Interesting book about why some linguists think all languages have an underlying universal grammar. The title seems a bit ironic since most of the book is about the restrictions and constraints on what languages can do. ( )

I love the idea of Universal Grammar, and this book explains it really nicely and goes over a lot of the evidence for it well. I also really like that Adger goes over sign languages as well, and mentions signing at the same time as he mentions speaking when referring to languages. ( )

All and all a strong defence of an innate Universal Grammar & the recursive Merge rule. Still, there will not be that much new for people with an academic background in linguistics.

The book is an introduction for a more or less general audience with a firm theoretical interest, and the Merge rule Noam Chomsky described first is not the focal point: general observations about the importance of syntax for the uniqueness of human language are. This is first and foremost a syntax book.

Adger starts from scratch, and gives a nice enough run through the nature of symbols, emoij, Kanzi the bonobo, AI languages, machine translation, and the likes. There's numerous examples from lots of different languages throughout the book.

In two or three cases I didn't think he was fully convincing - I don't think you need Merge to get to an endless possessive structure (like My sister's cat's food's bacteria's DNA's proteins' ect.), why wouldn't "Chunking" do, coupled with the power to extrapolate that is? - but overall I think the evidence points to Chomsky being right. Especially Adger's description of home signers (deaf children from hearing parents that grow up with other deaf children and invent their own sign language from scratch) is a powerful indication.

What was most interesting to me was the final chapter, on language and culture. It focussed on the distinction between grammar operating with distinct changes between things (words, word order) and generating meaning as such, and other ways of generating (social) meaning relying on aspects of language that rely on continuous changes, like the way a vowel is expressed by certain subcultures, or the slightly different way the s-sound is formed - overal - by gay men & how that even relates to their particular social context.

The book is clear and self-contained. I would have liked 100 pages more though, with more detail about the various arguments in the linguistic field, and more of the final chapter - but that's because I did linguistic 20 years ago and it would have been nice to have had a bit more of a thorough update of the state of the field today.

One final remark: at times there's something wrong with Adger's prose. I can't put my finger on it, but the writing feels a bit clunky, a bit wooden, and overtly repetitive at times. He writes in a kind of popular science mode, but doesn't seem to pull it off neatly.

More book reviews on Weighing A Pig Doesn't Fatten It ( )

Before digging into this, I think I should preface this review by saying that I am a Linguistics student and have a vested interest in the field. I also happen to know that David is a lovely dude and that these opinions might colour this review. However, I don't think they detract from the following sentiments; if anything, I think they bolster them. With that out of the way, let's get cracking.

This is probably the best pop linguistics book I have read since I discovered the field at the age of 14 (my other favourites being [b:Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language|36739320|Because Internet Understanding the New Rules of Language|Gretchen McCulloch|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1547222587l/36739320._SY75_.jpg|58531406] and [b:Language Death|329508|Language Death|David Crystal|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1347774010l/329508._SY75_.jpg|565422]). Whilst it's principally a book concerned with how generative syntax and Universal Grammar can account for the constrained yet vast variation across the world's languages, Adger does not forget to deal with other areas of linguistics, too. He incorporates child language acquisition, animal communication, and sociolingusitics, amongst other subfields, beautifully into the main point of the book. This diversity serves to strengthen his arguments and also cover his bases in terms of potential criticism- you certainly can't say he left out any major issues! Minor ones, maybe, but he acknowledges them and states that they are outwith the scope of the present book, which is a fair and valid thing to do.

As far as his arguments actually go, it's hard to walk away this book not a little bit infatuated with the idea of UG and Merge and the powers they wield in the realm of language. Maybe that's compounded by the fact that I'm currently taking a syntax course focusing on Minimalist Syntax with a textbook that Adger literally wrote, but I don't think so. His arguments are genuinely compelling, and easy to follow (more on that later). He draws on evidence from a wide array of the world's languages, not falling into the traps that many other linguists have over the years whereby the focus on a Eurocentric sample.

The other avoidance Adger makes is one I'm very grateful for, and that's the inclusion of a particular individual with regard to what happens when humans are raised without linguistic input. He instead opts to use examples from emergent sign languages, which exhibit more compelling evidences for his arguments anyways. This also avoids the odd fetishisation that some linguists have engaged in with regard to the children and adults who have faced lots of experimentation and scrutiny after being raised with little to no linguistic input. I have no idea if this was intentional, but it's refreshing nonetheless.

One of the best things about this book is how damn accessible it is. Adger describes everything in very plain language, even going so far as to rename linguistic principles that we are familiar with to have less threatening titles, e.g. The Pronoun Law (side note if anyone from that new forensic linguistics tv show is reading, the Pronoun Law or the Binding Principle would both make fabulous episode names...). Everything is fully explained and laid out clearly, and I found myself rereading paragraphs to understand much less frequently than I have in other pop linguistics pop. I think this accessibility is the main selling point of the book.

Finally, it's so refreshing to have a bit of diversity in the examples in a linguistics textbook! No more violence towards women! Just gays running marathons (or not, sorry Anson) and cats being funny. Plus, the fact that Adger openly talks about his partner and touches on issues of sexuality in sociolinguistics is really nice to see as a young aspiring linguist who also happens to be queer.

In sum- read this book if you have any interest in linguistics at all- or even if you don't! It's compelling, accessible, and above all, fun. 10/10 would merge their eyeballs with the pages again. ( )