How Scientific is Chomskys theory of linguistics?
In this study, I have endeavoured to appraise and criticise Noam Chomsky’s work in linguistics. My intention was to distinguish those parts of Chomsky’s work that were non-scientific from those that were. I have concluded that, in large part, Chomsky’s work is not comprised of scientific theories. Rather I claim that he has establishd a rationalist progressive research programme in linguistics. In support of this conclusion, I show that Chomsky’s primary contribution to linguistic research has been his expositions of the history and philosophy of linguistics. Further, I show that this exposition is standardly presented to defend Chomsky’s tacit claim: there is (and has been) a positive (metaphysical) heuristic guiding successful linguistic research since at least the time of the influence of the Port-Royal grammar. This heuristic is better known as the innateness hypothesis—there is an essence of language and it is inborn. In this study I have presented: the relevant history of the s
