B r i g i t t e L. M . B a u e r
University o f NijmegenIn the March 1996 issue o f Language (72.1) David Lightfoot reviewed my book The Emergence ancl Development of SVO Patterning in Latin and French: Diachronic and Psycholinguistic Perspectives. Lightfoot criticizes ideas that are not in the book and also provides inaccurate analyses of its contents. In addition» he places the work in a biological frame it does not have, thus over looking the principal contribution of the work. The book analyzes a major syntactic change and accounts for it by referring to psycholinguistic evidence in order to have objective criteria to evaluate the difficulty of the structures involved. I explicitly state that ' before jum ping to biological evolution, we must fully understand the linguistic principles underlying the phenomena we observe1 (Bauer 1995:216), which reflects a position that recurs constantly in the work. It is therefore amazing that one-third of the review discusses the alleged biological explanation that the book proposes, referring to 'Lamarckism with a twist' , and to the alleged assumption that I argue that X becomes Y because 'our brains work' in a certain way (159), By contrast, the research for the book was carried out from a 'purely linguistic perspective ' (Bauer 1995:218), thereupon relating diachronic linguistics and psycholinguistics without any biological or evolutionary perspectives.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.