Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Salvador Mascarenhas's review of my 2024 book The language puzzle focusses on one specific issue: the existence or otherwise of universal grammar. While this has been a valuable notion within the history of linguistics, it is an idea that lacks evolutionary credibility and needs to be discarded. When defending universal grammar, Mascarenhas inadvertently misrepresents how I draw on that idea and my reasons for rejecting its validity. If Mascarenhas and other linguists wish to maintain the idea of universal grammar and persuade others of its veracity, they need to explain when, how, and why it could have evolved.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Steven Mithen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: