Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaCross-Text Connections: Perspective Comparison

Text 1
Linguist Derek Bickerton’s "language bioprogram hypothesis" proposes that creole languages are created in a single generation by children who use their innate grammatical capacity to transform unstructured pidgin input into a complete language. According to Bickerton, because the pidgins spoken by parents lack consistent syntactic rules, children must rely on pre-programmed cognitive structures to invent grammar, explaining why geographically isolated creoles worldwide share striking grammatical similarities that cannot be traced to their parent languages.

Text 2
Linguist Salikoko Mufwene and other gradualists challenge the idea of a sudden cognitive leap in creole creation. They argue that creole grammar develops incrementally over several generations through a "feature pool" model. In multilingual settings, speakers select and adapt features from various source languages based on communicative efficiency and social prestige. Under this view, the structural similarities among creoles are not products of an innate biological blueprint but rather the logical outcome of common language contact dynamics and shared input structures.

Based on the texts, how would Mufwene (the author of Text 2) most likely characterize Bickerton's explanation (Text 1) for the grammatical similarities among creoles?

  1. As an explanation that incorrectly attributes these similarities to innate cognitive structures rather than to shared dynamics of language contact.Cevap
  2. B
    As a plausible hypothesis that successfully accounts for the rapid speed at which children acquire grammatical rules.
  3. C
    As a view that fails to recognize that the pidgins spoken by parents already contain highly consistent syntactic rules.
  4. D
    As a model that overemphasizes the role of social prestige and communicative efficiency in shaping creole grammar.

Cevap

As an explanation that incorrectly attributes these similarities to innate cognitive structures rather than to shared dynamics of language contact.
The author of Text 2 argues that the similarities among creoles are not products of an innate biological blueprint but rather the logical outcome of common language contact dynamics. Therefore, Mufwene would characterize Bickerton's explanation—which relies on innate cognitive structures—as an explanation that incorrectly attributes these similarities to biology rather than contact dynamics.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze Bickerton's core argument in Text 1 regarding creole similarities.
Bickerton claims that creoles share similarities because children rely on innate, pre-programmed cognitive structures to invent grammar from unstructured pidgins.
Understanding the target of Mufwene's critique is necessary to determine Mufwene's response.
2
Analyze Mufwene's counterargument in Text 2.
Mufwene argues that creoles develop gradually over generations through language contact and the adaptation of features from source languages, rejecting the idea of a biological blueprint.
Determining Mufwene's perspective allows comparison with Bickerton's view.
3
Synthesize the relationship between the two perspectives.
Mufwene would see Bickerton's emphasis on innate cognitive structures as incorrect, pointing instead to external language contact dynamics to explain why creoles share structural features.
This direct comparison yields the correct response choice.

Anahtar Kavram

Cross-Text Connections: Perspective Comparison
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Cross-Text Connections: Perspective Comparison

Bu konudan daha fazla soru