Summary of "Noam Chomsky - Language and Thought"

Summary — main ideas and takeaways

Central claim

Noam Chomsky argues that two widespread “dogmas” about language should be rejected:

Language did not evolve primarily for communication.
- Language is primarily a system for creating and interpreting thought — a mode of thought — and is only secondarily (and incidentally) usable for communication.
- Structural features of language often conflict with what would be optimal for communicative efficiency; in known cases, communicative efficiency is sacrificed in favor of the language system’s internal/biological design.
- The result is that the design of language is “radically different” from a system optimized for external signaling.
The minimal meaningful elements of language (words, morphemes) do not straightforwardly pick out mind‑independent objects or events.
- Unlike many animal signaling systems (where signals map more directly to external events), linguistic elements do not reliably denote external, observer‑independent entities.
- Linguistic entities are largely mental constructs or modes of interpreting phenomena; they do not correspond one‑to‑one to things a natural scientist could identify without reference to human minds.

Implications

Language should be understood as a core human cognitive capacity—central to human nature—rather than merely a communication technology.
These views reverse common intuitions in philosophy, linguistics, and psychology and have wide-reaching consequences for how we study language and mind.
Although this is currently a minority position among linguists, Chomsky believes that ongoing research increasingly supports it and that it may become widely accepted over time.

Methodological notes (how these claims are established)

Chomsky recommends a combination of technical and comparative approaches: - Examine technical linguistic work and the detailed structure of language (syntax, morphology, semantics). - Document cases where linguistic design conflicts with communicative efficiency. - Compare human language properties with animal communication systems to highlight differences in how signals map to external events. - Review historical philosophical and linguistic treatments (e.g., Aristotle; 17th–18th century analyses) that anticipated some of these ideas. - Present a thorough (but not excessively long) exposition or technical review—roughly a half hour plus detailed technical work—to make the arguments clear.

Tone and context

Chomsky frames these points as contrarian and acknowledges they represent a minority view within the linguistic profession.
He emphasizes that demonstrating the claims requires technical argumentation rather than brief exposition, but he considers the conclusions neither mysterious nor implausible.

Speakers / sources featured or referenced

Speaker in the excerpt: Noam Chomsky
Referenced thinkers and sources: Aristotle; Darwin; unspecified 17th–18th century work
General fields/groups referenced: linguists, philosophers, psychologists, and researchers of animal communication systems