UG controversy: arguments that have been put forward in favor of

Chomsky’s “universal grammar” vs compelling evidence disproving

Chomsky’s assertions.

To start with, philosophical rationalism's central discovery is that human

creativity is closely linked to an inherent system of concept creation and
combining. Chomsky claims that children show "ordinary" creativity—appropriate
and original use of complexes of concepts—from the time they are able to speak.
When they play, innovate, and speak and understand each other, they bring
hundreds of rich and articulate notions to bear with language. They appear to know
far more than they have been taught—or could possibly learn. As a result, such
knowledge must be innate in some way.

Chomsky's early attempts to explain the linguistic version of Plato's issue

were published in Aspects of the Theory of Syntax as "standard theory" and later
as "extended standard theory," which he expanded and revised into the late 1970s.
These ideas argued that the human infant's mind has a "format" for a hypothetical
grammar (a theory of linguistic data), a mechanism for generating grammars based
on the linguistic data to which the child is exposed, and a device for evaluating the
relative simplicity of built grammars.

To provide arguments of this theory of “universal grammar”, where selected

next explanations:

 A discrete infinity system.

The tremendous immensity of language, which caused Chomsky to label the

human language faculty "a system of discrete infinite," is the first argument I
would make for Universal Grammar. Pinker provides the example of a
hypothetical 20-word sentence to demonstrate how enormous language is. If a
speaker is interrupted at any time throughout the 20-word phrase, there are roughly
ten different words that can be inserted to keep the speech logical and grammatical.
There are at least 1020, or a hundred million trillion, potential sentences as a result
of this. It would take a human a hundred trillion years to memorize all of the
sentences if they spoke one every five seconds. This number skyrockets when one
considers (correctly) that sentences can be longer than 20 words. Clearly, a concept
based solely on imitation and memorizing of responses is incorrect.

 The lack of stimulation and the genius child

The ideas of "learning" and "acquisition" are distinguished by Andrew

Carnie. Learning is the process of acquiring conscious information, such as
algebraic principles or understanding how an automobile engine works. The ability
to talk, for example, or "the ability to visually recognize separate objects" are
examples of subconscious knowledge. An crucial thing to remember, according to
Pinker, is "how a learner can correctly generalize from a limited sample of words
in context to the infinite set of sentences that define the language from which the
sample was obtained."

Talking about disproving Chomsky’s assertions, linguists and philosophers

sympathetic to empiricism will argue that these characteristics emerge when a
community "invents" a language to do the tasks it requires; it's no surprise, then,
that linguistic meanings reflect human concerns and issues.  According to the
rationalists,  humans, on the other hand, could not even conceive of these interests
and concerns unless the required conceptual machinery was accessible beforehand.
The speed and ease with which children learn "give" and "village" and tens of
thousands of other concepts, according to Chomsky, demonstrates that the
empiricist approach is incorrect—though it may be correct in the case of scientific
concepts like "muon," which are apparently not innate and do not reflect human
concerns.

To conclude, Chomsky was not persuaded by other theorists such as John

Locke, who claimed that humans are born with blank slates. Chomsky claimed
instead that children learning to talk cannot begin as blank slates because they lack
the necessary information to conduct many of the complicated grammatical
maneuvers he witnessed. Our proverbial slates cannot be completely blank when
we are born, according to Chomsky; we must be hard-wired with structures in our
brains, which he refers to as language learning devices (LADs). The LAD is a
theorized instrument built into the brain that aids in the quick acquisition of
language by youngsters.