Michael Tomasello's Arguments Against the Universal Grammar Theory
Michael Tomasello’s argument against UG
The hypothesis that Grammar is Universal does not have much
strength. It is not well defined, it is difficult to test which means just because it hasn’t been proven wrong doesn’t
mean it can’t be it is just a difficult hypothesis to test.
Also, even though it
is not well defined, theorists who have tried to define it have not been able to come up with a universal definition and the
definitions that have been used differ greatly.
Michael Tomasello has several
arguments against the theory of universal grammar. He states that universal grammar does not identify with what the innate
abilities actually consist of, and it fails to explain how deaf children create their own language, and almost any language
can be forced into pretty much any model of explanation.
Arguments for universal grammar
are borrowed from the argument based on the theory of biological innateness.
Michael Tomasello's major argument
is that the universal Grammar hypothesis does not relate to how children's competence in other areas of cognitive development
Michael Tomasello simply wants
to know what is included in universal language, what types of innateness is responsible for it and how can it be disproved.