University of Kansas, Department of Linguistics, Lawrence, Kansas 66045, USA.
J Child Lang. 2012 Jun;39(3):611-36. doi: 10.1017/S0305000911000183. Epub 2011 Aug 19.
Poverty of the stimulus (POS) arguments have instigated considerable debate in the recent linguistics literature. This article uses the comparative method to challenge the logic of POS arguments. Rather than question the premises of POS arguments, the article demonstrates how POS arguments for individual languages lead to a reductio ad absurdum as POS arguments from genetically related languages are compared. Comparison leads to different contradictions for poverty of the negative stimulus (PONS) and poverty of the positive stimulus (POPS) arguments. Comparing PONS arguments leads to the conclusion that Universal Grammar contains language-specific versions of linguistic rules. Comparing POPS arguments leads to the conclusion that Universal Grammar may supply knowledge that is ungrammatical in the target language. The reductio shows that universal principles of grammar cannot be established on the basis of POS arguments from a single language.
刺激贫困（POS）论点在最近的语言学文献中引发了相当多的争论。本文使用比较方法来挑战 POS 论点的逻辑。本文不是质疑 POS 论点的前提，而是通过比较遗传相关语言的 POS 论点，展示了为什么 POS 论点会导致荒谬的结论。比较导致了对否定刺激贫困（PONS）和肯定刺激贫困（POPS）论点的不同矛盾。比较 PONS 论点得出的结论是，普遍语法包含语言规则的特定于语言的版本。比较 POPS 论点得出的结论是，普遍语法可能提供在目标语言中不合语法的知识。这种归谬表明，不能基于单一语言的 POS 论点来确立语法的普遍原则。
