This has been a useful discussion (not that it should end of course). Larry Barham (University of Liverpool, Department of Archaeology) and I have finished a long paper (just submitted) on the evidence that lower Paleolithic tools manufactured by Homo Erectus were simultaneously icons, indexes, and symbols. We then argue that if that is correct they had language (since syntax is itself a combination of icon, index, and symbol + a varied range of computational properties).
Peirce used the term Universal Grammar in 1865 and his version of UG (like Chomsky’s nearly a century later) had recursion. The difference is that Peirce’s recursion was semantic (interpretants of interpretants) whereas Chomsky’s is syntactic. Peirce’s recursion works better for understanding a number of modern languages, as well as language evolution (I and a co-author point this out in a review article to appear in Language). Understanding the various nuances of his work is therefore vital to grasping its contemporary significance (as readers here know) - in some ways especially for understanding language and its evolution - and I am grateful to this list for continuing to host such illuminating discussions. Dan
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
