On the reception and revivification of Cartesian
linguistics
Fifty years after its publication, it is timely to return
to Noam Chomsky’s Cartesian linguistics to explore
what this controversial text accomplished, what it didn’t
accomplish, and for whom. I begin with the context of midcentury
American linguists’ historical consciousness into which
Cartesian linguistics initially appeared, then
review responses to the book by (first) philosophers and historians
of linguistics, and (second) generative linguists versus linguists
not associated with generativism, especially those in the United
States. I evaluate whether the book achieved Chomsky’s own goals,
then close by calling attention to an emerging second life of
Cartesian linguistics, beginning around
2000.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.American historiography of linguistics before 1966
- 3.Response to Cartesian linguistics from
philosophers and historians of linguistics
- 4.Response of linguists
- 5.Did Cartesian linguistics meet Chomsky’s own
goals?
- 6.Cartesian linguistics in the twenty-first
century
- 7.Conclusion
-
References
References
Aarsleff, Hans
1967 The
study of language in England,
1780–1860. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aarsleff, Hans
1970 “
The
history of linguistics and Professor
Chomsky”.
Language 56. 570–585.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aarsleff, Hans
1971 “‘
Cartesian
linguistics’: History or
fantasy?”
Language
Sciences 17: 1–12.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Appleby, Joyce
1989 “
One
good turn deserves another: Moving beyond the linguistic; A
response to David
Harlan”.
The American
Historical
Review 94: 5. 1326–1332.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Behme, Christina
2009 [
Review
of the book Cartesian
linguistics (3rd
ed.)].
Metapsychology Online
Reviews 13:36. On-line:
[URL] (last
access 1 January 2018).
Behme, Christina
2014a “
A
‘Galilean’ science of
language” [Review of the
book
The science of language: Interviews with James
McGilvray].
Journal of
Linguistics 50.671–704.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Behme, Christina
2014b Evaluating
Cartesian linguistics: From historical antecedents to
computational
modeling. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Behme, Christina
2015 “
Is
the ontology of biolinguistics
coherent?”
Language
Sciences 47.32–42.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Blitman, Delphine
2010 “
Chomsky
et l’empirisme: de la critique de l’empirisme au sens de
l’innéisme et du rationalisme
chomskyens”.
Histoire
Épistémologie
Langage 32:1. 139–167.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bloomfield, Leonard
1933 Language. New York: Holt.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boeckx, Cedric
2010 Language
in cognition: Uncovering mental structures and the rules
behind
them. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boeckx, Cedric
2011 “
Some
reflections on Darwin’s problem in the context of Cartesian
biolinguistics”. In
The
biolinguistic
enterprise, ed. by
Anna Maria di Sciullo, and
Cedric Boeckx, 42–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boeckx, Cedric
2013 “
Biolinguistics:
Fact, fiction, and
forecast”.
Biolinguistics 7.316–328.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boeckx, Cedric
2015 “
Beyond
Humboldt’s problem: Reflections on biolinguistics and its
relation to generative
grammar”.
Language
Sciences 50.127–132.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boeckx, Cedric, and Kleanthes K. Grohmann
2007 “
The
Biolinguistics
manifesto”.
Biolinguistics 1.1–8.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bracken, Harry M.
1970 “
Chomsky’s
variation on a theme by
Descartes”.
Journal of the
History of
Philosophy 18.181–192.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bracken, Harry M.
1972 “
Chomsky’s
Cartesianism”.
Language
Sciences 22.11–17.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brekle, Herbert E.
1975 “
The
seventeenth
century”. In
Current
trends in linguistics: Vol. 13. Historiography of
linguistics, ed. by
Thomas A. Sebeok, 277–382. The Hague: Mouton.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Breva-Claramonte, Manuel
1977 “
Sanctius’s
antecedents: The beginnings of transformational
grammar”.
Language
Sciences 44.10–18 (Part
1) & 45.6–21 (Part
2).
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
1964 “
The
logical basis of linguistic
theory”. In
Proceedings
of the Ninth International Congress of
Linguists”, ed. by
Horace G. Lunt, 914–978. The Hague: Mouton.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
1965 Aspects
of the theory of
syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
1966 Cartesian
linguistics: A chapter in the history of rationalist
thought. New York: Harper and Row. 2nd
ed. 2002, New Zealand: Cybereditions; 3rd
ed. (ed. and with Introduction by
James
McGilvray) 2009, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
1973,
July 19. “
Chomsky
replies” [Letter to the
editor].
The New York Review of
Books 19.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
1979 Language
and responsibility. New York: Pantheon Books.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
1986 Knowledge
of language. New York: Praeger.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
2004a “
The
Biolinguistic perspective after 50
Years”.
Quaderni del
Dipartimento di Linguistica, Universita di
Firenze 14.3–12.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
2004b The
generative enterprise revisited: Discussions with Riny
Huybregts, Henk van Riemsdijk, Naoki Fukui, and Mihoko
Zushi. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
2009 “
Thoughts
on minds and
language”.
International
Journal on Humanistic
Ideology 1.13–42.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam
2017 “
The
Galilean
challenge”.
Inference:
International Review of
Science 3:1 On-line:
[URL] (last
access 1 January 2018).
Chomsky, Noam, and Michel Foucault
1971/2006 “
Human
nature: Justice versus power: A debate between Noam Chomsky
and Michel
Foucault”.
Originally broadcast on Dutch television November 1971 Transcript
published 2006 in
Noam Chomsky and
Michel Foucault,
The
Chomsky-Foucault
debate, 1–67. New York: The New Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam, and Morris Halle
1968 The
sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cooper, David E.
1972 “
Innateness:
Old and new”.
The
Philosophical
Review 81.465–483.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Danto, Arthur C.
1975 “
Preface”.
General
and rational grammar: The Port-Royal
grammar, by
Antoine Arnauld and
Claude Lancelot (
Jacques Rieux, and
Bernard E. Rollin, eds. and
trans.), 11–17. The Hague: Mouton.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeGraff, Michel
2001 “
On
the origin of creoles: A Cartesian critique of Neo-Darwinian
linguistics”.
Linguistic
Typology 5:2.213–310.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dik, S. C., J. G. Kooij, and E. M. Uhlenbeck
1968 “
Some
impressions of the Tenth International Congress of
Linguists”.
Lingua 19.225–232.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fellman, Jack
1976 “
Concerning
the validity of the term ‘Cartesian
linguistics.’”.
Linguistics 182.35–37.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Freidin, Robert
1992 Foundations
of generative
syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fromkin, Victoria, and Robert Rodman
(
1974)
An
introduction to language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Givón, Talmy
2013 “
On
the intellectual roots of functionalism in
linguistics.” In
Functional
approaches to
language, ed. by
Shannon T. Bischoff and
Carmen Jany, 9–29. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Golumbia, David
2015 “
The
language of science and the science of language: Chomsky’s
Cartesianism”.
diacritics 43:1.38–62.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hall, Robert A., Jr
1969a “
Some
recent developments in American
linguistics”.
Neuphilologische
Mitteilungen 70:2.192–227.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hall, Robert A., Jr
1969b “
Some
recent studies on Port-Royal and
Vaugelas”.
Acta Linguistica
Hafniensia 12:2.207–233.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harlan, David
1997 The
degradation of American
history. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harman, Gilbert
1968 [
Review
of the book Cartesian
linguistics].
The
Philosophical
Review 77:2.229–235.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hockett, Charles
1965 “
Sound
change”.
Language 41.185–204.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hudson, Grover
2000 Essential
introductory
linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jenkins, Lyle
2000 Biolinguistics:
Exploring the biology of
language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Joly, André
1977 “
La
linguistique cartésienne: Une erreur
mémorable”. In
La
grammaire générale: Des Modistes aux
Ideologues, ed. by
André Joly, and
Jean Stéfanini, 165–199. Lille, France: Université de Lille III.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, George
1973,
February 8. “
Deep
Language” [Letter to the
editor].
The New York Review of
Books 19.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, Robin
1969 [
Review
of the book Grammaire générale et raisonnée, ou la
grammaire du
Port-Royal].
Language 45.343–364.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, Ronald W.
1968 Language
and its structure: Some fundamental linguistic
concepts. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lappin, Shalom, Robert D. Levine, and David E. Johnson
2000 “
The
structure of unscientific
revolutions”.
Natural
Language and Linguistic
Theory 18:3.665–671.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Larson, Richard K.
2010 Grammar
as science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lenneberg, Eric H.
1967 Biological
foundations of language. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Meader, Clarence L., and John H. Muyskens
1950 Handbook
of biolinguistics. Toledo, Ohio: Herbert C. Weller.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Miel, Jan
1969 “
Pascal,
Port-Royal, and Cartesian
linguistics”.
Journal of the
History of
Ideas 30.261–271.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Padley, G. A.
1985 Grammatical
theory in western Europe 1500–1700: Trends in vernacular
grammar
I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pariente, Jean-Claude
1985 L’analyse
du langage à
Port-Royal. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Percival, W. Keith
1968 “
The
notion of usage in Vaugelas and in the Port Royal
grammar”.
Papers from the
Fourth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics
Society, 165–176.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Percival, W. Keith
1972 “
On
the non-existence of Cartesian
linguistics”. In
Cartesian
studies, ed. by
R. J. Butler, 137–145. Oxford: Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Postal, Paul M.
2009 “
The
incoherence of Chomsky’s ‘biolinguistic’
ontology”.
Biolinguistics 3.104–123.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rorty, Richard
1984 “
The historiography of philosophy: Four genres”. In
Philosophy in history: Essays on the historiography of philosophy, ed. by
Richard Rorty,
J. B. Schneewind, and
Quentin Skinner, 49–75. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Salmon, Vivian
1979
[1969] [
Review of the book
Cartesian
linguistics].
Journal
of
Linguistics 5.165–187. (
Reprinted
as ‘Pre-Cartesian linguistics’, in Vivian Salmon
1979,
The study of language
in 17th century
England, 63–85 [=
Studies in the History of the Language Sciences,
17]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Salus, Peter H.
1969 “
PRE-pre-Cartesian
linguistics”.
Papers from the
Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics
Society, 429–434.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Searle, John R.
1972,
June 29. “
Chomsky’s
revolution in
linguistics”.
The New York
Review of
Books 18.12–29.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Simone, Raffaele
1998 “
The
early modern
period”. In
History
of linguistics: Vol. 3. Renaissance and early modern
linguistics, ed. by
Giulio Lepschy, 149–236. London: Longman.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sullivan, John J.
1980 “
Noam
Chomsky and Cartesian
linguistics”. In
Psychology
of language and thought: Essays on the theory and history of
psycholinguistics, ed. by
R. W. Rieber, 197–223. Boston Mass.: Springer.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tavoni, Mirko
1998 “
Renaissance
linguistics”. In
History
of linguistics: Vol. 3. Renaissance and early modern
linguistics, ed.
Giulio Lepschy, 1–108. London: Longman.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Riemsdijk, Henk, and Edwin Williams
1986 Introduction
to the theory of
grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verhaar, John W. M., S. J.
1971 “
Philosophy
and linguistic
theory”.
Language
Sciences 14.1–11.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zimmer, Karl E.
1968 [
Review
of the book Cartesian
linguistics].
International
Journal of American
Linguistics 34.290–303.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 june 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.