The Cognitive Architecture of Signs: Al-Mutairi, Chomsky and Saussure in Dialogue

Introduction

The nature of human cognition raises the question of whether a unified cognitive faculty governs various systems of signs, including spoken language, writing, mathematics, sign language, etc. This inquiry challenges us to reconsider how different symbolic systems might be interconnected through a shared cognitive architecture.

Noam Chomsky argues from a biolinguistic perspective that language is a specialized, innate cognitive faculty centered on syntax and the Merge operation. He views language as distinct from other symbolic systems, focusing primarily on spoken communication.

On the other hand, Ferdinand de Saussure offers a broader perspective, emphasizing that language encompasses more than speech, extending to a general capacity for creating systems of signs. He argues that the essence of language lies in its abstract structure, independent of sensory modality, reflecting a unified cognitive faculty.

Building on this idea, Fahad Rashed Al-Mutairi explores parallels between language and mathematics, identifying shared structural properties like recursion and dependency (Al-Mutairi, 2014). He suggests that both domains are rooted in a common cognitive foundation, challenging Chomsky’s compartmentalized model and pointing toward a generalized capacity for symbolic reasoning.

Theoretical Perspectives

Noam Chomsky’s framework, particularly the Merge-Only Hypothesis, posits that the operation of Merge—an essential mechanism that recursively generates syntactic structures—is central to human language. He argues that this recursive ability is unique to language, reflecting a specialized cognitive module distinct from other symbolic systems. However, proving the exclusivity of Merge to language is challenging, as it requires showing that no other cognitive domains utilize similar principles. Chomsky’s biolinguistic perspective focuses on spoken language as the primary object of study, emphasizing the role of syntax and its evolutionary significance in human communication. This specialized view positions language as a distinct cognitive faculty, separate from other sign systems.

In contrast, Ferdinand de Saussure's framework presents a broader view. Saussure argues that “it is not spoken language which is natural to man, but the faculty of constructing a language, i.e., a system of distinct signs corresponding to distinct ideas.” He asserts that the essence of language lies in the abstract structure of signs (la langue), independent of any particular sensory modality. This view emphasizes the general cognitive capacity for handling symbolic systems rather than focusing solely on spoken language.

Extending Saussure’s perspective, Fahad Rashed Al-Mutairi explores the parallels between language and mathematics. He identifies shared structural properties such as recursion and dependency, arguing that both language and mathematics are governed by a common cognitive capacity. Al-Mutairi’s work supports the notion of a unified cognitive faculty for symbolic systems, challenging Chomsky’s Modular approach by suggesting that language is part of a broader cognitive ability that includes other symbolic domains.

Aphasia Studies and Their Implications

Aphasia studies offer important insights into the cognitive faculties underlying language and other symbolic systems. Empirical findings reveal inconsistencies in how aphasia affects linguistic and mathematical abilities: while some types of aphasia impair both domains, others leave mathematical skills intact despite severe linguistic deficits. This variability underscores the complexity of the cognitive systems involved. Chomsky addresses these discrepancies through his competence-performance distinction, arguing that observed variations in aphasia outcomes reflect the separation between an individual’s underlying linguistic competence and their real-world performance. His framework maintains that linguistic faculties are specialized and compartmentalized, focusing specifically on syntax and the operational mechanics of language, rather than a broader cognitive capacity.

However, aphasia studies often support the notion of a unified cognitive faculty for manipulating signs, aligning with Ferdinand de Saussure’s argument that what is inherent to humans is not spoken language itself, but the capacity to develop a language system—a set of distinct signs linked to distinct concepts. This perspective is further reinforced by Fahad Rashed Al-Mutairi’s exploration of the parallels between language and mathematics. Al-Mutairi argues that “language and mathematics share a deep cognitive basis,” suggesting a generalized cognitive faculty for symbolic manipulation, rather than treating linguistic and mathematical abilities as entirely separate domains (Al-Mutairi, 2014).

Comparative Analysis

Ferdinand de Saussure and Fahad Rashed Al-Mutairi converge on the idea of a unified cognitive faculty for handling symbolic systems. Saussure argues that the inherent human ability is not the act of speaking but the capacity to create a structured system of signs corresponding to distinct ideas. This broader cognitive capacity allows for the manipulation of symbolic systems beyond spoken language. Al-Mutairi extends this view by exploring the parallels between language and mathematics, suggesting that both domains share a common cognitive foundation. This perspective implies that linguistic and mathematical abilities are manifestations of a broader, generalized cognitive capacity, reshaping our understanding of how humans engage with various symbolic systems.

Noam Chomsky’s framework, on the other hand, is more specialized, focusing on spoken language as the primary manifestation of the language faculty. His emphasis on the "Merge-Only Hypothesis" and the syntactic nature of language reflects a restricted framework, where language functions are distinct from other cognitive domains, such as mathematics. However, this specialization is challenged by aphasia studies, which reveal inconsistencies in how language and mathematical abilities are affected. These findings complicate Chomsky’s modular approach, suggesting that the cognitive faculties for language and mathematics may not be as separate as his theory implies. Empirical evidence from aphasia research thus presents a significant challenge to Chomsky’s narrowly defined view of the language faculty.

Conclusion

This article has examined the perspectives of Saussure, Al-Mutairi, and Chomsky on the cognitive faculties that govern symbolic systems. Saussure and Al-Mutairi advocate for a unified cognitive capacity that transcends specific modalities. Saussure’s assertion that the natural human trait is not spoken language itself but the ability to construct a system of signs, alongside Al-Mutairi’s exploration of parallels between language and mathematics, points to a general cognitive faculty for handling symbolic systems. This contrasts with Chomsky’s view of language as a specialized cognitive module focused on syntax and the "Merge-Only Hypothesis."

Aphasia studies complicate Chomsky’s distinct methodology, revealing inconsistencies in how linguistic and mathematical abilities are affected. These findings suggest that language and mathematical reasoning may share underlying cognitive processes, aligning more closely with Saussure and Al-Mutairi’s views on a broader cognitive faculty.

Future research should further explore the interconnectedness of cognitive faculties across different symbolic domains, such as spoken language, writing, mathematics, etc. Investigating the shared cognitive principles underlying these systems could deepen our understanding of human cognition and reveal how various symbolic abilities are interrelated.

Yet, as Chomsky himself has cautioned in his lecture Science, Mind, and Limits of Understanding, “Nor do we even know whether these are questions that lie within the scope of human understanding, or whether they fall among what Hume took to be Nature’s ultimate secrets, consigned to 'that obscurity in which they ever did and ever will remain.'” With this in mind, it is essential to approach the study of cognitive architecture with humility, recognizing the possibility that some questions may lie beyond our current or even future grasp.

Related Post

A Conversation with Saussure

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2023/10/blog-post_12.html

Bibliography

Al-Mutairi, Fahad Rashed. The Minimalist Program: The Nature and Plausibility of Chomsky’s Biolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

Chomsky, Noam. Science, Mind, and Limits of Understanding. Lecture presented at The Science and Faith Foundation (STOQ), The Vatican, January 2014. https://chomsky.info/201401__/.

Chomsky, Noam. Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures. Third printing. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1989.

Chomsky, Noam. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist Thought. Second Edition. Edited by James McGilvray. Christchurch, New Zealand: Cybereditions Corporation, 2002.

Chomsky, Noam. Language and Mind. Third Edition. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, 2006.

Chomsky, Noam. On Nature and Language. Edited by Adriana Belletti and Luigi Rizzi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, with Albert Riedlinger. Libraire Payot.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. "Course in General Linguistics." Translated and annotated by Roy Harris. With a new introduction by Roy Harris. Bloomsbury, 2013.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. Cours de linguistique générale. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, with the collaboration of Albert Riedlinger. Arbre d’Or, Genève, 2005.

Bouquet, Simon, Rudolf Engler, and Antoinette Weil, eds. ESCRITOS SOBRE LINGÜÍSTICA GENERAL. Translated by Clara Ubaldina Lorda Mur. Original title: Écrits de linguistique générale, de Ferdinand de Saussure. © Éditions Gallimard, 2002.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Computational Nature of Language: Chomsky’s Theoretical Perspectives in the 21st Century

Image
  Introduction Noam Chomsky's linguistic theories have undergone significant evolution throughout his career. Examining his work in distinct phases can offer valuable insights into his changing beliefs and theoretical developments, much like analyzing the work of an artist with a long trajectory, such as Picasso, across different periods. This article delves into Chomsky’s core beliefs as articulated in his September 24, 2016, interview with C.J. Polychroniou. In this conversation, Chomsky elucidates key aspects of his linguistic theory at that time, focusing on the unique and invariant nature of the human language faculty , the distinction between internal language (the language of thought) and external speech, and the evolutionary emergence of language in Homo Sapiens. His insights emphasize the Basic Property of language as a simple yet profound computational system and its deep-seated universal principles , such as structure-dependence . Furthermore, Chomsky addresses th
Read more

Beyond the Beehive Mind: Chomsky’s Critique of the Representationalist Doctrine

Image
Introduction In a thought-provoking interview with C.J. Polychroniou on September 24, 2016, Noam Chomsky delves into the biolinguistic perspective, offering insights into the nature of human language. Among the many topics discussed, Chomsky critiques the Representationalist Doctrine—the idea that words and concepts in language directly correspond to objects and events in the external world in a straightforward, mirror-like fashion. Chomsky argues that while this doctrine might adequately explain certain forms of animal communication, it falls short in capturing the complexity and uniqueness of human language. This article explores Chomsky's critique, focusing on how human language operates in ways that fundamentally differ from animal communication systems. The Representationalist Doctrine This Theory suggests that words and concepts in language directly correspond to objects and events in the external world. This framework is effective in understanding animal communicat
Read more

Language as a Computational System: Relations and Differences Between Chomsky and Saussure

Image
Introduction The study of language as a structured system has undergone significant evolution, shaped by the contributions of influential figures like Noam Chomsky and Ferdinand de Saussure. Chomsky, drawing from the computational theories pioneered by Alan Turing and others, conceptualizes language as a computational system where atomic elements—basic, indivisible units—are combined according to defined rules to produce an infinite array of meaningful expressions. This approach underscores the importance of these atomic elements as foundational to the cognitive processes that drive human language. In contrast, Saussure, whose work predates the development of computational theory, viewed language as a system of interrelated signs, where the meaning of each sign is shaped by its relationships with other signs within the linguistic system. Despite lacking the computational tools available to Chomsky, Saussure's insights share conceptual similarities with computational theory but
Read more