What do you think?
Rate this book
The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P.S.) (Harper Perennial Modern Classics) by Steven Pinker, Harper Perennial Modern Classics
In this classic, the world's expert on language and mind lucidly explains everything you always wanted to know about language: how it works, how children learn it, how it changes, how the brain computes it, and how it evolved. With deft use of examples of humor and wordplay, Steven Pinker weaves ...
Download Link :
readmeaway.com/download?i=0061336467
0061336467 The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P.S.) (Harper Perennial Modern Classics) PDF by Steven Pinker
Read The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P.S.) (Harper Perennial Modern Classics) PDF from Harper Perennial Modern Classics,Steven Pinker
Download Steven Pinker's PDF E-book The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P.S.) (Harper Perennial Modern Classics)
Download Link :
readmeaway.com/download?i=0061336467
0061336467 The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P.S.) (Harper Perennial Modern Classics) PDF by Steven Pinker
Read The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P.S.) (Harper Perennial Modern Classics) PDF from Harper Perennial Modern Classics,Steven Pinker
Download Steven Pinker's PDF E-book The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P.S.) (Harper Perennial Modern Classics)
ebook
13 people are currently reading
86 people want to read
About the author
Stewart Brand
60 books291 followersStewart Brand was a pioneer in the environmental movement in the 60s – his Whole Earth Catalog became the Bible for sustainable living, selling more than 10 million copies worldwide. Brand is President of The Long Now Foundation and chairs the foundation's Seminars About Long-term Thinking.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
February 2, 2025
A FASCINATING EXPLANATION OF MANY RECENT DISCOVERIES/ISSUES ABOUT LANGUAGE
Steven Arthur Pinker (born 1954) is a Canadian-born experimental psychologist, cognitive scientist, linguist and professor at Harvard University. He wrote in the Preface to this 1994 book, “Language is beginning to submit to that uniquely satisfying kind of understanding that we call science, but the news has been kept a secret. For the language lover, I hope to show that there is a world of elegance and richness in quotidian speech that far outshines the local curiosities of etymologies, unusual words, and fine points of usage. For the reader of popular science, I hope to explain what is behind the recent discoveries (or, in many cases, nondiscoveries) reported in the press: universal deep structures, brainy babies, grammar genes, artificially intelligent computers, neural networks, signing chimps, talking Neanderthals, idiot savants, feral children, paradoxical brain damage, identical twins separated at birth, color pictures of the thinking brain, and the search for the mother of all languages. I also hope to answer many natural questions about languages, like why there are so many of them, why they are so hard for adults to learn…
“For students unaware of the science of language and mind, or worse, burdened with memorizing word frequency effects on lexical decision reaction time or the fine points of the Empty Category principle, I hope to convey the grand intellectual excitement that launched the modern study of language several decades ago. For my professional colleagues… I hope to offer a semblance of an integration of this vast territory… For the general nonfiction reader, interested in language and human beings in the broadest sense, I hope to offer something different from the airy platitudes… that typify discussions of language (generally by people who have never studied it) in the humanities and sciences alike.”
He states in the first chapter, “This book is about human language. Unlike most books with ‘language’ in the title, it will not chide you about proper usage, trace the origins of idioms and slang, or divert you with palindromes, anagrams, eponyms, or those precious names for groups of animals like ‘exaltation of larks.’ For I will be writing not about … the instinct to learn, speak, and understand language… The recent illumination of linguistic abilities has revolutionary implications for our understanding of language and its role in human affairs, and for our view of humanity itself.” (Pg. 17)
He observes, “Linguists repeatedly run up against the myth that working-class people and the less educated members of the middle class speak a simpler or coarser language. This is a pernicious illusion… Ordinary speech… is a paradigm of engineering excellence---a technology that works so well that the user takes its outcome for granted, unaware of the complicated machinery hidden behind the panels. Behind such ‘simple’ sentences as ‘Where did he go?’ or ‘The guy I met killed himself,’ used automatically by any English speaker, are dozens of subroutines that arrange the words to express the meaning. Despite decades of effort, no artificially engineered language system comes close to duplicating the person in the street, HAL and C3PO notwithstanding.” (Pg. 28)
He points out, “Japanese and English are looking-glass versions of each other. And such consistency has been found in scores of languages: if a language has the verb before the object, as in English, it will also have prepositions; if it has the verb after the object, as in Japanese, it will have postpositions. This is a remarkable discovery. It means the super-rules suffice not only for all phrases in English but for all phrases in all languages, with one modification: removing the left-to-right order from each super-rule.” (Pg. 111)
He suggests, “If you want to stump an artificial intelligence system, ask it questions like: Which is bigger, Chicago or a breadbox? Do zebras wear underwear? Is the floor likely to rise up and bite you? If Susan goes to the store, does her head go with her? Most fears of automation are misplaced. As the new generation of intelligent devices appears, it will be the stock analysts and petrochemical engineers and parole board members who are in danger of being replaced by machines. The gardeners, receptionists, and cooks are secure in their jobs for decades to come.” (Pg. 193)
He explains, “Linguistically, most left-handers are not mirror images of the righty majority. The left hemisphere controls language in virtually all right handers (97%), but the right hemisphere controls language in a minority of left-handers, only about 19%. The rest have language in the left hemisphere (68%) or redundantly in both. In all of these lefties, language is more evenly distributed between the hemispheres than it is in righties, and thus the lefties are more likely to withstand a stroke on one side of the brain without suffering aphasia. There is some evidence that left-handers, though better at mathematical, spatial, and artistic activities, are more susceptible to language impairment, dyslexia, and stuttering.” (Pg. 306)
He asserts, “Many of the claims of the ape [language] trainers were not … scientific. Most of the trainers were schooled in the behaviorist tradition of B.F. Skinner and are ignorant of the study of language; they latched on to the most tenuous resemblance between chimp and child and proclaimed that their abilities are fundamentally the same. The more enthusiastic trainers went over the heads of scientists and made their engaging case directly to the public on ‘The Tonight Show’ and ‘National Geographic.’” (Pg. 337)
He continues, “To begin with, the apes did NOT ‘learn American Sign Language.’ This preposterous claim is based on the myth that ASL is a crude system of pantomimes and gestures rather than a full language with complex phonology, morphology, and syntax. In fact the apes had not learned ANY true ASL signs. The one deaf native signer on the Washoe team later made these candid remarks: ‘Every time the chimp made a sign, we were supposed to write it down in the log…. They were always complaining because my log didn’t show enough signs. All the hearing people turned in logs with long lists of signs. They always saw more signs than I did… The hearing people were logging every movement the chimp made as a sign. Every time the chimp put his finger to his mouth, they’d say, ‘Oh, he’s making the sign for ‘drink’… When the chimp scratched itself, they’d record it as the sign for ‘scratch.’” (Pg. 337-338)
He summarizes, “Even putting aside vocabulary, phonology, morphology, and syntax, what impresses one the most about chimpanzee signing is that fundamentally, deep down, chimps just don’t ‘get it.’ They know that the trainers like them to sign and that signing often gets them what they want, but they never seem to feel in their bones what language is and how to use it. They do not take turns in conversation but instead blithely sign simultaneously with their partner… The chimps seldom sign spontaneously, they have to be molded, drilled, and coerced. Many of their ‘sentences,’ especially the ones showing systematic ordering, are direct imitations of what the trainer has just signed, or minor variants of a small number of formulas that they have been trained on thousands of times. They do not even clearly get the idea that a particular sign might refer to a kind of object. Most of the chimps’ object signs can refer to any aspect of the situation with which an object is typically associated. ‘Toothbrush’ can mean ‘toothbrush,’ ‘toothpaste,’ ‘brushing teeth,’ ‘I want my toothbrush,’ or ‘It’s time for bed.’ … Also, the chimps rarely make statements that comment on interesting objects or actions, virtually all their signs are demands for something they want, usually food or tickling.” (Pg. 340)
He summarizes, “So the language instinct suggests a mind of adapted computational modules rather than the blank slate, lump of wax, or general-purpose computer of the Standard Social Science Model. But what does this view say about the secular ideology of equality and opportunity that the model has provided us? If we abandon the SSSM, are we forced to repugnant doctrines like ‘biological determinism’?... [No.] Everyone could be born with identical, richly structured minds, and all differences among them could be bits of acquired knowledge and minor perturbations that accumulate through people’s history of life experiences. So… there is no need for alarm at the search for innate mental structure, whatever the truth turns out to be.” (Pg. 427-428)
This book will be of great interest to anyone studying language, and its origin in us.
Steven Arthur Pinker (born 1954) is a Canadian-born experimental psychologist, cognitive scientist, linguist and professor at Harvard University. He wrote in the Preface to this 1994 book, “Language is beginning to submit to that uniquely satisfying kind of understanding that we call science, but the news has been kept a secret. For the language lover, I hope to show that there is a world of elegance and richness in quotidian speech that far outshines the local curiosities of etymologies, unusual words, and fine points of usage. For the reader of popular science, I hope to explain what is behind the recent discoveries (or, in many cases, nondiscoveries) reported in the press: universal deep structures, brainy babies, grammar genes, artificially intelligent computers, neural networks, signing chimps, talking Neanderthals, idiot savants, feral children, paradoxical brain damage, identical twins separated at birth, color pictures of the thinking brain, and the search for the mother of all languages. I also hope to answer many natural questions about languages, like why there are so many of them, why they are so hard for adults to learn…
“For students unaware of the science of language and mind, or worse, burdened with memorizing word frequency effects on lexical decision reaction time or the fine points of the Empty Category principle, I hope to convey the grand intellectual excitement that launched the modern study of language several decades ago. For my professional colleagues… I hope to offer a semblance of an integration of this vast territory… For the general nonfiction reader, interested in language and human beings in the broadest sense, I hope to offer something different from the airy platitudes… that typify discussions of language (generally by people who have never studied it) in the humanities and sciences alike.”
He states in the first chapter, “This book is about human language. Unlike most books with ‘language’ in the title, it will not chide you about proper usage, trace the origins of idioms and slang, or divert you with palindromes, anagrams, eponyms, or those precious names for groups of animals like ‘exaltation of larks.’ For I will be writing not about … the instinct to learn, speak, and understand language… The recent illumination of linguistic abilities has revolutionary implications for our understanding of language and its role in human affairs, and for our view of humanity itself.” (Pg. 17)
He observes, “Linguists repeatedly run up against the myth that working-class people and the less educated members of the middle class speak a simpler or coarser language. This is a pernicious illusion… Ordinary speech… is a paradigm of engineering excellence---a technology that works so well that the user takes its outcome for granted, unaware of the complicated machinery hidden behind the panels. Behind such ‘simple’ sentences as ‘Where did he go?’ or ‘The guy I met killed himself,’ used automatically by any English speaker, are dozens of subroutines that arrange the words to express the meaning. Despite decades of effort, no artificially engineered language system comes close to duplicating the person in the street, HAL and C3PO notwithstanding.” (Pg. 28)
He points out, “Japanese and English are looking-glass versions of each other. And such consistency has been found in scores of languages: if a language has the verb before the object, as in English, it will also have prepositions; if it has the verb after the object, as in Japanese, it will have postpositions. This is a remarkable discovery. It means the super-rules suffice not only for all phrases in English but for all phrases in all languages, with one modification: removing the left-to-right order from each super-rule.” (Pg. 111)
He suggests, “If you want to stump an artificial intelligence system, ask it questions like: Which is bigger, Chicago or a breadbox? Do zebras wear underwear? Is the floor likely to rise up and bite you? If Susan goes to the store, does her head go with her? Most fears of automation are misplaced. As the new generation of intelligent devices appears, it will be the stock analysts and petrochemical engineers and parole board members who are in danger of being replaced by machines. The gardeners, receptionists, and cooks are secure in their jobs for decades to come.” (Pg. 193)
He explains, “Linguistically, most left-handers are not mirror images of the righty majority. The left hemisphere controls language in virtually all right handers (97%), but the right hemisphere controls language in a minority of left-handers, only about 19%. The rest have language in the left hemisphere (68%) or redundantly in both. In all of these lefties, language is more evenly distributed between the hemispheres than it is in righties, and thus the lefties are more likely to withstand a stroke on one side of the brain without suffering aphasia. There is some evidence that left-handers, though better at mathematical, spatial, and artistic activities, are more susceptible to language impairment, dyslexia, and stuttering.” (Pg. 306)
He asserts, “Many of the claims of the ape [language] trainers were not … scientific. Most of the trainers were schooled in the behaviorist tradition of B.F. Skinner and are ignorant of the study of language; they latched on to the most tenuous resemblance between chimp and child and proclaimed that their abilities are fundamentally the same. The more enthusiastic trainers went over the heads of scientists and made their engaging case directly to the public on ‘The Tonight Show’ and ‘National Geographic.’” (Pg. 337)
He continues, “To begin with, the apes did NOT ‘learn American Sign Language.’ This preposterous claim is based on the myth that ASL is a crude system of pantomimes and gestures rather than a full language with complex phonology, morphology, and syntax. In fact the apes had not learned ANY true ASL signs. The one deaf native signer on the Washoe team later made these candid remarks: ‘Every time the chimp made a sign, we were supposed to write it down in the log…. They were always complaining because my log didn’t show enough signs. All the hearing people turned in logs with long lists of signs. They always saw more signs than I did… The hearing people were logging every movement the chimp made as a sign. Every time the chimp put his finger to his mouth, they’d say, ‘Oh, he’s making the sign for ‘drink’… When the chimp scratched itself, they’d record it as the sign for ‘scratch.’” (Pg. 337-338)
He summarizes, “Even putting aside vocabulary, phonology, morphology, and syntax, what impresses one the most about chimpanzee signing is that fundamentally, deep down, chimps just don’t ‘get it.’ They know that the trainers like them to sign and that signing often gets them what they want, but they never seem to feel in their bones what language is and how to use it. They do not take turns in conversation but instead blithely sign simultaneously with their partner… The chimps seldom sign spontaneously, they have to be molded, drilled, and coerced. Many of their ‘sentences,’ especially the ones showing systematic ordering, are direct imitations of what the trainer has just signed, or minor variants of a small number of formulas that they have been trained on thousands of times. They do not even clearly get the idea that a particular sign might refer to a kind of object. Most of the chimps’ object signs can refer to any aspect of the situation with which an object is typically associated. ‘Toothbrush’ can mean ‘toothbrush,’ ‘toothpaste,’ ‘brushing teeth,’ ‘I want my toothbrush,’ or ‘It’s time for bed.’ … Also, the chimps rarely make statements that comment on interesting objects or actions, virtually all their signs are demands for something they want, usually food or tickling.” (Pg. 340)
He summarizes, “So the language instinct suggests a mind of adapted computational modules rather than the blank slate, lump of wax, or general-purpose computer of the Standard Social Science Model. But what does this view say about the secular ideology of equality and opportunity that the model has provided us? If we abandon the SSSM, are we forced to repugnant doctrines like ‘biological determinism’?... [No.] Everyone could be born with identical, richly structured minds, and all differences among them could be bits of acquired knowledge and minor perturbations that accumulate through people’s history of life experiences. So… there is no need for alarm at the search for innate mental structure, whatever the truth turns out to be.” (Pg. 427-428)
This book will be of great interest to anyone studying language, and its origin in us.
July 30, 2025
This was a side-quest alongside two other side-quests which was getting me nowhere fast so I doubled down on finishing this one. It was my first full foray into the world of Linguistics to see if I do want to commit to further postgraduate study 👀 As well as a thorough grounding in many aspects of Linguistics, this book argued in favour of language (grammar in particular) being innate. As someone who has long believed the opposite, this certainly tempered my views. Pinker also introduced me to a side of Chomsky and his work in this field that I hadn’t known about but discovered is no less controversial than his writing on politics. I really need to finish those other two books in the background but already eyeing follow on reads. It’s annoying that the last eight years of study have led me to understand that Linguistics is probably what I should have studied from the beginning - but there was no distance learning option to study this subject when I started out.
November 20, 2023
Fascinating read that is easy to follow for such a complete topic of languages.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews