A departure from cognitivism: Implications of Chomsky's second revolution in linguistics.
Chomsky dumped fixed rules—use that plot twist to sell contingency-shaped verbal lessons.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Page (2000) is a theory paper. It looks at Chomsky’s later ideas, called principles-and-parameters.
The author says this new view drops fixed rules. That move looks less mentalistic.
The paper tells behavior analysts: use this shift to teach rule-governed versus contingency-shaped talk.
What they found
Chomsky’s second turn leaves old rule books behind.
That break gives Skinner fans room to argue real words grow from consequences, not hidden rules.
How this fits with other research
Petursdottir et al. (2017) count papers. They show verbal-operant studies jumped after 2005, mostly in autism work. The boom proves Skinner’s ideas are tested, not just cited.
Bao et al. (2017) map the same wave. They find mand and intraverbal training dominate autism journals. T’s philosophical point lines up: clinicians already pick contingency-shaped programs over rule drills.
Baer et al. (1984) sound a warning. Only four in every 100 citations of Skinner’s book test the operants. T’s paper helps close that gap by giving trainers a clear contrast to sell to funders.
Why it matters
You can stop debating invisible grammar rules. Point to Chomsky’s own pivot, then run mand or intraverbal trials. When parents ask why you skip rule drills, say even the top linguist moved on. Use T’s story to defend data over doctrine.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open your next mand session by telling the team: we follow consequences, not grammar rules—Chomsky agrees now.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
In 1957 Noam Chomsky published Syntactic Structures, expressing views characterized as constituting a "revolution" in linguistics. Chomsky proposed that the proper subject matter of linguistics is not the utterances of speakers, but what speakers and listeners know. To that end, he theorized that what they know is a system of rules that underlie actual performance. This theory became known as transformational grammar. In subsequent versions of this theory, rules continued to play a dominant role. However, in 1980 Chomsky began a second revolution by proposing the elimination of rules in a new theory: the principles-and-parameters approach. Subsequent writings finalized the abandonment of rules. Given the centrality of rules to cognitivism, this paper argues that Chomsky's second revolution constitutes a departure from cognitivism.
The Analysis of verbal behavior, 2000 · doi:10.1007/BF03392956