But I assure you, it is well worth it in the end.

If you just want to get a feel of the core idea, I would say that chapters 1 and 5 will suffice. The rest of the book expands on the language aspect of the ideas discussed in these chapters - ideas that are fundamentally rooted in the philosophy of the mind (Plato's forms and Descartes' mind-body problem). These are not new ideas, i.e., they are not presented for the first time in this book; what the book achieves though, is a skillful demonstration of how these ideas manifest in human languages.

I personally feel like the discussion is highly pertinent to the development of human-level artificial intelligence, given the stage we are currently at on our path to that goal. The lectures present a convincing case for why a manifestly human cognitive ability - the 'language faculty', as Chomsky calls it in the book - must be biologically pre-determined and not automatically learned; it gives us a strong reason to believe that current approaches to AI will ultimately be inadequate.

But speculation and philosophy aside - there are still a number of other reasons that you will love this book. Most importantly for me, sitting with the examples and trying to internalize them helped me appreciate, to some extent, how exciting the experience of learning a new language is. Just that feeling is reason enough to read this book. It will take a lot of patience and persistent effort, but as I said before, it's well worth it in the end.

[Dr. André · Rating 4 out of 5]

Die folgenden Anmerkungen und Reflexionen beziehen sich auf die deutsche Übersetzung von Noam Chomskys „Language and Problems of Knowledge“, die unter dem Titel Probleme sprachlichen Wissens in der Übersetzung von Michael Schiffmann erschienen ist. Leider ist gerade diese Ausgabe auf Plattformen wie Goodreads bislang nicht gelistet, was bedauerlich ist – nicht nur wegen der bibliografischen Lücken, sondern auch, weil Übersetzungen (und ihre jeweiligen Entscheidungen) einen erheblichen Einfluss auf die Rezeption philosophischer und linguistischer Werke haben.
Schiffmanns Übersetzung ist kenntnisreich, aber nicht unproblematisch: Sie folgt dem Original in Ton und Struktur zwar meist gewissenhaft, doch es finden sich immer wieder terminologische Unebenheiten und stilistische Glättungen, die die argumentative Schärfe des Originals mitunter abschwächen. Wer Chomskys Werk also aus der Perspektive der deutschen Übersetzung diskutiert, tut gut daran, diese zusätzliche interpretative Ebene mitzudenken.
In den späten 1970er- und frühen 1980er-Jahren war Nicaragua ein symbolisch aufgeladenes Terrain der globalen Systemkonkurrenz zwischen Nord und Süd, Kapitalismus und Sozialismus, Imperialismus und Selbstbestimmung. Das zentralamerikanische Land rückte 1979 schlagartig in das Zentrum der internationalen Aufmerksamkeit, als die Sandinistische Befreiungsfront (FSLN) nach Jahrzehnten des Widerstands den Somoza-Clan, eine brutale, von den USA gestützte Familiendiktatur, stürzte.
Die Somozas hatten das Land seit den 1930er-Jahren beherrscht – mit stillschweigender oder offener Billigung Washingtons. Erst unter Jimmy Carter (1977–1981) kam es zu einem Kurswechsel: Carter setzte erstmals in der US-Außenpolitik auf eine Rhetorik der Menschenrechte und stellte die Waffenlieferungen an das Regime ein – ein innenpolitisch umstrittener, aber außenpolitisch symbolträchtiger Schritt. Diese diplomatische Distanzierung bereitete indirekt den Weg für den revolutionären Machtwechsel im Juli 1979, als die Sandinisten triumphierend in Managua einzogen.
Mit dem Sturz der Somozas verband sich international eine doppelte Hoffnung: einerseits auf eine gerechtere Gesellschaftsordnung im Zeichen sozialistischer Reformen, andererseits auf eine Abkehr von der jahrzehntelangen neokolonialen Bevormundung durch die USA. Nicaragua wurde zum Experimentierfeld für eine neue politische Ökonomie der Peripherie – mit Alphabetisierungskampagnen, Landreformen und einer Betonung kultureller Emanzipation. Diese Phase wurde jedoch rasch durch neue Konfliktlinien überlagert.
Die sandinistische Regierung sah sich schon bald einer aggressiven Gegenoffensive der Reagan-Administration (ab 1981) gegenüber, die die sogenannten Contras – rechtsgerichtete Aufständische, oft ehemalige Somoza-Offiziere – logistisch, finanziell und paramilitärisch unterstützte. Die US-amerikanische Einmischung eskalierte zum offenen Stellvertreterkrieg, der Nicaragua in den 1980er-Jahren schwer erschütterte und internationale Solidarität ebenso mobilisierte wie Kritik an der US-Außenpolitik.
Chomskys Besuch in Managua 1986 – der Ursprung der Vorlesungen, die später als Language and Problems of Knowledge veröffentlicht wurden – war vor diesem Hintergrund mehr als eine akademische Geste. Es war eine politische Bekundung intellektueller Solidarität mit einem Land, das sich inmitten eines ideologisch aufgeladenen Ringens um Selbstbestimmung, Bildung und kulturelle Souveränität befand. Die Entscheidung, gerade dort über Sprache, Wissen und Erkenntnis zu sprechen, lässt sich auch als subtile Antwort auf die epistemische Arroganz des geopolitischen Nordens lesen.
Noam Chomsky diskutiert in seinen Vorlesungen die Spracherwerbsfähigkeit des Menschen, die er als ein angeborenes „Sprachorgan“ im Gehirn betrachtet. Er argumentiert, dass Kinder Sprache nicht durch Nachahmung oder umfassende Erfahrung lernen, sondern durch grundlegende, biologisch determinierte Prinzipien der „Universellen Grammatik“, die es ihnen ermöglichen, aus begrenzten Daten komplexe Sprachsysteme zu entwickeln. Chomsky hinterfragt traditionelle Ansichten, die Sprache als reines Gewohnheitssystem oder als Fähigkeit betrachten, und betont die Strukturabhängigkeit sprachlicher Regeln. Er vergleicht den Spracherwerb mit der körperlichen Entwicklung und schlägt vor, dass die menschliche Erkenntnisfähigkeit über die Sprache hinaus auch angeborene Eigenschaften für Moral, Kunst und sogar Mathematik umfasst. Insgesamt stellt er die menschliche Natur als einen Satz spezifischer, spezialisierter kognitiver Fähigkeiten dar, die durch die Umwelt „ausgelöst“ und geformt werden, aber nicht vollständig von ihr bestimmt sind.
FORTSETZUNG FOLGT!!!!!!!!!

[CTEP]

For the July book club, I read Language and Problems of Knowledge by Noam Chomsky. This book drew my attention because of my interest in language acquisition and Chomsky's work in the field of linguistics. Chomsky approaches this topic from various sides; he not only argues that humans have a genetic predisposition for learning languages and have an innate "biological endowment" to acquire languages, but that none of this can be learned through experience. I found this argument to contradict what he states later in the book, specifically, "The child approaches language with an intuitive understanding of such concept as physical object, human intention, volition, causation, goal, and so on." If languages are acquired through a biological endowment alone, how can understanding be explained? Of course, here, one assumes understanding is developed by experience as well as intuition. It's most likely that I've failed to grasp Chomsky's rhetoric, perhaps I need another read to fully understand his arguments (he is, after all, a known genius). I was more drawn to his discussion about the concept of Universal Grammar. He uses the specifics of the Spanish and English languages as examples to demonstrate similarities in their uses. Although quite evocative, it left me unconvinced since there were no examples given of other languages. My interest in this subject grew particularly after witnessing the struggle faced by the New Americans at my site who didn't grow up speaking English and are now trying to assimilate into a society where it's an absolute necessity to acquire these language skills in order to succeed. We utilize online tools to improve upon their speaking and listening abilities; and while I observe some struggle more than others, the intention behind every one of my clients is clearly present. My curiosity is further piqued by reading this book, why is it that age aside some people have a better grasp of languages than others? If every human has a biological predisposition for acquiring languages, what other factors inhibit people from learning a new language properly, especially if there is such a thing as universal grammar. Chomsky has many similar books and lectures out there about languages that I want to explore, as well as similar topics by different authors. This book was a worthwhile read, especially if you're curious about linguistics or psycho-linguistics, but be warned that it is quite dry and (from my understanding) fails to legitimize many of its initial arguments concerning language. It does, however, give the reader something to think about in regards to the biology behind language acquisition. To be quite frank, reading about topics such as these gives me perspective when I find myself frustrated by the language barrier that's ever present in my interactions with the clients in my lab everyday.

[Sarah Eagle · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a linguist since college, I’ve always admired Chomsky’s work from afar, not reading anything beyond a short biopic or excerpt until now.
A good part of his explanations went over my head, but it’s mostly due to the facts that A.) I’m no longer in an academic setting in which I can break these down with a professor and classmates, and B.) I was reading this a few pages at a time before bed.
Regardless, Chomsky’s brilliance and attention to facts and language structure are not to be underestimated. He truly is an incredible man who still gives us much to think about today. I’ll be seeking more of his literature in the future.

[Katarina · Rating 4 out of 5]

HRV: Od kad sam odslušala Teoriju jezika prošle godine na prvom semestru (i prošla), te čula predavanje o Chomskyjevim transformacijama, postala sam fascinirana i htjela sam čitati njegova djela. Ovo je bilo interesantno štivo.

ENG: Ever since taking my Linguistics class last year in my first semester of college - especially after hearing about Chomsky's transformation of language and after passing the class - I have been fascinated to read more of his work. This was an interesting read.

[Sam Ferrera · Rating 4 out of 5]

good introduction but can still be a bit confusing / require you to re-read some of the grammatical ideas twice or thrice. not sure how people got this first time in a lecture hall but hey. also the ending where chomsky starts to abandon language and just start talking politics is very chomsky but a little irritating. overall good book, first convinced me i might want to study linguistics, later solidified that i probably don't want to do that

[Frida H]

este libro de Chomsky será el único en mi 2024 de un vato.

lo leí porque lo iba a comentar con un amigo, pero ahora me arrepiento un poco porque siento que arruinó mi propósito de sólo leer a morras.

en fin, es un libro pesado. me quedé con dudas y tuve que ver muchos artículos y videos en yt para medio comprender algunas cositas. Aunque en general la experiencia es buena porque el vato trata de ser lo más claro posible.

a mí sí me cae bien chomsky

[David Doel · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very interesting book although a fair amount of it is beyond my understanding. I read a linguistics text prior to reading this, but it didn't help. My problems were due to my lack of knowledge of Spanish. Nevertheless, I believe I have a reasonable understanding of his universal grammar concept. Lectures 3 and 4 were especially tough sledding, but worth the trouble.

[Erin Cisewski · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a novice reader of linguistics, some of the lectures where a bit tough. But, found lecture five thought provoking and accessible for all levels of readers.

[AhMâd Rêfâi · Rating 3 out of 5]

NEED to reread it very complex

[Elena letteraturaeturpiloquio · Rating 2 out of 5]

Pessima traduzione che rende teorie già non perfettamente lineari parzialmente incomprensibili.

[Göker Makaskıran · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dilbilim hakkında giriş niteliğinde bir kitap. Konferans metni olması okumayı kolaylaştırmış, yoksa Chomsky'nin dilbilim yazıları zorlayıcıdır.

[Arianna · Rating 4 out of 5]

sto leggendo talmente tanto Chomsky in questi giorni che sto iniziando a pensare che sta storia dell'innatismo sia vera

[Dave · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although Chomsky is a genius and specialized in a smaller branch of science concerning language...and the problems therein, man does he really get into himself.
Mostly championing his own theories(naturally)He does so in a boorish manner, when not really necessary. It is a good read, but i don't think many people have raised a hnad to his intellectual and philosophical might. This is a relaticely easy read. If you are into Linguistics or Language studies (formation of etc._) this is a must in your library. I just don't subscribe to his thoughts- but he is simply one of the few who have ventured into this subject and one must hear what he has said.
Blowhard of a guy though

[Josh · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book offered a phenomenal introduction into the idea of generative grammar, Chomsky's theory of language acquisition. If you're really interested in theories of language, it's a must-read.

[Naoufal Kharbach]

inspiring

[Robin · Rating 4 out of 5]

a lot of the technical breakdowns were way over my head.