UG or not UG: Where is Recursion?

©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! !http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! ! ! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! Martin!Atkinson! [email protected]! University!of/Essex! Fahad!Al?Mutairi! [email protected]! PAAET,/Kuwait/ DOI!to!be!assigned! ! Abstract:!The!operation!Merge,!applying!to!two!syntactic!objects!to!produce! a!third!and!instantiating!the!property!of!recursion,!has!been!a!fundamental! and! largely! uncontroversial! feature! in! the! development! of! the! Minimalist! Programme.! In! early! formulations,! such! as! Chomsky! (1995a,! b),! Merge! is! cited! as! a! feature! of! the! human! language! faculty! that! illustrates! virtual! conceptual!necessity,!and!it!is!an!examination!of!this!characterisation!that! stimulates!the!concerns!addressed!here,!where!we!argue!that!neither!of!the! familiar! routes! (satisfaction! of! interface! conditions! or! computational! economy)! provides! a! justification! for! the! conceptually! necessary! status! of! Merge.!A!third!route,!via/considerations!of!‘languages!as!such,’!a!notion!that! includes! human! and! artificial! languages,! may! provide! the! required! justification,!but,!as!Chomsky!(1980)!urges,!the!study!of!‘languages!as!such’! is!unlikely!to!yield!empirically!interesting!results.!Specifically,!this!route!to! justification!will!not!locate!Merge!in!UG!if!the!content!of!UG!is!an!empirical! matter.!This!conclusion!is!damaging!to!the!view!(Hauser!et/al.,!2002)!that!the! emergence!of!recursion!(and!Merge)!is!the!single!development!crucial!to!the! evolution!of!language,!an!empirical!proposal,!albeit!in!a!different!discourse,! that!firmly!places!Merge!in!UG.! Keywords:!Recursion,!Merge,!Minimalism,!UG,!Conceptual/Necessity,!Evolution.!! Resumen:!La! operación! Merge,! aplicada! a! dos! objetos! sintácticos! para! producir!un!tercero,!y!ejemplificando!así!la!propiedad!de!la!recursividad,!ha! venido! siendo! un! rasgo! fundamental! y! ampliamente! aceptado! en! el! desarrollo! del! Programa! Minimalista.! En! sus! primeras! formulaciones! (Chomsky!1995a,b),! Merge! es! propuesto! como! un! rasgo! de! la! facultad! humana! del! lenguaje! que! ilustra! una! necesidad! virtual! humana.! La! problemática! que! aquí! se! aborda! es! precisamente! un! examen! de! esta! caracterización.! Se! defiende! aquí! que! ninguna! de! las! vías! de! justificación! habitualmente!propuestas!(la!satisfacción!de!las!condiciones!de!interfaz!o!la! economía! computacional)! prueba! el! estatus! de! necesidad! conceptual! de! Merge.!Una!tercera!vía!que!considera!‘las!lenguas!como!tales,’!propuesta!que! incluye! tanto! a! lenguas! humanas! como! a! las! artificiales,! podría! ofrecer! la! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 36! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! justificación!adecuada,!pero,!tal!y!como!insta!Chomsky!(1980),!el!estudio!de! las! ‘lenguas! como! tales’! probablemente! no! resultaría! en! conclusiones! empíricamente!interesantes.! En! concreto,! esta! vía! de! justificación! no! localizaría!a!Merge!como!parte!de!la!Gramática!Universal!si!el!contenido!de! esta!es!una!cuestión!empírica.!Esta!conclusión!daña!la!idea!(Hauser!et/ al.,! 2002)! de! que! la! aparición! de! la! recursividad! (y! de! Merge)! es! la! principal! novedad!que!propició!la!evolución!del!lenguaje,!una!propuesta!empírica,!si! bien!es!cierto!que!en!un!contexto!diferente,!que!sitúa!firmemente!a!Merge! dentro!de!la!Gramática!Universal.!!! Palabras! clave: Recursividad,! Merge,! Minimalismo,! UG,! Necesidad/ Conceptual,! Evolución. Resumo:!A! operação! Compor,! aplicada! a! dois! objetos! sintáticos! para! produzir!um!terceiro!e!instanciar!a!propriedade!de!recursividade,!tem!sido! uma!característica!fundamental!e!indiscutível!ao!longo!do!desenvolvimento! do! Programa! Minimalista.! Nas! primeiras! formulações,! como! Chomsky! (1995a,! b),! Compor! é! descrito! como! uma! propriedade! da! faculdade! da! linguagem!humana!que!ilustra!a!necessidade!conceptual!virtual.!É!a!análise! desta! caracterização! que! motiva! este! artigo,! onde! defendemos! que! nem! a! satisfação! das! condições! da! interface! nem! a! economia! computacional! conseguem!justificar!a!necessidade!conceptual!do!estatuto!de!Compor.!Um! terceiro!aspeto,!via!entendimento!das!‘linguagens!como!tal’,!uma!noção!que! inclui!a! linguagem! humana! e!as! linguagens!artificiais,! pode! fornecer! a! justificação!pretendida.!No!entanto,!como!Chomsky!(1980)!reforça,!o!estudo! das! ‘linguagens! como! tal’! poderá! não! surtir! resultados! empiricamente! interessantes.!Mais! especificamente,! esta! proposta! de! justificação! não! localiza!Compor!na!Gramática!Universal!(UG)!se!o!conteúdo!da!Gramática! Universal! (UG)! for! de! natureza! empírica.! Esta! conclusão! não! suporta! a! perspetiva! (Hauser! et! al.,! 2002)! de! que! a! emergência! da! recursividade! (e! Compor)!é!o!único!desenvolvimento!crucial!para!a!evolução!da!linguagem,! uma! proposta! empírica,! embora! num! discurso! diferente,! que! coloca! indiscutivelmente!Compor!na!UG.! Palavras1chave:! Recursividade,/ Compor,/ Minimalismo,/ Gramática/ Universal/ (UG),/Necessidade/Conceptual,/Evolução.! 1.!Introduction*! It!is!apparent!in!Chomsky!(1995a,!2000a!and!many!other!places)!that!the! core!recursive!operation!of!the!computational!system!of!human!language!(CHL),! always!regarded!in!these!sources!as!binary!Merge,!enjoys!a!privileged!role.!For! instance,! in! Chomsky! (1995a,! 378)! he! says: 1!‘Something! like! Merge! is! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! *!We!are!grateful!to!an!anonymous!Iberia!reviewer!for!comments!on!an!earlier! version!of!the!paper.! 1!Throughout! this! discussion,! we! shall! not! seek! to! systematically! distinguish! recursion! from! (binary)! Merge,! following! whatever! terminology! appears! in! the! passages! to! which! we! give! attention! and! on! occasion! resorting! to! the! use! of! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 37! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! inescapable/in! any! language?like! system! …’;! and! again! (2000a:! 101):! ‘One! [operation]! is! indispensable! in! some! form! for! any! language?like! system:! the! operation!Merge/…’.!In!these!two!passages,!we!see!reference!to!‘language?like’! systems,! a! matter! that! will! take! on! additional! significance! as! our! discussion! proceeds.! However,! we! should! also! note! that! Chomsky! himself,! along! with! many! others,! is! not! averse! to! construing! the! necessity! of! Merge! more! restrictively!as!a!feature!of!human/languages.!For!instance,!we!find!in!Chomsky! (1995a:!226)!the!claim!that!‘…!the!operations!Select!and!Merge,!or!some!close! counterparts,! are! necessary! components! of! any! theory! of! natural/ language.’! (italics! added).! And! Smith! (2004:! 88?89),! having! observed! that! Merge! is! a! subpart!of!CHL,!‘the!Computational!system!for!Human/Language’!(italics!added),! goes! on! to! state! that! ‘[Merge’s]! conceptual! necessity! does! not! obtain! so! obviously!for!Agree.’! The!presence!of!something!like!Merge,!it!is!maintained,!is!responsible!for! the! so?called! discrete!infinity! of! language,! which! is! a! property! of! linguistic! expressions! generated! by! the! potentially! infinite/ application! of! Merge! (what! Chomsky!often!refers!to!as!unbounded/Merge)!to!a!finite!set!of!discrete/lexical! items!or!syntactic!objects.2!From!Chomsky’s!perspective,!it!is!this!property!that! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ‘recursion/Merge’!to!signal!indifference.!Clearly,!recursion!is!a!system!property,!as!well! as!an!operation!property,!i.e.!a!system!can!exhibit!recursion!via!a!sequence!of!operations! none!of!which!is!individually!recursive:!binary!Merge,!as!standardly!understood,!is!a! recursive! operation,! and! any! system! including! it! exhibits! recursion.! Additionally,! recursion! as! an! operation! property! is! general,! with! binary! Merge! being! just! one! instantiation!of!this!property.!Also,!we!shall!set!aside!questions!that!arise!in!the!context! of!attempts!to!justify!the!binarity/of!Merge.!Clearly,!there!are!two!questions!that!the! standard!minimalist!methodology!urges:!(i)!why!does!the!Language!Faculty!include! any!recursive!operations!at!all?!(ii)!why!is!one!(perhaps!the!only!one)!of!these!binary! Merge?!The!focus!in!this!paper!is!entirely!on!issues!arising!in!connection!with!(i).!! 2!Discrete!infinity,!according!to!Chomsky,!is!also!the!property!that!differentiates! human!languages!from!animal!communicative!systems!(cf.!Hauser!et/al.!2002:!1576),!an! issue!to!which!we!shall!return!in!Section!6.!Pullum!and!Scholz!(2010)!argue!that!while! it!is!commonplace!for!linguists!working!within!the!Chomskian!framework!to!regard! this! property! of! ‘discrete! infinity’! as! an! entirely! uncontroversial! attribute! of! human! languages,! no! sound! argument! to! this! conclusion! has! ever! been! provided.! The! seductiveness!of!the!ascription!of!discrete!infinity!to!natural!languages,!they!suggest,! has!its!origins!in!what!were!legitimate!idealisations!in!theory!construction!in!the!early! days!of!generative!grammar,!idealisations!that!led!naturally!enough!to!the!inclusion!of! recursive!operations!in!the!theories!being!put!forward!at!the!time.!The!more!recently! developed! constraint?satisfaction! accounts! favoured! by! Pullum! and! Scholz! are! non? committal! on! the! issue! of! discrete! infinity! and! consequently! on! the! necessity! of! operations!such!as!Merge.!!This!perspective!will!also!re?emerge!in!the!final!section!of! this!paper.!!! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 38! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! makes!Merge!indispensable!for!any!language?like!system,!and!the!question!of! how! this! indispensability! should! be! interpreted! will! structure! much! of! the! discussion!of!this!paper.!For!present!purposes,!suffice!it!to!say!that,!insofar!as! Merge!embodies!the!generative!capacity!of!the!Language!Faculty,!recognition!of! the! special! status! of! some! such! recursive! operation! in! human! language! is! readily! apparent! in! Chomsky‘s! pre?minimalist! views! on! the! nature! of! this! cognitive!system.!Consider,!for!instance,!the!following!passage!from!Chomsky! (1968),!a!commentary!on!the!definition!of!human!intelligence!due!to!the!Spanish! physician! Juan! Huarte,! in! which! he! observes! (p.! 15)! ‘striking! similarities! between!the!seventeenth?century!climate!of!opinion!and!that!of!contemporary! cognitive!psychology!and!linguistics.’!! Huarte!came!to!wonder!at!the!fact!that!the!word!for!‘intelligence,’!ingenio,! seems! to! have! the! same! Latin! root! as! various! words! meaning! ‘engender’! or! ‘generate.’!This,!he!argued,!gives!a!clue!to!the!nature!of!mind.!Thus,!‘One!may! discern! two! generative! powers! in! man,! one! common! with! the! beasts! and! the! plants,! and! the! other! participating! of! spiritual! substance.! Wit! (Ingenio)! is! a! generative! power.! The! understanding! is! a! generative! faculty.’! Huarte‘s! etymology!is!actually!not!very!good;!the!insight,!however,!is!quite!substantial.! (ibid.:!9) In!the!same!work,!Chomsky!(ibid.:!10?11)!sees!!an!observation!made!by! Descartes!concerning!the!distinctive!feature!of!human!language!as!supportive! of!this!same!general!idea:!! In! fact,! as! Descartes! himself! quite! correctly! observed,! language! is! a! species?specific!possession,!and!even!at!low!levels!of!intelligence,!at!pathological! levels,!we!find!a!command!of!language!that!is!totally!unattainable!by!an!ape!that! may,!in!other!respects,!surpass!a!human!imbecile!in!problem?solving!ability!and! other!adaptive!behavior…!There!is!a!basic!element!lacking!in!animals,!Descartes! argued,! …! namely!Huarte‘s! second! type! of! wit,! the! generative! ability! that! is! revealed!in!the!normal!human!use!of!language!as!a!free!instrument!of!thought.!! Thus,! Chomsky’s! emphasis! on! the! importance! of! the! generative! perspective!is!not!new,!and!it!is!not!misleading!to!view!this!early!emphasis!on! the!privileged!role!of!the!recursive!property!of!language!as!later!culminating!in! what!Pinker!and!Jackendoff!(2005)!have!called!the!‘recursion?only!hypothesis,’! that! is,! the! hypothesis! that! recursion! is! the! only! uniquely! linguistic! and! uniquely!human!property!of!the!Language!Faculty,!which!was!first!advanced!in! Hauser,!Chomsky,!and!Fitch!(2002).! 2.!The!conceptual!necessity!of!Merge!! We! have! observed! that,! for! Chomsky,! Merge! is! a! necessary! (i.e.! indispensable)!property!of!any!language?like!system,!but!what!kind!of!necessity/ ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 39! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! is!this?!Chomsky!(1995b:!396)!offers!an!answer!to!this!question!when!he!says:! ‘[Merge]!is!necessary!on/conceptual/grounds/alone:!an!operation!that!forms!larger! units!out!of!those!already!constructed!…’!(italics!added).!Here,!then,!we!have! ‘conceptual! necessity’! ascribed! to! Merge,! and! it! is! instructive! to! set! this! ascription!alongside!the!notorious!passage!that!introduces!this!paper!(ibid.:!385? 6):! …! what! conditions! on! the! human! language! faculty! are! imposed! by! considerations!of!virtual!conceptual!necessity?!…!To!what!extent!is!the!language! faculty!determined!by!these!conditions,!that!is,!how!much!special!structure!does! it!have!beyond/them?!The!first!question!in!turn!has!two!aspects:!what!conditions! are!imposed!on!the!language!faculty!by!virtue!of!(A)!its!place!within!the!array!of! cognitive!systems!of!the!mind/brain,!and!(B)!general!considerations!of!simplicity,! elegance!and!economy!that!have!some!independent!plausibility.’!(italics!added)! Two! observations! concerning! this! passage! are! in! order.3!First,! what! it! seems!to!suggest!is!that!the!ascription!of!conceptual!necessity!can!arise!from! either!of!two!ways!of!viewing!language:!one!as!a!cognitive!system!embedded!in! other! such! systems,! and! another! as! an! object! to! which! ‘considerations! of! simplicity,! elegance! and! economy’! apply.! More! specifically,! if! the! Language! Faculty!is!regarded!as!a!system!that!generates!linguistic!expressions,!and!if!the! information! encapsulated! in! these! expressions! is! available! to! speech! and! thought! systems! (or,! to! use! the! conventional! terminology,! the! Articulatory? Perceptual! system! (A?P)! and! the! conceptual?intentional! system! (C?I),! respectively),! then! it! is! a! conceptual! necessity! that! these! two! systems! have! access!to!the!information!provided!by!the!Language!Faculty;!this!latter!must! satisfy! interface/ conditions.! Features! of! the! Language! Faculty! that! enable! the! satisfaction! of! these! conditions! are! then! viewed! as! themselves! conceptually! necessary.4!On!the!other!hand,!if!human!language!is!viewed!as!a!natural!object,! and!if!the!natural!world!in!toto!is!governed!by!simple!and!elegant!laws,!then! those!laws!that!govern!human!language!and!display!the!requisite!simplicity!or! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 3!Here!we!set!aside!any!misgivings!about!the!modifier!‘virtual’!and!we!shall!not! use!this!modifier!from!now!on.!For!particularly!acerbic!remarks!on!the!rhetorical!force! of!this!hedge,!see!Postal!(2003:!599).!To!our!knowledge,!there!has!been!no!attempt!to! assign!it!a!reputable!purpose.! 4!Elsewhere,!Chomsky!(2002:!108)!formulates!this!in!terms!of!an!argument!from! ‘usability’:!‘The!language!faculty!has!to!interact!with!those!systems,!otherwise!it‘s!not! usable! at! all! …,! given! that! the! language! is! essentially! an! information! system,! the! information!it!stores!must!be!accessible!to![sensorimotor!and!thought]!systems.’!Thus,! an!‘inert’!Language!Faculty,!generating!its!expressions!to!no!purpose,!is!regarded!as!a! conceptual!impossibility.!Clearly,!it!is!not!a!logical/impossibility.! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 40! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! elegance! do! so! as! a! matter! of! conceptual! necessity.5!It! is! a! conceptual! impossibility!for!language!to!be!simultaneously!part!of!the!natural!world!and!to! operate! outside! the! principles! that! govern! that! world.! Secondly,! the! passage! also!seems!to!propose!a!contrast!between!what!is!special/to!language!as!opposed! to!what!follows!from!these!considerations!regarding!conceptual!necessity.!As! we! shall! see! later! (Section! 6),! this! contrast! assumes! a! different! form! in! the! context! of! Chomsky’s! (2005)! ‘Three?Factors’! framework,! one! that! opens! the! door!for!what!we!shall!suggest!is!a!problematic!implication!for!the!ontological! status!of!Merge.! We!have!two!routes!to!conceptual!necessity,!then:!one!by!reference!to! interface!conditions!and!the!other!adverting!to!optimal!computation,!this!latter! expression!now!being!used!as!a!cover!term!for!whatever!simplicity,!elegance! and!their!kin!are!intended!to!denote.!Interface!conditions!are!imposed!by!the! external! systems! of! speech! and! thought,! and! optimal! computation! owes! its! credentials! to! the! supposition! that! the! operation! of! the! Language! Faculty! is! subject! to! whatever! general! principles! govern! the! natural! world.6!Before! we! proceed!to!examine!these!two!routes!in!more!detail!and!the!extent!to!which!they! may!be!applicable!to!the!case!of!Merge,!we!should!observe!that!together!they! identify!the!two!core!aspects!of!the!so?called!Strong!Minimalist!Thesis!(SMT),! which!is!introduced!in!Chomsky!(2001:!1)!in!the!following!terms:!‘The!strongest! minimalist!thesis!would!hold!that!language!is!an!optimal!solution!to![legibility]! conditions.’! There! has! been! some! evolution! from! earlier! terminology! to! this! formulation,! with! ‘legibility! conditions’! replacing! reference! to! the! Language! Faculty’s!‘place!within!the!array!of!cognitive!systems!of!the!mind/brain,’!and! ‘optimal!solution’!appearing!in!place!of!‘general!considerations!of!simplicity,! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 5!Given! Chomsky’s! ‘naturalistic’! approach! to! language,! we! link! simplicity! considerations!with!the!notion!of!‘natural!object’!in!this!way!despite!the!fact!that!only! the! former! is! explicitly! mentioned! in! the! passage! under! discussion.! See! Chomsky! (1995c)! for! extensive! discussion! of! language! as! a! natural! object.! Of! course,! there! is! much!here!that!one!could,!and!perhaps!should,!pause!on.!For!instance,!the!notion!of! ‘law’!as!it!is!used!in!the!natural!sciences!does!not!figure!much!in!linguistic!discourse! (although,!see!Pesetsky!and!Torrego!2001!for!use!of!the!word!but!no!discussion!of!its! appropriateness);!and!the!concepts!of!‘simplicity’!and!‘elegance,’!are!hardly!innocent,! as! extensive! discussions! in! a! variety! of! forums! indicate!(in! general! science,! see,! for! example,!Sober!2001,!and,!in!linguistics,!among!others,!Fukui!1996,!Uriagereka!1998,! Freidin!and!Vergnaud!2001,!and!Epstein!and!Seely!2002).!!!! 6!Whether!it!is!straightforwardly!appropriate!to!view!optimal!computation!as! the! result! of! the! operation! of! physical! laws! that! themselves! exhibit! simplicity,! generality,!etc.!is!far!from!clear.!For!some!initial!discussion!of!the!uncertainties!here,! see!Al?Mutairi!(2011:!244ff).!! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 41! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! elegance! and! economy! that! have! some! independent! plausibility.’ 7!More! importantly,!this!formulation!of!the!SMT!invites!us!to!think!carefully!about!the! ontological!status!of!Merge,!the!issue!to!which!we!now!turn. 3.!Merge!and!the!two!routes!to!conceptual!necessity! What!are!our!options!with!regard!to!Merge!and!the!two!aspects!of!the! SMT! (equivalently,! the! two! routes! for! justifying! an! ascription! of! conceptual! necessity)?!Starting!with!optimal!computation,!we!can!immediately!see!that!it! makes!little!or!no!sense!to!try!to!justify!the!presence!of!Merge!in!the!operation! of! the! Language! Faculty! with! respect! to! any! aspect! of! this! notion.! The! methodological!emphasis!on!simplicity,!etc.!in!the!cited!passage!from!Chomsky! (1995b:!385?6)!may!provide!some!purchase!on!why!the!recursive!operation!in! question!should!be!binary!Merge,!a!view!that!has!been!attractive!to!many,!most! recently!Krivochen!(2011),!and!some!have!argued!that!binarity!can!be!justified! by!reference!to!principles!that!play!some!role!at!least!in!the!description!of!the! natural!world,!viz.!Fibonacci!sequences!(Carnie!and!Medeiros,!2005),!but!the! binarity!of!Merge!is!not!what!is!at!issue!here;!rather!we!are!concerned!with! question!(i)!from!fn.!1!above,!and!while!it!may!be!the!case!that!the!necessity!of! recursion!can!be!ascribed!via/reference!to!the!particulars!of!the!computations! the! Language! Faculty! performs,! this! does! not! amount! to! recursion! itself! bestowing! optimality! on! these! computations.! Without! recursion,! these! computations!may!be!demonstrably!inadequate,!but!we!take!it!that!optimality!is! stronger!than!mere!adequacy.8!! Turning! to! legibility! conditions,! the! issue! looks! more! promising.! Focusing!on!the!C?I!interface,!we!may!be!tempted!by!the!suggestion!that!its! expressive!power!is!unrestricted,!in!the!sense!that!whatever!atoms!function!in! this! domain! can! be! combined! with! each! other! indefinitely,! so! producing! an! instantiation! of! the! property! of! discrete! infinity! in! the! C?I! system.! Chomsky! (2000a:! 94)! notes! this! perspective,! without! dismissing! it! as! implausible! or! unhelpful,!when,!in!speculating!about!the!emergence!of!the!Language!Faculty,! he!says:! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 7!Indeed,! there! is! no! explicit! reference! to! the! SMT! in! Chomsky! (1995a,! b).! However,!it!is!hardly!controversial!to!suggest!that!a!version!of!the!SMT!is!implicit!in! the! passage! from! Chomsky!(1995b:! 385?386)!cited!above.!Specifically,!if!we! propose! ‘none’!as!the!answer!to!the!question!in!this!passage!regarding!special!structure,!this! seems!to!us!to!be!equivalent!to!the!formulation!of!the!SMT!introduced!here.! 8!More! searchingly,! if! we! were! to! be! convinced! by! Pullum! and! Scholz’s! agnosticism!about!what!they!(2010:!117)!refer!to!as!the!No!Maximal!Length!claim,!even! the! necessity! of! recursion! in! dealing! with! the! range! of! linguistic! structures! can! be! questioned.! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 42! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! Imagine! some! primate! with! the! human! mental! architecture! and! sensorimotor! apparatus! in! place,! but! no! language! organ.! It! had! our! modes! of! perceptual! organization,! our! propositional! attitudes! (beliefs,! desires,! hopes,! fears,!…)!insofar!as!these!are!not!mediated!by!language,!perhaps!a!“language!of! thought”!in!Jerry!Fodor’s!sense,!but!no!way!to!express!its!thoughts!by!means!of! linguistic!expressions,!so!that!they!remain!largely!inaccessible!to!it,!and!to!others.! Now,!the!Language!of!Thought!(LOT),!as!understood!by!Fodor,!displays! some! of! the! crucial! properties! of! natural! languages! (see,! for! instance,! the! Appendix! to! Fodor! 1987).9!In! particular,! its! expressive! power! requires! a! recursive! syntax.! So,! if! the! conceptual! necessity! exhibited! by! some! (or! all)! aspects! of! the! Language! Faculty! is! partially! driven! by! the! need! to! satisfy! interface!requirements!appropriately,!we!can!immediately!see!in!the!LOT!an! interface?driven!motivation!for!the!presence!of!recursion/Merge!in!language.10! Despite!this,!Chomsky!has!never,!to!our!knowledge,!explicitly!proposed!this! sort!of!justification!for!recursion/Merge,!and!we!must!now!consider!why!this!is! so.11!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 9!A!relevantly!explicit!statement!is!(ibid.:!147—148):! The! classical! argument! that! mental! states! are! complex! adverts! to! the! productivity!of!the!attitudes.!There/is/a/(potentially)/infinite/set/of/–/for/example/beliefR state/types,!each!with!its!distinctive!intentional!object!and!its!distinctive!causal!role.! This! is! immediately! explicable! on! the! assumption! that! belief! states! have! combinatorial!structure!….!The!LOT!story!is,!of!course,!a!paradigm!of!this!sort!of! explanation,!since!it!takes!believing/to/involve/ a/relation/to/ a/syntactically/structured/ object!…’!!!(italics!added)! 10!A!similar!emphasis,!using!quite!different!terminology,!can!be!identified!in! Chomsky! (2004:! 105)! when! he! introduces! IC!(not! to! be! confused! with! C?I!)! as! an! “interface!condition”!and!then!remarks!(ibid.:!106):! The! language! L! generates! a! set! of! derivations.! The! last! line! of! each! derivation! D! is! a! pair! 〈PHON,! SEM〉,! where! PHON! is! accessed! by! [the! sensorimotor!system]!and!SEM!by!C?I.!D!converges/if!PHON!and!SEM!each!satisfy! IC;!otherwise!it!crashes/at!one!or!the!other!interface.!IC!must!be!strong!enough!to! allow!sufficient!diversity!of!“legible”!expressions!at!the!SEM!interface.!Exactly!how! this!requirement!should!be!formulated!is!not!obvious.!At!least!infinite!legibility!is! presumably!required!…! This!formulation!appears!to!require!some!source!for!the!‘sufficient!diversity’! referred!to!and!this,!along!with!the!allusion!to!‘infinite!legibility’,!is!consistent!with!the! C?I!system!displaying!discrete!infinity!and!requiring!this!property!to!be!mirrored!in!the! Language! Faculty.! Interestingly,! we! are! not! aware! of! any! references! to! IC! in! subsequent!papers!by!Chomsky.! 11!It!is!of!some!interest,!particularly!in!the!light!of!the!previous!footnote,!that! Chomsky!(2010:!55,!fn25)!expresses!a!rather!different!view!on!the!value!of!assuming!a! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 43! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! If!Merge!were!conceptually!necessary!by!virtue!of!it!being!analysable!in! terms!of!either!of!the!two!routes!under!discussion!here,!it!would!follow!that!it! does! not! qualify! as! contributing! to! any! ‘special! structure’! that! might! be! associated!with!the!Language!Faculty!(recall!the!contrast!noted!above!between! what! is! special! to! language! as! opposed! to! what! follows! from! general! considerations! of! conceptual! necessity).! In! fact,! if! read! in! the! context! of! the! passage! cited! from! Chomsky! (1995b:! 385?386),! the! formulation! of! the! SMT! above!appears!to!require!that,!not!only!Merge,!but!no!other!language!property! qualifies!as!contributing!to!whatever!special!structure!we!might!attribute!to!the! Language!Faculty;!in!effect,!the!SMT!formulated!in!this!way,!if!correct,!entails! that! language! has! no! special! structure! beyond! the! domain! of! conceptual! necessity.! Now,!this!suggestion!contrasts!sharply!with!Chomsky’s!firm!and!long? standing!belief!that,!if!language!acquisition!is!not!to!be!regarded!as!miraculous,! there! must! be! something! special! about! language.12!Moreover,! and! of! direct! concern!to!this!paper,!it!seems!to!be!in!direct!conflict!with!Chomsky’s!recent! support!for!the!recursion?only!hypothesis! introduced! at!the!end!of!Section! 1! and!to!which!we!shall!return!in!Section!6.!!! On! the! basis! of! the! above! considerations,! the! question! arises! as! to! whether!Merge!can!be!regarded!as!both!instantiating!a!conceptual!necessity!and! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! role!for!the!LOT!in!accounting!for!the!emergence!of!language!in!the!species!to!that! cited!in!the!above!passage:! Note!that!postulation!of!an!independent!or!prior!“language!of!thought”! LOT! raises! all! the! problems! of! the! evolution! of! language,! but! with! the! extra! difficulty! that! we! have! almost! no! idea! what! LOT! would! be,! independently! of! linguistic!evidence.! Adoption! of! this! view! severs! any! explanatory! link! between! the! C?I! interface! and! recursion! in! language! by! maintaining! that,! abstracting! away! from! the! effects! of! language,!i.e.!causation!from!language!to!thought,!there!is!no!reason!to!suppose!that! the!C?I!interface!brings!any!demands!that!would!require!the!emergence!of!recursion!in! the!Language!Faculty.!It!is!also!noteworthy!that!this!paper!was!first!circulated!in!2005. 12!Observe!that!this!recognition!of!there!being!something!special!immediately! gives!rise!to!the!implication!that!the!SMT!(as!formulated!above)!is!untenable/a/priori!and,! therefore,!cannot!be!regarded!as!embodying!an!empirical!thesis;!i.e.,!if!we!accept!the! fact!that!there!must!be!something!special!about!language,!then!the!SMT!is,!ipso/facto,! false!and!no!empirical!research!is!required!to!find!out!whether!all!language!properties! derive!from!general!considerations!of!conceptual!necessity.!Chomsky!himself!(2001,!1)! concedes!that!‘SMT!cannot!be!seriously!entertained,’!while!simultaneously!suggesting! that!‘in!nontrivial!respects!some!such!thesis!holds.’!!Below!(p.!53),!we!shall!meet!an! alternative!formulation!of!what!continues!to!be!confusingly!referred!to!as!the!SMT!that! does!not!embody!this!failing.!! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 50! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! We! now! turn! to! what! we! believe! is! a! problematic! implication! of! the! above!considerations.!! 6.!UG!or!not!UG:!where!is!recursion/Merge?! We!have!seen!that!the!third!route!providing!an!ascription!of!conceptual! necessity!to!Merge!is!based,!not!by!invoking!core!properties!of!human!language,! but!by!relying!on!the!concept!of!language/as/such,!and!we!are!taking!the!latter!as! uncontroversial!for!the!sake!of!argument.!We!have!also!seen!from!the!remarks! cited!above!from!Chomsky!(1980:!28?29)!that!he!regards!the!study!of!language! as!such!as!unempirical!and!having!no!significance!for!the!nature!of!UG!in!his! preferred! sense,! which,! by! definition,! embodies! an! empirical/ biological/ hypothesis.!From!this,!it!follows!that!Merge!is!not!in!UG,!that!is,!it!does!not! form!part!of!the!genetic!component!of!the!language!faculty.!! However,!we!now!reintroduce!the!hypothesis,!first!noted!in!Section!2,! and! defended! at! length! by! Hauser,! Chomsky! and! Fitch! (2002),! according! to! which!recursion!is!the!only!uniquely!linguistic!and!uniquely!human!property!of! the! language! faculty.20 !This! hypothesis! not! only! regards! the! presence! of! recursive!mechanisms!(including!at!least!Merge,!we!suppose)!as!providing!a! genetic! differentiation! between,! on! the! one! hand,! human! language! and! other! human!cognitive!systems!and,!on!the!other,!between!human!language!and!all! systems!of!non?human!cognition.!It!is!also!intended!to!constitute!an!empirical! hypothesis;! thus,! the! authors! (ibid.:! 1578)! acknowledge! that! evidence! for! recursive! mechanisms! in! animal! systems! of! cognition! would! falsify! the! hypothesis!that!recursion!is!unique!to!humans.!Furthermore,!the!presence!of! recursion!in!human!non?linguistic!cognitive!domains!immediately!entails!that! the!hypothesis!in!its!most!straightforward!form!cannot!be!maintained.!Equally,! although!this!possibility!is!not!adverted!to,!we!can!suppose!that!the!hypothesis! would!be!falsified!by!the!existence!of!a!human!language!that!does!not!display! recursion.21 !Most! importantly,! from! our! perspective,! adoption! of! such! a! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! mechanisms!achieve!the!satisfaction.!But!the!precise!nature!of!interface!conditions!and! of!the!mechanism(s)!that!serve!them!is!a!matter!of!empirical!enquiry.!!! 20!See!also!Fitch,!Hauser!and!Chomsky!(2005)!for!further!discussion,!and!Pinker! and!Jackendoff!(2005),!Jackendoff!and!Pinker!(2005)!and!Jackendoff!(2011)!for!concerns,! criticism!and!alternatives.! 21!The!recent!discussion!between!Everett!(2005,!2009)!and!Nevins,!Pesetsky!and! Rodrigues!(2009a,!b),!focusing!as!it!does!on!detailed!aspects!of!Pirahã!morphosyntax,!is! arguably!sufficient!to!establish!the!empirical!nature!of!the!claim.!Supposing!the!Nevins! et/al.!position!that!Pirahã!structures!do!exhibit!recursion!eventually!proves!to!be!correct;! would!this!be!sufficient!to!render!the!initial!enquiry!non?empirical?!We!think!not.!! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 51! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! hypothesis!firmly!locates!Merge!in!UG!in!direct!contradiction!to!the!conclusion! reached!at!the!end!of!the!previous!paragraph.! Before!proceeding!with!our!main!line!of!argument,!it!is!worth!pausing!on! the! status! of! the! empirical! proposal! we! are! here! considering.! Setting! aside! claims! regarding! the! possibility! of! non?recursive! human! languages! such! as! Pirahã,! and! the! difficulties! in! assessing! the! presence! of! genuine! recursion! in! non?human! systems! of! cognition! (Parker,! 2006,! 241ff)),! it! is! generally! acknowledged! that! non?linguistic! systems! of! human! cognition! such! as! the! system! of! natural! numbers! do! exhibit! this! property.! As! far! as! the! simple! evolutionary!hypothesis!put!forward!by!Hauser!et/al.!goes,!such!observations! are! sufficient! to! refute! it,! and! Chomsky! himself! is! well! aware! of! this.! In! response!to!it!(2007:!7),!he!proposes!that!there!must!be!‘a!genetic!instruction!to! adopt!Merge! (or!some!more!complex!recursive! operations)!to!form!infinitely! many!structured!linguistic!expressions!satisfying!the!interface!conditions.’!Thus,! the! apparent! pervasiveness! of! recursive! operations! throughout! human! cognition! forces! Chomsky! to! adopt! an! alternative! whereby! Merge! (or! some! similar! operation)! is! recruited! via/ this! ‘genetic! instruction’! from! what! presumably!has!to!be!some!antecedently!available!capacity.22!We!suspect!that! we! are! not! alone! in! finding! this! speculation! difficult! to! assess,! and! in! this! context!it!is!noteworthy!that!some!of!Chomsky’s!most!ardent!supporters!have! sought!to!develop!different!perspectives!on!Merge!while!retaining!contact!with! the! evolutionary! question.! However,! these! developments! have! themselves! embraced! some! odd! claims,! an! observation! that! may! be! indicative! of! some! fundamental!insecurities!in!this!area!of!discussion.!Here!we!mention!just!one! case.! In! Boeckx! (2009:! 48),! we! find! the! suggestion! that! Merge! should! be! decomposed! into! two! ‘fairly! basic! operations,’! Concatenate! and! Copy,! the! former! amounting! to! set! formation! plus! ordering! and! the! latter! determining! what!should!function!as!the!head!of!a!complex!linguistic!object.!!There!are!at! least!two!observations!that!need!to!be!made!about!this!proposal.!First,!Boeckx’s! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 22 Of! course,! possibilities! multiply.!Maybe! evolution! provides! a! ‘generic’! recursive! capacity! that! is! recruited! by! distinct! cognitive! systems,! taking! somewhat! different!forms!in!each;!maybe!recursion/Merge!shows!up!first!in!the!Language!Faculty! and!is!later!recruited!to!the!system!of!natural!numbers,!the!system!of!planning,!etc.! Maybe! …! We! should! be! mindful! of! Lewontin’s! (1998:! 111)! observation! that! ‘[r]constructions!of! the! evolutionary! history! and! the! causal! mechanisms! of! the! acquisition! of! linguistic! competence! or! numerical! ability! are! nothing! more! than! a! mixture!of!pure!speculation!and!inventive!stories.’!It!is!also!not!clear!how!to!reconcile! this! ready! adoption! of! the! ‘genetic! instruction’! strategy! with! the! unsympathetic! attitude!to!the!LOT!highlighted!in!fn.!11.! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 52! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! reliance!on!concatenation!appears!to!indicate!a!failure!to!understand!the!nature! of!Merge,!at!least!as!this!latter!is!understood!in!Chomsky’s!own!work.!Merge!is! simply! set! formation,! whereas! concatenation! involves! an! additional! step! whereby!order!is!introduced!to!the!complex!product;!given!this,!the!proposal!to! ‘decompose’! Merge! into! something! including! Concatenate! is! nonsensical.23! Second,!and!more!importantly!in!the!current!context,!Boeckx!continues!(ibid.):!! these!two!operations!…!need!not!be!linguistically!specific.!These! might! have! been! recruited! from! other! systems! that! presumably! exist.! I! haven’t! checked,! …! But! it! is! the! combination! of! these! two! presumably! general!processes!that!gives!you!the!specificity!that!linguistic!structures! display.!(Boeckx,!2009:!48)! Thus,!here!there!is!no!mysterious!genetic!instruction!but!arguably!it!is! replaced! by! something! equally! unsatisfactory,! the! coming! together! of! two! presumably/ pre?existing! capacities.! The! presumption! that! these! exist! although! Boeckx!‘[hasn’t]!checked’!does,!we!feel,!take!speculation!to!a!point!where!the! chances! of! meaningful! assessment! are! remote.! And! we! note! that,! even! if! empirical!enquiry!were!to!substantiate!this!degree!of!speculation,!still!further! checking!would!be!needed!to!examine!whether!the!two!systems!in!question!not! only!exist!but!also!do!not!operate!in!tandem!outside!the!linguistic!system.!Such! joint!operation,!if!it!were!found!to!exist,!would!require!Boeckx!to!fall!back!on! some!variant!of!Chomsky’s!genetic!instruction!strategy,!one!might!suppose.!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 23 !Chomsky! himself! makes! the!same! point! in! his! response! to! Boeckx’s! contribution!(p.!52).!By!the!end!of!the!exchange,!Boeckx!has!conceded!that!when!he! used!Concatenate!he!didn’t!mean!concatenate!at!all!but!simply!set!formation.!Thus,!the! proposal!appears!to!be!one!for!‘decomposing’!set!formation!into!set!formation!plus! labelling! –! still! nonsensical,! unless! we! suppose,! as! suggested! below,! that! Boeckx’s! Merge! is! not! to! be! identified! with! Chomsky’s.! A! somewhat! different! proposal! to! ‘decompose’!the!combinatory!process,!obviously!no!longer!Merge!in!Chomsky’s!sense,! appears! in! Hornstein! and! Pietroski! (2009)! with! the! speculation! that! it! is! ‘labeling’! (which! seems! to! correspond! to! Boeckx’s! copying)! that! constitutes! the! distinctive! human!evolutionary!step.!As!the!Iberia/referee!points!out!Chomsky’s!(1995a,!b)!own! early!work!on!Bare!Phrase!Structure!built!the!specification!of!a!label!(more!properly,! constraints! on! possible! labels)! into! the! operation! of! Merge,! thereby! treating! it! as! a! complex!and!decomposable!operation.!In!more!recent!work,!however,!as!revealed!in! his!exchange!with!Boeckx,!he!sees!Merge!as!simple!set!formation!with!the!identity!of! labels!being!determined!by!economy!conditions!on!search.!The!referee!suggests!that! there!may!be!merit!in!distinguishing!different!conceptions!of!Merge!notationally,!and! we! could! contemplate! introducing! MERGE1!to! refer! to! set! formation! and! labelling,! MERGE2!!for!concatenation!and!labelling,!etc.!Nothing!but!obfuscation!is!achieved!by! referring!to!distinct!operations!with!the!same!term.!!!!! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 53! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! Returning!to!our!main!theme,!it!might!be!maintained!that!the!proposals! developed!by!Chomsky!in!his!association!with!the!biologists!Hauser!and!Fitch! should! be! kept! separate! from! his! more! circumscribed! linguistic! work,! particularly!as!the!former!contains!no!mention!of!Merge,!focusing!instead!on! the! more! general! idea! of! recursion! (cf.! fn.! 1! at! the! beginning! of! this! paper).! However,! any! such! manoeuvre! becomes! difficult! to! justify! once! we! acknowledge!the!three?factor!framework!first!introduced!explicitly!in!Chomsky! (2005).! There,! we! find! the! suggestion! that! the! growth! of! language! in! the! individual! is! determined! by! the! interaction! of! three! factors:! (1)! genetic! endowment;! (2)! experience;! and! (3)! general! principles! not! specific! to! the! language!faculty.24!Given!these!three!factors,!a!‘principled!explanation’!of!the! language!faculty!and!its!properties!may!be!achieved,!Chomsky!maintains!(ibid.:! 9)!!by!shifting!the!burden!of!explanation!from!genetic!endowment!(Factor!1)!to! general!principles!not!specific!to!the!language!faculty!(Factor!3).!It!is!important! to!be!clear!that!what!is!subsumed!under!general!principles!here!includes!the! two! aspects! of! the! SMT! from! Chomsky! (2001)! introduced! earlier! (p.! 40),! i.e.! legibility! conditions! and! optimal! computation.! Thus! the! SMT! in! that! formulation! is! an! explanatory! thesis,! as! understood! here,! embodying! the! principled!explanation! that!the! minimalist!approach! strives!for.! However,!as! noted!earlier,!the!SMT!in!that!formulation!is!false!in!that!it!leaves!no!room!for! what! is! special! about! language,! and! in! Chomsky! (2010:! 52)! we! meet! a! substantively!different!formulation!as!a!thesis!that!holds!‘that!language!keeps!to! the! simplest! recursive! operation,! Merge,! and! is! perfectly! designed! to! satisfy! interface!conditions.’!!Thus,!Merge!is!added!to!the!general!principles!implicit!in! the!optimal!satisfaction!of!interface!conditions,!and!it!is!clear!that!Chomsky!is! proposing!here!to!confine!genetic!endowment!to!the!recursive!operation!Merge.! In! this! he! is! being! entirely! consistent! with! the! hypothesis! he! advanced! in! collaboration!with!Hauser!and!Fitch,!namely!the!recursion?only!hypothesis,!and! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 24!!Krivochen!(2011:!22)!illustrates!some!of!the!confusion!that!is!all!too!apparent! when!the!question!of!the!range!of!recursion!in!human!cognition!is!considered!in!the! context!of!this!framework.!He!maintains!that!‘merge/is!the!one!and!only!combinatory! mechanism!in!the!human!mind,!regardless!of!the!module,’!but!goes!on!to!state!that!the! ‘only!thing!we!can!say!for!sure!is!that!this!operation!belongs!to!Chomsky’s!…!first/factor,! genetic! endowment,! that! is,! it! is! not! acquired! but! given’! (italics! in! original).! Here,! Krivochen!fails!to!distinguish!between!that!which!is!genetically!given!and!that!which!is! available!via/the!operation!of!general!physical!principles,!what!Cherniak!(2005,!2009)! refers!to!as!nonRgenomic/nativism.!This!latter,!while!also!‘given’,!as!opposed!to!‘learned’,! is!not!part!of!genetic!endowment.!Our!understanding!is!that!a!capacity!that!extends! across!a!number!of!cognitive!domains!will!be!a!candidate!for!representing!Chomsky’s! third! factor,! unless! the! account! is! supplemented! by! something! like! the! genetic! instruction!strategy!mentioned!above.! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 54! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! he! is! explicitly! committing! himself! to! the! proposition! that! Merge! should! be! located! inside! UG.! Moreover,! Merge! (qua/ genetic! property)! will,! from! the! perspective!of!the!passage!cited!above!from!Chomsky!(1980:!28?29),!belong!to! the!“biologically!necessary!properties!of!language,”!and!as!such!it!is!in!need!of! empirical! justification.! So! long! as! this! is! maintained,! the! third! route! to! the! ascription!of!conceptual!necessity!cannot!be!applied!to!Merge.25! How!might!we!respond!to!the!dilemma,!if!that!is!what!it!is,!raised!by!the! above! considerations?! We! believe! that! the! answer! to! this! question! is! rather! straightforward,! but! that! it! has! one! rather! significant! implication! for! the! practice!of!theoretical!linguistics.!To!approach!this,!we!first!return!to!examples! where! Chomsky! relies! on! talk! of! conceptual! necessity,! and! we! note! that! sometimes!(but!not!always)!he!includes!a!rider!referring!to!the!adoption!of!a! general!framework!or!outlook.!For!instance,!in!Chomsky!(1995a:!169),!a!passage! already!noted!in!fn.!15,!he!says:!‘So!far!we!are!within!the!domain!of!virtual! conceptual!necessity,!at/least/if/the/general/outlook/is/adopted’!(italics!added).!The! ‘general!outlook’!in!this!specific!context!includes!the!propositions!that!there!are! at! least! two! interface! levels! and! that! there! is! a! lexicon! and! a! computational! system,!and!we!could,!without!fear!of!contradiction,!add!the!proposition!that! the!Language!Faculty!contains!one!or!more!combinatorial!operations.!Now,!we! maintain! that! recognition! of! the! rider! renders! the! ascription! of! conceptual! necessity!to!the!propositions!that!constitute!its!content!entirely!innocent.!To!see! why,!we!can!think!informally!in!the!possible!worlds!framework!for!interpreting! modalities.! Thus,! it! is! standard! to! maintain! that! a! proposition! is! logically! necessary!if!and!only!if!it!is!true!in!all!worlds!in!which!the!truths!of!logic!obtain! ?!the!truths!of!logic!themselves!come!out!as!logically!necessary!and!nothing!else! does.! Now! suppose! that! the! truths! of! logic! are! supplemented! by! whatever! propositions! comprise! the! ’general! outlook’! and! that! we! now! understand! conceptual!necessity!as!truth!in!all!worlds!in!which!the!truths!of!logic!and!our! ‘general! outlook’! obtain.! Of! course,! it! follows! entirely! trivially! that! the! propositions! comprising! our! ‘general! outlook’! exhibit! conceptual! necessity.! And! the! same! would! be! the! case! for! any! set! of! propositions! comprising! a! different!‘general!outlook.’!!Thus,!the!conceptual!necessity!ascribed!to,!say,!the! existence!of!at!least!two!interface!levels!amounts!to!no!more!than!the!truth!of! the!proposition!that!there!are!at!least!two!interface!levels!in!any!system!where! we!assume!that!there!are!two!interface!levels:!as!true!as!it!is!unenlightening.!! Now,! of! course,! Chomsky! and! others,! when! introducing! talk! of! conceptual!necessity,!do!not!always!have!an!appropriate!rider,!and!it!seems!to! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 25!Observe!that!what!we!say!in!fn.!19!above!does!not!apply!here,!for!we!have! argued!that!the!conceptual!necessity!associated!with!Merge!is!of!a!different!kind!from! that!ascribed!to!the!operation!Agree.! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 55! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! us!that!it!is!this!expository!failing!that!has!generated!a!lot!of!the!heat!about! conceptual! necessity.! Put! alongside! this! the! fact! that! riders! rarely! make! the! headlines!and!we!have!a!recipe!for!conceptual!necessity!being!imbued!with!a! power!(and!perhaps!mystery)!that!is!quite!special.!Looked!at!as!we!suggest!here,! however,! it! is! no! more! than! a! rather! tame! attribute! of! the! assumptions! that! comprise!a!‘general!outlook.’! With! the! above! perspective! in! place,! let! us! return! to! our! ‘dilemma,’! which! the! reader! should! note! has! now! grown! scare! quotes.! We! have! an! argument!that!suggests!that!one!component!of!the!‘general!outlook,’!Merge,!by! virtue!of!the!claim!that!it!is!the!key!occupant!of!biologically!understood!UG,!is! subject! to! empirical! investigation.! But! that'ʹs! not! what! happens! with! ‘general! outlooks,’! which! are! assumed! or! taken! for! granted,! but! not! empirically! investigated.26!So!we!have!something!that!looks!a!bit!like!a!contradiction,!that’s! our!‘dilemma,’!and!we!need!to!get!off!one!horn!of!it.!Which!should!it!be?!We! have!referred!earlier!(p.!41)!to!the!agnosticism!advocated!by!Pullum!and!Scholz! (2010)! with! respect! to! the! No! Maximal! Length! claim,! an! agnosticism! that! extends!to!the!requirement!that!a!language!contain!an!operation!such!as!Merge.! It! is! of! some! interest! that! the! different! varieties! of! constraints! satisfaction! frameworks! favoured! by! Pullum! and! others,! where! this! agnosticism! can! be! consistently! maintained,! and,! one! supposes,! a! different! ‘general! outlook’! is! adopted,!appear!to!be!largely,!perhaps!completely,!ignored!by!those!following! Chomsky’s!lead.27!Some!may!see!this!as!a!strange,!indeed!reprehensible,!feature! of!the!discipline,!but!it!is!not!our!role!to!offer!judgement!on!this.!Rather,!we! simply!observe!that!there!is!at!least!one!very!small!exception!to!this!strategy!of! apparent! non?recognition.! This! appears! in! Chomsky! (1995a:! 223),! where! he! opens! with:! ‘A! related! question! is! whether! CHL! is! derivational! or! representational!...’!He!goes!on:!‘[This!question!is]!not!only!imprecise!but!also! rather!subtle!...![but!is]!ultimately!empirical.’!(italics!added),!and!he!continues!to! cite!some!minimal!support!from!phonology!for!the!derivational!perspective.!!In! other!words,!the!choice!of!‘general!outlook’!is!here!acknowledged!as!involving! empirical!issues.! The!general!question!that!this!discussion!raises!is!that!of!whether!there!is! any! useful! ‘space’! between! logical! necessity! and! empirical! truth.! The! introduction!of!conceptual!necessity!into!the!discourse!suggests!that!perhaps! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! 26!In! a! climate! where! many! linguists! have! made! a! habit! of! seeing! analogies! between!what!they!do!and!what!natural!scientists!get!up!to,!it!may!be!tempting!to! think! of! a! ‘general! outlook’! as! akin! to! the! foundational! assumptions! underlying! a! scientific!paradigm!in!the!sense!of!Kuhn!(1962).!!We!shall!resist!this!temptation!! 27 One! can! only! suppose! that! practitioners! of! these! different! approaches! somehow!escape!the!scope!of!Boeckx’s!universal!quantifier!mentioned!earlier!(p.!42).!! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 56! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! there!is!a!species!of!truth!that,!while!falling!short!of!logical!necessity,!enjoys!a! status!that!entails!that!it!is!immune!to!empirical!enquiry!and,!perhaps,!revision.! With!the!uncertainties!we!have!discussed!involving!Merge,!it!has!become!clear! that!Chomsky!himself!has!conceded!the!empirical!vulnerability!of!a!construct! regarded! elsewhere! as! instantiating! conceptual! necessity.! With! this! much! conceded,! we! contend! that! the! natural! step! is! to! give! up! the! troublesome! concept! of! conceptual! necessity,! a! concept! that! has! engendered! confusion! among!both!supporters!and!adversaries!of!Chomsky’s!general!approach,!with! supporters! likely! to! chant! an! empty! mantra! and! adversaries! prone! to! see! inflated!and!unjustified!content!where!none!exists.!What!do!we!gain!by!relying! on! this! notion! of! conceptual! necessity?! To! rephrase! the! question! in! a! not! innocent! way:! What! do! we! lose! by! not! operating! with! this! notion?! What! is! important! is! to! be! explicit! about! what! amounts! to! no! more! than! the! foundational!assumptions!of!a!specific!approach!to!linguistic!description.!! In!conclusion,!then,!it!would!appear!that!if!Chomsky!wishes!to!maintain! his!claims!about!the!biological!status!of!Merge,!he,!along!with!those!following! him,! will! need! to! acknowledge! the! empirical! status! of! the! ‘general! outlook,’! acknowledgement! that! one! might! hope! would! lead! to! some! meaningful! dialogue! between! those! who! have! adopted! the! framework! he! favours! and! others!whose!‘general!outlook’!has!taken!a!different!form.! We!hope!that!this!paper!has!made!a!convincing!case!for!a!debilitating! tension!between!the!minimalist!justifications!of!Merge!as!a!conceptual!necessity! on!the!one!hand,!and!as!a!biological!attribute!on!the!other.!This!tension!renders! the!ontological!status!of!Merge!uncertain;!for,!given!UG!as!a!biological!entity,! the! question! arises! as! to! whether! Merge! falls! inside! or! outside! UG.! If! it! is! considered! to! be! inside! UG,! then! a! justification! for! its! privileged! status! as! a! conceptual! necessity! becomes! urgent! if,! on! the! other! hand,! Merge! is! to! be! viewed! as! falling! outside! the! scope! of! UG! (or! even! as! extending! beyond! language!into!other!cognitive!domains),!then!the!question!that!arises!is!that!of! what!makes!language!a!prerogative!of!our!species.!We!believe!that!this!tension! remains!unresolved!and!will!continue!to!be!so,!unless!steps!are!taken!to!make! explicit!what!are!foundational!assumptions!in!one!approach!to!the!nature!of! language! and! linguistic! theory.! With! these! steps! in! place,! we! can! hope! that! proper! debate! between! linguists! who! currently! appear! to! share! little! will! become!possible.!! REFERENCES! Al?Mutairi,!Fahad.!2011.!The/Strong/Minimalist/Thesis:/Its/nature/and/plausibility.! Colchester:!University!of!Essex!PhD!Thesis.! Boeckx,!Cedric.!2006.!Linguistic/Minimalism.!Oxford:!Oxford!University!Press.!! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 57! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! Boeckx,!Cedric.!2009.!The!nature!of!Merge:!consequences!for!language,!mind! and!biology.!In!Massimo!Piattelli?Palmarini!et/al.!(eds).! Carnie,!Andrew!&!David!Medeiros.!2005.!Tree!maximization!and!the!Extended! Projection!Principle.!Coyote/Working/Papers/in/Linguistics!14./51—55.! Cherniak,! Christopher.! 2005.! Innateness! and! brain?wiring! optimization:! non? genomic!nativism.!In!A.!Zhilao!(ed.),!Evolution,/Rationality/and/Cognition.! London!&!New!York:!Routledge.!! Cherniak,! Christopher.! 2009.! Brain! wiring! optimization! and! non?genomic! nativism.,!In!Piattelli?Palmarini!et/al.!(eds).! Chomsky,!Noam.!1968.!Language/and/Mind.!New!York:!Harcourt!Brace!&!World,! Inc.! Chomsky,!Noam.!1980.!Rules/and/Representations.!!Oxford:!Blackwell.! Chomsky,!Noam.!1995a.!The/Minimalist/Program.!Cambridge,!MA:!MIT!Press.! Chomsky,! Noam.! 1995b.! Bare! Phrase! Structure.! In! Gert! Webelhuth! (ed.),! Government/ and/ Binding/ Theory/ and/ the/ Minimalist/ Program.! Oxford:! Blackwell.! Chomsky,!Noam.!1995c.!Language!and!nature.!!Mind!104.!1—61./ Chomsky,!Noam.!2000a.!Minimalist!inquiries:!the!framework.!In!Roger!Martin,! David!Michaels!&!Juan!Uriagereka!(eds),!Step/by/Step:/Essays/in/Minimalist/ Syntax/in/Honor/of/Howard/Lasnik.!Cambridge,!MA:!MIT!Press.! Chomsky,! Noam.! 2000b.! New/ Horizons/ in/ the/ Study/ of/ Language/ and/ Mind.! Cambridge:!Cambridge!University!Press.! Chomsky,!Noam.!2001.!Derivation!by!phase.!In!Michael!Kenstowicz!(ed.).! Chomsky,!Noam.!2002.!On/Nature/and/Language.!Edited!by!Adriana!Belletti!and! Luigi!Rizzi.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!University!Press.! Chomsky,!Noam.!2004.!Beyond!explanatory!adequacy.!In!Adriana!Belletti!(ed.),! Structures/ and/ Beyond:! Volume/ 3:! The/ Cartography/ of/ Syntactic/ Structures.! Oxford:!Oxford!University!Press.! Chomsky,!Noam.!2005.!Three!factors!in!language!design.!Linguistic/Inquiry/36.! 1—22.! Chomsky,! Noam.! 2007.! Approaching! UG! from! below.! In! Uli! Sauerland! and! Hans?Martin!Gärtner!(eds),!Interfaces/+/Recursion/=/Language?:/Chomsky’s/ Minimalism/and/the/View/from/SyntaxRSemantics.!Berlin:!de!Gruyter.! Chomsky,!Noam.!2010.!Some!simple!evo?devo!theses:!how!true!might!they!be! for!language?!In! Richard! Larson,!Viviane!Déprez! &! Hiroko!Yamakido! (eds),! The/ Evolution/ of/ Human/ Language:/ Biolinguistic/ Perspectives.! Cambridge:!Cambridge!University!Press.! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!! ISSN!1989?8525! 58! UG!or!not!UG:!Where!is!Recursion?! Epstein,! Samuel! &! Daniel! Seeley.! 2002.! Introduction:! on! the! quest! for! explanation.! In! Samuel! Epstein! &! Daniel! Seeley! (eds),! Derivation/ and/ Explanation/in/the/Minimalist/Program.!Oxford:!Blackwell.! Everett,!Daniel.!2005.!Cultural!constraints!on!grammar!and!cognition!in!Pirahã.! Current/Anthropology/46.!621—646.! Everett,!Daniel.!2009!Pirahã!culture!and!grammar:!a!response!to!some!criticisms.! Language/85.!405—442.! Fitch,!W.!Tecumseh.,!Marc!D.!Hauser!&!Noam!Chomsky.!2005.!The!evolution!of! the!language!faculty:!clarifications!and!implications.!Cognition/97.!279— 310.! Fodor,!Jerry.!A.!1987.!Psychosemantics:/The/Problem/of/Meaning/in/the/Philosophy/of/ Mind.!Cambridge,!MA;!MIT!Press.! Freidin,! Robert! &! Jean?Roger! Vergnaud.! 2001.! Exquisite! connections:! some! remarks!on!the!evolution!of!linguistic!theory.!Lingua/111.!639—666.! Fukui,! Naoki.! 1996.! On! the! nature! of! economy! in! language.! Ninti/ Kagaku/ [Cognitive/Studies]!3.!51—71.! Grohmann,! Kleanthes.! 2003.! Symmetries! in! Locality.! <http://www.punksinscience.org/kleanthes/papers/fest.pdf>.![14/04/2011]!! Hauser,!Marc!D.,!Noam!Chomsky!&!W.!Tecumseh!Fitch.!2002.!The!faculty!of! language:! what! is! it,! who! has! it,! and! how! did! it! evolve?! Science/ 298.! 1569—1579.! Hopcroft,! John! &! Jeffrey! Ullman.! 1979.! Introduction/ to/ Automata/ Theory,! Languages/and/Computation.!Boston,!MA:!Addison?Wesley.! Hornstein,!Norbert,!Jairo!Nunes!&!Kleanthes!Grohmann.!2005.!Understanding/ Minimalism:/An/Introduction/to/Minimalist/Syntax.!Cambridge:!Cambridge! University!Press.! Hornstein,!Norbert! &! Paul! Pietroski.! 2009.! Basic! operations:! minimal! syntax? semantics.!Catalan/Journal/of/Linguistics!8.!113—139.! Jackendoff,! Ray.! 2011.! What! is! the! human! language! faculty?:! two! views.! Language/87:!586—624.!! Jackendoff,!Ray!&!Steven!Pinker.!2005.!The!nature!of!the!language!faculty!and! its! implications! for! evolution! of! language.! (reply! to! Fitch,! Hauser! and! Chomsky).!Cognition/97.!211—225! Kenstowicz,!Michael!(ed.).!2001.!Ken/Hale:/A/Life/on/Language.!Cambridge,!MA:! MIT!Press.! Krivochen,!Diego.!2011.!An!introduction!to!radical!minimalism!I:!on!Merge!and! Agree!(and!related!issues).!Iberia!3.!20—62.! Kuhn,!Thomas.!1962.!The/Structure/of/Scientific/Revolutions.!Chicago:!University! of!Chicago!Press.! ! ©!Iberia:!An!International!Journal!of!Theoretical!Linguistics!vol!4.1,!2012,!35?60! ! ! http://revistas.ojs.es/index.php/iberia!ISSN!1989?8525! 59! Martin!Atkinson!and!Fahad!Al?Mutairi! Langendoen,!Terence.!2003.!Merge.!In!Andrew!Carnie,!Heidi!Harley!&!Mary! Willie!(eds),!Formal/Approaches/to/Function/in/Grammar.!John!Benjamins:! Philadelphia.!!! Lewontin,!Richard.!1998.!The!evolution!of!cognition:!questions!we!will!never! answer.!In!Donald!Scarborough!&!Saul!Sternberg!(eds).!An/Invitation//to/ Cognitive/Science,/Vol/4:/Methods,/Models/and/Conceptual/Issues.!Cambridge,! MA:!MIT!Press.! Montague,! Richard.! 1970.! English! as! a! formal! language.! In! B! Visentini! (ed.),! Linguaggi/ nella/ Società/ e/ nella/ Tecnica.! Milan:! Edizioni! di! Comunità.! Reprinted!in!Richmond!Thomason!(ed.),!Formal/Philosophy:/Selected/Papers/ of/ Richard/ Montague.! New! Haven! and! London:! Yale! University! Press.! 1974.! Nevins,! Andrew,! David! Pesetsky! &! Cilene! Rodrigues.! 2009a.! Pirahã! exceptionality:!a!reassessment.!Language/85.!355—404.! Nevins,! Andrew,! David! Pesetsky! &! Cilene! Rodrigues.! 2009b.! Evidence! and! argumentation:!a!reply!to!Everett!(2009).!Language/85.!671—681.! Parker,!Anna.!2006.!Evolution/as/a/constraint/on/theories/of/syntax:/The/case/against/ minimalism.!Edinburgh:!University!of!Edinburgh!PhD!Thesis.! Pesetsky,! David.! &! Esther! Torrego.! 2001.! T?to?C! movement:! causes! and! consequences.!In!Michael!Kenstowicz!(ed.).! Piattelli?Palmarini,!Massimo,!Juan!Uriagareka!&!Pello!Salaburu!(eds).!2009.!Of/ Minds/ and/ Language:/ The/ Basque/ Country/ Encounter/ with/ Noam/ Chomsky.! Oxford:!Oxford!University!Press.! Pinker,!Steven.!&!Ray.!Jackendoff.!2005.!The!faculty!of!language:!what’s!special! about!it?!Cognition!95.!201—236.! Postal,!Paul.!M.!2003.!(Virtually)!conceptually!necessary.!Journal/of/Linguistics/39.! 599—620.!! Pullum,!Geoffrey!&!Barbara!Scholz.!2010.!Recursion!and!the!infinitude!claim.!In! Harry! van! der! Hulst! (ed.),! Recursion/ and/ Human/ Language.! Berlin! and! New!York:!Mouton!de!Gruyter.! Smith,!Neil.!2000.!Foreword!to!Noam!Chomsky.!In!Noam!Chomsky!(2000b).! Smith,!Neil.!2004.!Chomsky:/ Ideas/ and/ Ideals/ (2nd! ed.).! Cambridge:!Cambridge! University!Press.!! Sober,!Eliot.!2001.!What!is!the!problem!of!simplicity?!In!Arnold!Zellner,!Hugo! Keuzenkamp!&!Michael!McAleer!(eds),!Simplicity,!Inference/and/Modelling:/ Keeping/it/Sophisticatedly/Simple.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!University!Press.! Uriagereka,!Juan.!1998.!Rhyme/and/Reason:/An/Introduction/to/Minimalist/Syntax.! Cambridge,!MA:!MIT!Press.! !