Talk:Innateness hypothesis: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
m Signing comment by 74.14.177.150 - "just a thought" |
No edit summary |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{WikiProject Linguistics|class=start|importance=|philosophy=yes}} |
{{WikiProject Linguistics|class=start|importance=|philosophy=yes}} |
||
==Citation please= |
== Citation please == |
||
for "This hypothesis supports linguistic nativism and was first proposed by Noam Chomsky." |
Please find a citation for: "This hypothesis supports linguistic nativism and was first proposed by Noam Chomsky." |
||
As far as I can tell the expression 'innateness hypothesis' was introduced by Hilary Putnam... in 1967. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.14.177.150|74.14.177.150]] ([[User talk:74.14.177.150|talk]]) 22:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
As far as I can tell the expression 'innateness hypothesis' was introduced by Hilary Putnam... in 1967. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.14.177.150|74.14.177.150]] ([[User talk:74.14.177.150|talk]]) 22:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
Revision as of 02:25, 11 April 2016
![]() | Philosophy: Language Start‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Linguistics: Philosophy of language Start‑class | ||||||||||||
|
Citation please
Please find a citation for: "This hypothesis supports linguistic nativism and was first proposed by Noam Chomsky." As far as I can tell the expression 'innateness hypothesis' was introduced by Hilary Putnam... in 1967. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.177.150 (talk) 22:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
[Untitled]
Hello, a group of students from Linguistic & Multilingual Studies in NTU are editing this page. Please give us your kind feedback.
Brief Review
My students revised this page for a course (HG2052: Language, Technology and the Internet) and I am adding a couple of comments as part of the final review. Francis Bond (talk) 08:55, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- overall the page is greatly improved, with well-cited additions
- the prose is a bit choppy and repetitive
- many small mis-wordings/spacings
- it would be good to merge identical references
- the page has captured the fact that there is still much disagreement about this
- so it is neutral
- it is also broad, stable and verifiable
- I think it fails a little to be well-written and illustrated