Re:
[{"sender": "jeffrey E. [jeevacation@gmail.com]", "recipients": ["Noam Chomsky"], "timestamp": "Thursday, December 24, 2015 9:24 AM", "subject": "Re:", "body": "we dont teach children to see. they have a visual grammar built in. why wouldnt we expect some mutation of that system to allow auditory grammar."}, {"sender": "Noam Chomsky", "recipients": ["jeffrey E. [jeevacation@gmail.com]"], "timestamp": "Thursday, December 24, 2015", "subject": "Re:", "body": "We don’t teach children language either, contrary to many beliefs. The visual grammar just grows, and as is known, can develop in various ways depending on early experience. Same with the language grammar, though the period in which experience has a shaping effect is much longer.\n\nHowever, there are fundamental differences between vision and language. Can send you a recent paper about it if you like. Vision is an input system. Language isn’t. It’s an internal capacity, a system of knowledge, which is used to process input and also to produce thoughts (sometimes externalized). Seems also to be modality independent. And their properties look wholly different, so it’s hard to see how one could piggy-back on the other.\n\nNoam"}, {"sender": "jeffrey E. [jeevacation@gmail.com]", "recipients": ["Noam Chomsky"], "timestamp": "Thursday, December 24, 2015 10:09 AM", "subject": "Re:", "body": "The hardware of vision is an input system , It's the software that I'm referring to ."}, {"sender": "Noam Chomsky", "recipients": ["jeffrey E. [jeevacation@gmail.com]"], "timestamp": "Thursday, December 24, 2015", "subject": "Re:", "body": "I presume that the software just guides the hardware. Don’t see how that changes the considerations."}]