Chomsky 's Influence On Cognitive Psychology

Cognitive psychology began around 19th century. Different approaches have been used to trace the roots of psychology. It is also known that cognitive psychology was out numbered by behaviorism but later revived, bringing into being cognitive revolution. The paper discusses cognitive revolution in the history of cognitive psychology as the most influential part in the practice of modern psychology.

On the other hand Nativists believe that language acquisition is a biological occurrence. Their theories confirm that important aspects of children’s linguistic knowledge are not acquired, but innate (Ambridge B, 2011). Their theories emphasise the structure of the human brain and how it obtains and uses language. Social Critic Noam Chomsky proposed that children are born with the ability to generate grammar (Dulay, H. 1982). This emphasises nativist’s theories and promotes nature to be the dominant role.

Have you ever wondered how we speak? How about why our communication is considered a language and other animal’s communication is not considered language? A wide range of beliefs exist on what defines language. Thus, by exploring the definition of language and lexicon, evaluating language’s key features, the four levels of language structure and processing, and the role of language in Cognitive Psychology, an understanding of what language is becomes clear. Let us begin by defining language and a term named lexicon.

The main reason that Boroditsky’s argument that language shapes our minds is valid is that the research she did with her teams covers a wide variety of aspects on this topic while still keeping her article cohesive. The first research Boroditsky introduces to her audience is the research on the Kuuk Thaayorre, which is an

There were countless pivotal events that occurred in the 1960’s that contributed to the current popularity of experimental cognitive psychology. Miller, Galanter, and Pribram published Plans and the Structure of Behavior which explained that concepts such as information feedback could explain human behavior that is goal-directed. Additionally, Miller and Bruner originated a Center for Cognitive Studies to promote research and thoughts. Miller also published articles such as Some Psychological Studies of Grammar (1962) and Psychology: The Science of Mental Life (1962). In 1969, Miller was appointed president of the APA. Further, cognitive psychology was finally mature enough to have courses and textbooks specifically designed for it and Neisser’s

The linguistic theory of Chomsky has changed the long, traditional way of studying language. The nature of knowledge, which is closely tied to human knowledge in general, makes it a logical step for Chomsky to generalize his theory to the study of the relation between language and the world-in particular, the study of truth and reference. But his theory has been controversial and his proposal of "innate ideas" has been resisted by some empiricists who characterize him as rationalist. In our view, these empiricists make a mistake. In the present paper we attend to his position regarding linguistics as a science of mind/brain, which we believe is an important aspect of his theory that has not been paid enough attention or understood by

Cognitive psychology is the study of mental processes surrounding learning, memory, perception, and thought. Though it is still a relatively new formal branch of psychology, its roots extend back to Descartes who sought a way to explain how the mind worked, proposing the analogy of a “hydraulic system of nerve function” (Willingham, 2007, p. 26) after he observed animated statues in Saint-Germain-en-Laye. It has been the restless pursuit of not only the idea of how the mind works but also what exactly constituted the mind that eventually led to the foundations of cognitive theory. As psychologists examined how

Chomsky’s theory of generative grammar emphasizes the importance of taking and storing of information, similar to the premise of the current continuous provision plan (Chomsky, 2000). In Chomsky’s theory of language and communication, to retain information and knowledge, there is need for previously stored knowledge to which newly inserted knowledge and information s added and linked (Chomsky,

Language is an important component in discussing cognitive psychology. There are many different aspects to language that can be broken down to better understand its functions. Language can be defined as “An organized way to combine words to communicate” (O’Brien, lecture notes 2014). In addition language is a communication system that is unique to humans. It is also something that is learned as opposed to being biologically inherited (O’Brien, lecture notes, 2014).

Key features of language include its words and their sub structures such as morphemes, graphemes and syllables at the writing level as well as reading or speaking, words, their meanings and contexts in which the words get spoken or read. Language has to be interpreted as a whole, and not just as the specific word. There must be an explicit pattern or structure. In order for language to be understood correctly, the meaning of words must be arranged in a given context. This is what constructs language; even though words are arbitrary themselves, in order to integrate as a language, they must be used in the appropriate context. This pre-established cultural context is what will enable effective communication. (Daniel Willingham, 2007, p. 1).

In the first chapter of this book Chomsky ponders the idea of human existence and if our

Linguistics has impacted cognitive psychology as the quest to understand language acquisition and the structure of language itself is undertaken. Linguistics is a complex and multifaceted; it includes language structural patterns and language development (Barsalou, 2005). The process of language development is complicated and dense, as the study of language is examined; the role of cognition is inherently examined and analyzed. Sternberg (2006) also explores language as an innate process and presents the idea that humans are born ready for language as a biological and cognitive process.

This essay will be focused on two different approaches to cognitive psychology: Cognitive Neuropsychology and Cognitive Neuroscience. Cognitive Neuropsychology is concerned with the patterns of cognitive performance and emphasis on the cognitive effects of brain-damaged patients who suffered lesions, injuries or diseases, providing vest information on normal human cognition. (Eysenck and Keane 2015, p.5) Whereas cognitive neuroscience involves in-depth study of our brain and behaviours. As the brain contains numerous neurones and is so complicated, the cognitive neuroscience emphasis on the biological side of the brain and focuses on the lobes that are divided from the cerebral cortex.

“Cognitive psychology is a modern approach to the study of [processes by which people come to understand the world- such processes as memory, learning, comprehending language, problem solving, and creativity. Cognitive psychology has been influenced by developments in language, computer science, and of course, earlier work in philosophy and psychology” – Hayes (cited by Lundin)

He seeks to find underlying similarities across these “distinct” languages, to construct a general theory of a singular language. However, it seems as though he cannot be scientifically vindicated without the groundwork being laid down by many of the authors that he is critical of. Thus, it is particularly interesting that Chomsky seems to be so at odds with the idea of descriptivism. When Chomsky says, “Grammar should not be merely a record of the data of usage, but, rather, should offer an explanation for such data,” (587) he is acknowledging the usefulness, presumably to his own theories, of descriptive linguistics. He in fact recognizes the debt he owes when he says, “To me, it seems that [structural linguistics'] major achievement is to have provided a factual and a methodological basis that makes it possible to return to the problems that occupied the traditional universal grammarians...” (590) But he goes on to say, “On the other hand, it seems to me that the substantive contributions to the theory of language structure are few, and that, to a large extent, the concepts of modern linguistics constitute a retrogression as compared with universal grammar.” (590) Where the descriptivists see an end, Chomsky sees only the means, and is somewhat dismissive of them.