This paper examines whether the human capacity for language is biologically innate or culturally constructed, using Noam Chomsky's 1957 work Syntactic Structures as its conceptual anchor. The paper explores key features that distinguish human language from animal communication — particularly syntax, the ability to convey absence, and the generative production of new meaning within grammatical rules. It considers cross-linguistic variation, the limits of what language can express, and the relationship between universal communicative drives and culturally specific sound-meaning connections. The paper concludes that while the link between communication and language may be innate, the particular forms language takes are shaped by culture and environment.
All day long — from when we get up in the morning to when we go to bed, even when we dream — our minds are producing language in some form. We are linguistic beings, whether we are in dialogue with ourselves, listening and speaking with others, or receiving electronic or print media. But given that most of us cannot remember a time when our consciousness was not organized by language, how can we determine whether the ability and the need to use language is innate to the human brain?
Starting in 1957, Noam Chomsky reframed the traditional study of language in his book Syntactic Structures, shifting the focus of linguistics away from language as it exists to the question of why it exists. Chomsky believed the biologically wired nature of the human mind enables humans to produce language under the correct environmental — that is, learning and cultural — conditions. Key to language is the production of new meanings within a set of governed rules, or acceptable grammatical structures and sounds.
Different languages have different rules for word production, which calls somewhat into question the idea that all languages are infinitely flexible in their creativity. Languages may have words with meanings not shared by other languages — in other words, English and Inuit may not just have different words for "snow," but will have words not present in the other linguistic system at all. There is a single Inuit word that conveys the meaning of "Don't you want to go window shopping with me?" with no corresponding single word in English.
Thus, although all languages may be uniquely creative — and in English we daily produce sentences that have never existed before — not all languages are creative in the same grammatical and conceptual ways.
At the core of language is the notion of syntax: the linking of sounds to meaning through structured order. Words can occur in any sequence — boy, kick, ball — but to make meaning, they must be arranged in a particular order within a particular fashion to convey a specific meaning in time. The rules of language are, in this sense, independent of meaning: a sentence can be grammatical but meaningless, or meaningful but ungrammatical.
Syntax, although it varies from language to language, is what makes language uniquely human. No other animal species uses syntax in its communication system. No matter how different human language systems may appear from one another, they are all far more similar to each other than any of them are to animal communication systems.
Animals do not communicate on a conceptual level, and their communication exists only in the present moment. Human language, by contrast, can convey absence — for instance, the fact that "there is no giraffe next to me." People who know a language can also infer the meaning of new words from the position of those words and the meanings of surrounding words in a sentence. Language changes and grows over time, and within the life of an individual, a child's capacity to develop new and unique language skills far surpasses that of any other animal during its lifetime.
"What language cannot express, even within itself"
"Universal drives versus culturally constructed language forms"
You’re 68% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.