Are linguists better subjects?

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Who are the best subjects for judgment tasks intended to test grammatical hypotheses? Michael Devitt ( [2006a] , [2006b] ) argues, on the basis of a hypothesis concerning the psychology of such judgments, that linguists themselves are. We present empirical evidence suggesting that the relevant divide is not between linguists and non-linguists, but between subjects with and without minimally sufficient task-specific knowledge. In particular, we show that subjects with at least some minimal exposure to or knowledge of such tasks tend to perform consistently with one another—greater knowledge of linguistics makes no further difference—while at the same time exhibiting markedly greater in-group consistency than those who have no previous exposure to or knowledge of such tasks and their goals
PhilPapers/Archive ID
CULALB
Revision history
Archival date: 2009-04-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Aspects of the Theory of Syntax.Ferebee, Ann S. & Chomsky, Noam
Ignorance of Language.Devitt, Michael
Intuitive Knowledge of Linguistic Co-Reference.Gordon, Peter C. & Hendrick, Randall

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Are Philosophers Expert Intuiters?Weinberg, Jonathan M.; Gonnerman, Chad; Buckner, Cameron & Alexander, Joshua
If Folk Intuitions Vary, Then What?Machery, Edouard; Mallon, Ron; Nichols, Shaun & Stich, Stephen P.

View all 25 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-04-22

Total views
636 ( #3,758 of 40,685 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
100 ( #4,536 of 40,685 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.