Language has long been a problem‐case for subsymbolic theories of mind. The reason for this is obvious: Language seems essentially symbolic. However, recent work has developed a potential solution to this problem, arguing that linguistic symbols are public objects which augment a fundamentally subsymbolic mind, rather than components of cognitive symbol‐processing. I shall argue that this strategy cannot work, on the grounds that human language acquisition consists in projecting linguistic structure onto environmental entities, rather than extracting this structure from them.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gabe Dupré (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: