Creating this presentation ignited my mind in the direction of science, linguistics, cognition, and evolution, completely altering the essence of my PhD and my life. The most important learning and teaching changes lives. I specialized in American Literature, and used the science as literary theory.

1. Chomsky’s
Labyrinth
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s133/eugcarmo/255665932jpg.jpg

2. Noam Chomsky
(b. 1928)
MIT
1955
http://www.spike-island.org.uk/files/images/chomsky.jpg

3. The
TOP 10
most-cited
writers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. Noam Chomsky
9.
10.
http://thelastminute.typepad.com/photos/peace_rally_march_20_2004/p3200199.JPG Steven Pinker (1994) The Language Instinct.

4. Why so influential?
http://www.pyke-eye.com/a/phil/1988/NoamChomsky.jpg

5. Grammar and Syntax
http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/photos/noam_chomsky_human_rights.jpg

6. His Grammar Created a Language-Mind Link
TRANSFORMATIONAL
Parse-able with
moveable pieces
Generative
Infinite variety from
finite pieces
Universal
Innate, inheritable

7. Seth Merrin Professor of Philosophy
Co-Director, Center for Cognitive Studies, Tufts University
Ray Jackendoff
(b. 1945)
Tufts University
2005
Brandeis University
2006
http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/incbios/RayJackendoff/index.htm

9. XP
Specifier X

11. NP
Det. N
The Chicken ran away from the farmer.
[t∫IkЛn]
http://brainmind.com/images/splitbrain20.jpg

12. Computational
MIND
http://peterhgregory.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/virus.PNG

13. The
,
Turing
Machines, and
http://www.tcf.ua.edu/AZ/AnalyticalEngine.jpg

14. Turing Computations with Binary Code
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f9/State_diagram_3_state_busy
_beaver_4_.JPG/800px-State_diagram_3_state_busy_beaver_4_.JPG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f9/State_diagram_3_state_busy_beaver_4_.JPG/800px-State_diagram_3_state_busy_beaver_4_.JPG

15. Metaphors
Turing Machines
• Data Processing
Computers
• Complex Processing
• Binary Code and Syntax
http://prevos.net/ola/identity.jpg

16. Steven Pinker
(b. 1954)
Harvard University
2009
MIT
2003
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/12.02/photos/7-pinker1-450.jpg

17. 1997
http://linguistlist.org/fund-drive/2008/linguist-of-the-day/Pinker.jpg
http://www.indwes.edu/Faculty/bcupp/Book.Pinker2.jpg

18. Sample Model of Language Processing
http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/epc/srb/cyber/thi7fig4.gif

19. EZ Reader 10
Reichle, E.D., Warren, T., & McConnell, K. (2009). Using E-Z reader to model the effects of higher level language processing on eye movements during reading.
Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16(1), 1-21.

21. Favorite Sources
http://www.bookswim.com/images_books/lar
http://ebooks-imgs.connect.com/ebooks/
ge/The_Language_Instinct_How_the_Mind_ http://www.changeany1thing.com/wp-
product/400/000/000/000/000/062/694/400000
Creates_Language_PS-119190035038056.jpg content/uploads/2008/03/noam_chomsky.jpg
000000000062694_s4.jpg

22. INFORMATION OVERLOAD!
MODULAR
MIND = SOLUTION
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/8646/fodorsk1.jpg

23. Multiple,
Specialized
Mind
Organs=
Complex Mental
Processing
p://brainmind.com/images/sci714428.jpg http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/innateness-language/PosnerRaichle.jpg

24. Pinker Fodor
VS
.
http://www.firebaugh.com/FDA/Seminars/BlankSlate/PinkerLogo.jpg http://www.pyke-eye.com/a/phil/2001/JerryFoder.jpg
12 Rounds over

25. Rou
nd
1997 2002

26. Parting
So how doesBlows
the mind work?
I don’t know. You don’t know. Pinker doesn’t know.
And I rather suspect, such is the current state of
the art, that if God were to tell us, we wouldn’t
understand him.
(Fodor, 2005, p. 31)
Fodor, more than anyone, has defended the
computational theory of mind ... specialization ...
[and] evolution as a shaping force in the modular
mind.
(Pinker, 2005, p. 2)

27. Some mysteries
of the mind
will probably
.
http://brainmind.com/images/schizophrenia43.jpg

28. References
Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Theoretical note--Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological
Review, 113(3), 628-647.
Carruthers, P., Laurence, S., & Stich, S. P. (2005). The innate mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. Netherlands: Mouton.
Chomsky, N. (1959). Verbal behavior, by B. F. Skinner. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (2006). Language and mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chomsky, N., & Arnove, A., (2008). The essential Chomsky. New York: New Press.
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006a). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics,
27, 107-126.
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006b). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 3-42.
Cook, V. (1999). Using SLA research in language teaching. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 267-84.
Duyck, W., Vanderelst, D., Desmet, T., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2008). The frequency effect in second-language visual
word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(4), 850.
Elston-Güttler, K. E., & Friederici, A. D. (2007). Ambiguous words in sentences: Brain indices for native and non-
native disambiguation. Neuroscience Letters, 414(1), 85-89.
Fodor, J. (1975). The language of thought. New York: Crowell.
Fodor, J. (1981). Representations : Philosophical essays on the foundations of cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fodor, J. (1983). The modularity of mind: An essay on faculty psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fodor, J. (2001). The mind doesn't work that way: The scope and limits of computational psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Fodor, J. (2005). Reply to Steven Pinker ‘So How Does The Mind Work?’ Mind & Language, 20(1), 25-32.
Fodor, J. (2006). How the mind works: What we still don't know. Daedalus, 135(3), 86-94.
Fodor, J., Bever, T. G., & Garrett, M. F. (1974). The psychology of language: An introduction to psycholinguistics and generative
grammar. New York: McGraw-Hill.

29. Fodor, J., & Katz, J. (1964). The structure of language: Readings in the philosophy of language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.
Friesen, D., & Jared, D. (2007). Cross-language message- and word-level transfer effects in bilingual text processing.
Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1542-1556.
Fukkink, R. G., Hulstijn, J., & Simis, A. (2005). Does training in second-language word recognition skills affect
reading comprehension? An experimental study. Modern Language Journal, 89(1), 54-75.
Generative Grammar. (2000). Oxford English dictionary. Retrieved December 7, 2009, from http://dictionary.oed.com
Jackendoff, R. (2003). Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jackendoff, R. (1977). X syntax : A study of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Keating, G. D. (2009). Sensitivity to violations of gender agreement in native and nonnative Spanish: An eye-
movement investigation. Language Learning, 59(3), 503-535.
Kliegl, R., Nuthmann, A., & Engbert, R. (2006). Tracking the mind during reading: The influence of past, present,
and future words on fixation durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology/General, 135(1), 12-35.
Koda, K. (2007). Reading and language learning: Crosslinguistic constraints on second language reading development.
Language Learning, 57(Supplement), 1-44.
Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct: How the mind creates language. New York: William Marrow, & Co.
Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: Norton.
Pinker, S. (2002). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking Adult.
Pinker, S. (2005). So how does the mind work? Mind and Language, 20(1), 1-24.
Pinker, S. (2007). The stuff of thought: Language as a window into human nature. New York: Viking.
Pinker, S. (2005). A reply to Jerry Fodor on how the mind works. Mind and Language, 20(1), 33-38.
Rayner, K. (1993). Eye movements in reading: Recent developments. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2(3), 81-
85.
Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506.

30. Rayner, K., Pollatsek, A., Drieghe, D., Slattery, T. J., & Reichle, E. D. (2007). Tracking the mind during reading via
eye movements: Comments on Kliegl, Nuthmann, & Engbert (2006). Journal of Experimental
Psychology/General, 136(3), 520-529.
Rayner, K., Smith, T. J., Malcolm, G. L., & Henderson, J. M. (2009). Eye movements and visual encoding during
scene perception. Psychological Science, 20(1), 6-10.
Reichle, E.D., Liversedge, S.P., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (2009). Encoding multiple words simultaneously in
reading is implausible. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(3), 115-119.
Reichle, E.D., Warren, T., & McConnell, K. (2009). Using E-Z reader to model the effects of higher level language
processing on eye movements during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16(1), 1-21.
Reichle, E., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z reader model of eye-movement control in reading:
Comparisons to other models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26(4), 445-476.
Reichle, E. D. (2006). Computational models of eye-movement control during reading: Theories of the eye mind
link. Cognitive Systems Research, 7(1), 2-3.
Skinner, B. F. (1992). Verbal behavior (Reprint, 1957 ed.). Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
Stuhr, J. J. (2000). Pragmatism and classical American philosophy: Essential readings and interpretive essays. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Tannen, D. (1999). The argument culture : Changing the way we argue and debate. London: Virago.
Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind: A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy,
59(236), 433.
Universal Grammar. (2000). Oxford English dictionary. Retrieved December 7, 2009, from http://dictionary.oed.com
Usó J., E., & Martínez F., A. (2006). Current trends in the development and teaching of the four language skills. New York:
M. de Gruyter.
Yamada, K. (2009). Lexical patterns in L2 textual gist identification assessment. Language Testing, 26(1), 101-122.