The linguistic hypothesis proposed by Chomsky that language is innate has been scientifically questioned and disproven by many researchers proving that there’s nothing innate in language. And no linguistics existed even before they made this unsupported hypothesis, so you don’t have to believe in it to be a linguist.

Everyone will have to choose which hypothesis they want to believe but rest assured that “language is innate” is just a thin air hypothesis but a fact and not certainly something you “must” believe.

I want to suggest John Bruer book “The Myth of the First Three Years”
Disproving scientifically with brain scans the hypothesis that children are meant to learn and adults not (as if learning something every day of your life wasn’t needed to survive and thrive in this planet) and the hypothesis that the brain of children is a sponge and that of adults is a wall.

sorry, here is the link to the image.

I just wanted to say I enjoyed the great conversation and would like to share a painting I recently purchased. The link below is the image of the painting. It is Titled “The signifier and the Signified” and as a linguistics buff, and a Noam Chomsky Fan, this painting just makes me all happy inside.

All the best.

and anyone who has had a kid and actually paid attention will see that we have language skills right out of the bag. in fact at least five word-sounds that are demonstrably language. for those interested, check out the Dunstan Baby Language. best thing for new parents and saved our sanity with out kids.

what’s more interesting is the Soviet studies of language roots that have shown a common sound-base to ALL known languages. very interesting indeed!