Modularity and pragmatics

The modular approach to language in its career of 30 years had alternating and rivaling views regarding the place pragmatics. A first basically is one outlined by Fodor (1983) that would pack pragmatic aspects use under rubric mushy General Problem Solver component architecture, thus extracting it from considerations modularity altogether. rival Massive Modular approaches such as Dan Sperber’s be willing treat crucial module part a general architecture with all over place. paper after summarizing theoretical interpretations calls for less dedicated distributed processing representation system where rather than simple starting point might seen result process modularization. Three types empirical data are surveyed. First, studies seem support specialized discussed, namely right hemisphere damaged populations brain imaging imply strong involvement variety emotional stress understanding non-literal language. second line comes developmental neuroscience considerations. Studies autistic other cognitively challenged suffering presupposed overall architectural deficit indicate role Theory Mind not only tasks order representation, attributing sophisticated Belief-Intention others, but well. One interpretation these postulate social psychological cognition, driving source use. primacy should left open an option. It possible itself pragmatics different intentional contexts partly responsible development seemingly encapsulated mentalization. This correspond idea early prepared systems being modified during interface buildup roughly corresponds metacognitive purposes. third evidence calling balanced treatment issue theories Paleobiology. Theories like ones proposed Donald, Mithen, Wilkins Wakefield also considered this regard. According human may actually have resulted loosening boundaries between modules, then strengthening them. reasoning especially interesting since supports emerges necessity interaction “intelligences’“, together elementary societal organization mind.