Dear list,
Is it possible that Peirce's thirdness, Percy's coupling and Chomsky's
merging are the same?
Could this bringing together, symbolization, merging, of two other things,
explain our language ability?
If so, this basic exemplification in diagrammatic form defines humans.
Interesting questions, Robert. They certainly deserve further investigation.
One difference I see is that Chomsky’s merge is a syntactic operation, whereas,
If I understand him correctly, Peircean coupling has a semantic aspect as well.
Chomsky consistently separates syntax and semantics, but
