[emodendroket]

I'm not talking about "where language comes from." I'm talking about a mechanical understanding of how humans produce and understand language.

Chomsky's idea goes deeper than "just random sounds," given his theory of universal grammar.

[zR0x]

Religion shows we can create very detailed belief in ornate ideas that are scientifically nonsensical. It’s possible the concepts linguists seek to develop are similarly self reinforcing feedback loops that are meaningless to science.

There’s been an explosion in biological science since Chomsky became prominent. He even admits his work is abstract and to serve his ends. We may be putting more into his ideas due to his fame and infamy than we should.

Trial and error, social constraints on sounds and the mechanics of biology can explain it elegantly. What do the ornate theories and ephemeral organs provide except to satisfy “linguists” biological agency to create and imagine?

Linguistics came about in a much less scientifically aware era in human history. My money is on it going the way of religion; an abstraction that’s so orthogonal to advancing science we leave it behind.

[emodendroket]

You can believe that if you like but it doesn’t bring us any closer to an answer.