Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı

Caner Kerimoğlu

doi:10.66119/babur.1939913

TR EN

Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı

Öz

Bu makale, dilbilim ve bilişsel bilimlerin en köklü tartışmalarından biri olan dilin doğuştanlığı hipotezini ve bu hipotezin temel dayanağı olan “Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı”nı (UEA) incelemektedir. Noam Chomsky tarafından modern dilbilime kazandırılan bu argüman, çocukların maruz kaldıkları sınırlı, kusurlu ve karmaşık dilsel girdiden yola çıkarak bu girdinin çıktıdaki dil zenginliğini tek başına açıklayamayacağını savunur. Makale rasyonalist gelenekten beslenen doğuştancı yaklaşım ile deneyimci, bilişselci ve etkileşimci alternatifleri karşılaştırmalı olarak sunmaktadır. Çalışmada UEA’nın tarihsel gelişimi; “izdüşüm problemi”, “negatif kanıt eksikliği” ve “zekâdan bağımsızlık” gibi temel iddiaları üzerinden ele alınmaktadır. Ardından bu argümana yönelik metodolojik, nörobilimsel ve kullanım temelli eleştiriler değerlendirilmektedir. Eleştiriler, girdinin aslında sanıldığından daha zengin olduğunu ve genel öğrenme mekanizmalarının dil edinimi için yeterli olabileceğini vurgular. Sonuç olarak makale UEA’nın güncel hesaplamalı modeller ve istatistiksel öğrenme verileri ışığında nasıl yeniden yorumlandığını tartışarak dilin edinimi ve kökenine dair tartışmaların çok disiplinli doğasına dikkat çekmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

uyaran eksikliği, dil edinimi, doğuştanlık, evrensel dilbilgisi

Linguistic Innateness and the Poverty of the Stimulus Argument

Öz

This article comprehensively examines the hypothesis of linguistic innateness and its cornerstone, the “Poverty of the Stimulus” (POS) argument, which remains one of the most fundamental debates in linguistics and cognitive sciences. Introduced to modern linguistics by Noam Chomsky, this argument posits that the limited, imperfect, and complex linguistic input children are exposed to cannot alone account for the linguistic richness found in their output. The article provides a comparative analysis between the nativist approach, rooted in the rationalist tradition, and empiricist, cognitivist, and interactionist alternatives. The study traces the historical development of the POS argument through key concepts such as the “projection problem,” “lack of negative evidence,” and “independence from general intelligence”. Subsequently, methodological, neuroscientific, and usage-based critiques against this argument are evaluated in detail. These critiques emphasize that linguistic input is richer than previously assumed and that general-purpose learning mechanisms may suffice for language acquisition. Ultimately, the paper discusses how the POS argument is being reinterpreted in light of contemporary computational models and statistical learning data, highlighting the multidisciplinary nature of debates regarding the origins of language.

Anahtar Kelimeler

poverty of sthe stimulus, language acquisition, nativizm, universal grammar

Kaynakça

Aksu-Koç, Ayhan. (1998). The role of input vs. universal predispositions in the emergence of tense-aspect morphology: Evidence from Turkish. First Language, 18, 255–280.
Aksu-Koç, Ayhan., & Slobin, Dan Isaac. (1985). The acquisition of Turkish. İçinde D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition (Cilt 1, ss. 839–878). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Arbib, Michael A. (2005). From monkey-like action recognition to human language: An evolutionary framework for neurolinguistics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(2), 105–124.
Arbib, Michael A. (2012). How the Brain Got Language: The Mirror System Hypothesis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baker, Carl L. (1979). Syntactic theory and the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry, 10(4), 533–581.
Bates, Elizabeth., & MacWhinney, Brian. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. İçinde B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition. Lawrence: Erlbaum Associates.
Behme, Christina., & Deacon, S. Helene. (2008). Language learning in infancy: Does the empirical evidence support a domain specific language acquisition device? Philosophical Psychology, 21(5), 641–671.
Bellugi, Ursula vd. (2013). Dissociation between language and cognitive functions in Williams syndrome. İçinde D. Bishop & K. Mogford (Ed.), Language Development in Exceptional Circumstances (ss. 177–189). London: Psychology Press.
Bender, Emily M. vd. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT 2021), 610–623.
Bergelson, Elika., & Aslin, Richard N. (2017). Nature and origins of the lexicon in 6-mo-olds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(49), 12916–12921.

Bergelson, Elika vd. (2019). Day by day, hour by hour: Naturalistic language input to infants. Developmental Science, 22(1), e12715.
Berwick, Robert C. vd. (2011). Poverty of the stimulus revisited. Cognitive Science, 35(7), 1207–1242.
Berwick, Robert C., & Chomsky, Noam. (2016). Why Only Us: Language and Evolution. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Berwick, Robert C., Chomsky, Noam., & Piattelli-Palmarini, Massimo. (2013). Poverty of the stimulus stands: Why recent challenges fail. İçinde M. Piattelli-Palmarini & R. C. Berwick (Ed.), Rich Languages from Poor Inputs (ss. 19–42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bowerman, Melissa. (1988). The “no negative evidence” problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar? İçinde J. Hawkins (Ed.), Explaining Language Universals (ss. 73–101). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Brown, Roger. (1973). A First Language: The Early Stages. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Brown, Roger., & Hanlon, C. (1970). Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child speech. İçinde J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language (ss. 11–53). New York: Wiley.
Brown, Tom B. vd. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 1877–1901.
Bruner, Jerome S. (1983). Child's Talk: Learning to Use Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bruner, Jerome S. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bybee, Joan. (1985). Morphology: A Study of the Relation Between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bybee, Joan. (2001). Phonology and Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, Joan. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind's response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733.
Bybee, Joan. (2010). Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carey, Susan. (1978). The child as word learner. İçinde M. Halle, J. Bresnan & G. A. Miller (Ed.), Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality (ss. 264–293). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Cazden, Courtney B. (1968). The acquisition of noun and verb inflections. Child Development, 39(2), 433–448.
Chater, Nick., & Christiansen, Morten H. (2011). A solution to the logical problem of language evolution: Language as an adaptation to the human brain. İçinde K. Gibson & M. Tallerman (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Language Evolution (ss. 626–639). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chomsky, Noam. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.
Chomsky, Noam. (1959). A review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior. Language, 35(1), 26–58.
Chomsky, Noam. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam. (1966). Explanatory models in linguistics. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, 44, 528–550.
Chomsky, Noam. (1980). Rules and Representations. New York: Columbia University Press.
Chomsky, Noam. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Chomsky, Noam. (1986). Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York: Praeger.
Chomsky, Noam. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam. (2012). Poverty of stimulus: Unfinished business. Studies in Chinese Linguistics, 3–16.
Chomsky, Noam. (2013). Poverty of stimulus: Willingness to be puzzled. İçinde R. C. Berwick & M. Piattelli-Palmarini (Ed.), Rich Languages from Poor Inputs (ss. 61–67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chomsky, Noam., Roberts, Ian., & Watumull, Jeffrey. (2023). Noam Chomsky: The false promise of ChatGPT. The New York Times. Erişim tarihi: 10.09.2025.
Christiansen, Morten H., & Chater, Nick. (2008). Language as shaped by the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31(5), 489–508.
Clahsen, Harald. (1999). Lexical entries and rules of language: A multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(6), 991–1013.
Clahsen, Harald., & Almazan, Mayella. (1998). Syntax and morphology in Williams syndrome. Cognition, 68(3), 167–198.
Clark, Eve Vivienne., & Lappin, Shalom. (2011). Linguistic Nativism and the Poverty of the Stimulus. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Cowie, Fiona. (1999). What's Within? Nativism Reconsidered. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cowie, Fiona., Culicover, Peter., & Samuels, Richard. (2020). Innateness and language. İçinde E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Erişim tarihi: 11.10.2025.
Crain, Stephen. (1991). Language acquisition in the absence of experience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14(4), 597–612.
Crain, Stephen., & McKee, Cecile. (1985). Acquisition of structural restrictions on anaphora. İçinde S. Berman, J. W. Choe & J. McDonough (Ed.), Proceedings of NELS 16 (ss. 94–110). Amherst: University of Massachusetts.
Crain, Stephen., & Nakayama, Mineharu. (1987). Structure dependence in grammar formation. Language, 63(3), 522–543.
Crain, Stephen., & Pietroski, Paul. (2001). Nature, nurture and universal grammar. Linguistics and Philosophy, 24(2), 139–186.
Crain, Stephen., & Thornton, Rosalind. (2000). Investigations in Universal Grammar. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Croft, William. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cipriani, E. (2025). Chomsky on methodological naturalism: On the scientific status of generative linguistics. Rivista Internazionale di Filosofia e Psicologia, 16(1).
Dąbrowska, Ewa. (2004). Language, Mind and Brain: Some Psychological and Neurological Constraints on Theories of Grammar. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Dąbrowska, Ewa. (2012). Different speakers, different grammars. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(10), 653–665.
Dąbrowska, Ewa. (2015). What exactly is universal grammar, and has anyone seen it? Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 852.
Dąbrowska, Ewa., & Street, James. (2006). Individual differences in language attainment: Comprehension of passive sentences by native and non-native English speakers. Language Sciences, 28(6), 604–615.
De Villiers, Jill G., & De Villiers, Peter A. (1973). A cross-sectional study of the acquisition of grammatical morphemes in child speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2(3), 267–278.
Deacon, Terrence W. (1997). The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain. New York: W. W. Norton.
Dessalles, Jean-Louis. (2007). Why We Talk: The Evolutionary Origins of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dryer, Matthew S. (1992). The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language, 68(1), 81–138.
Dryer, Matthew S. (2013). Order of subject, object and verb. İçinde M. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Ed.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Elman, Jeffrey L. vd. (1996). Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Evans, Nicholas., & Levinson, Stephen C. (2009). The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(5), 429–448.
Evans, Vyvyan. (2014). The Language Myth: Why Language Is Not an Instinct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fenson, Larry vd. (1994). Variability in early communicative development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 59(5), 174–185.
Ferguson, Charles A. (1964). Baby talk in six languages. American Anthropologist, 66(6), 103–114.
Fodor, Janet D., & Crowther, Carrie. (2002). Understanding stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 19, 105–145.
Fodor, Jerry A. (1981). Representations: Philosophical Essays on the Foundations of Cognitive Science. Brighton: Harvester Press.
Fodor, Jerry A. (1983). The Modularity of Mind: An Essay on Faculty Psychology. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Gilkerson, Jill vd. (2018). Language experience in the second year of life and language outcomes in late childhood. Pediatrics, 142(4).
Gleitman, Lila R. (1990). The structural sources of verb meanings. Language Acquisition, 1(1), 3–55.
Goldberg, Adele E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, Adele E. (2006). Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goodman, Nelson. (1955). Fact, Fiction, and Forecast. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Goodman, Nelson. (1967). The epistemological argument. Synthese, 17(1), 23–28.
Götz, M. (1968). Verzeichnis der orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland. Band XIII. 2: Türkische Handschriften. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH.
Griffiths, T. L., Kemp, C., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2008). Bayesian models of cognition. İçinde R. Sun (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Computational Psychology (ss. 59–100). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Guasti, Maria T. (2004). Language Acquisition: The Growth of Grammar. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Güven, Selin., & Leonard, Laurence Barry. (2020). Production of noun suffixes by Turkish-speaking children with developmental language disorder and their typically developing peers. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 55(3), 356–370.
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. (1975). Learning How to Mean: Explorations in the Development of Language. London: Edward Arnold.
Hart, Betty., & Risley, Todd R. (1995). Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Hart, Betty., & Risley, Todd R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap. American Educator, 27, 4–9.
Haspelmath, Martin. (2008). Parametric versus functional explanations of syntactic universals. İçinde T. Biberauer (Ed.), The Limits of Syntactic Variation (ss. 75–107). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Haspelmath, Martin. (2020). Human linguisticality and the building blocks of languages. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 3056.
Hauser, Marc D., Chomsky, Noam., & Fitch, Tecumseh. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569–1579.
Hawkins, John A. (1994). A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hawkins, John A. (2004). Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hickok, Gregory., & Poeppel, David. (2004). Dorsal and ventral streams: A framework for understanding aspects of the functional anatomy of language. Cognition, 92(1–2), 67–99.
Hickok, Gregory., & Poeppel, David. (2007). The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8(5), 393–402.
Hirsh-Pasek, Kathy., & Golinkoff, Roberta M. (1996). The Origins of Grammar: Evidence from Early Language Comprehension. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hockett, Charles Francis. (1958). A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: Macmillan.
Hornstein, Norbert., & Lightfoot, David. (1981). Explanation in Linguistics: The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition. London: Longman.
Hyams, Nina M. (1986). Language Acquisition and the Theory of Parameters. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Jackendoff, Ray. (1997). The Architecture of the Language Faculty. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Karmiloff-Smith, Annette. (1992). Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Karmiloff-Smith, Annette. (1998). Development itself is the key to understanding developmental disorders. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(10), 389–398.
Kerimoğlu, Caner. (2021a). Chomsky Darwin'e Karşı: Evrensel Dilbilgisi, Dilin Kökeni ve Evrim. İzmir: Varyant.
Kerimoğlu, Caner. (2021b). Chomsky'nin problemi: Dilin evrimi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Türkoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(2), 598–614.
Kerimoğlu, Caner. (2026). Yapay zekâ dilin doğuştanlığını yıkabilir mi? Büyük dil modelleri karşısında uyaran eksikliği argümanı. Dil Araştırmaları, 38, 1–24.
King, David. (2016). Poverty of the stimulus arguments and behaviorism. Behavior & Philosophy, 43, 38–61.
Köksal, M. Fatih. (2014). Yûnus Emre Dîvânı'nın yeni bir nüshası ve Yûnus'un yayımlanmamış şiirleri. Türk Kültürü İncelemeleri Dergisi, 31, 143–174.
Kuczaj, Stan A. (1977). The acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16(5), 589–600.
Langacker, Ronald W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. (2009). Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lasnik, Howard., & Lidz, Jeffrey. (2017). The argument from the poverty of the stimulus. İçinde I. Roberts (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Universal Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Laurence, Stephen., & Margolis, Eric. (2001). The poverty of the stimulus argument. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 52, 217–276.
Lecun, Yann., Bengio, Yoshua., & Hinton, Geoffrey. (2015). Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436–444.
Legate, Julie A., & Yang, Charles D. (2002). Empirical re-assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 19(1–2), 151–162.
Lewis, John., & Elman, Jeffrey L. (2001). Learnability and the statistical structure of language: Poverty of stimulus arguments revisited. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 359–370.
Lieberman, Philip. (2000). Human Language and Our Reptilian Brain: The Subcortical Bases of Speech, Syntax, and Thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Lieberman, Philip. (2007). The evolution of human speech: Its anatomical and neural bases. Current Anthropology, 48(1), 39–66.
Lieven, Elena V. M., Pine, Julian M., & Baldwin, Gillian. (1997). Lexically based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of Child Language, 24(1), 187–219.
Lidz, Jeffrey. (2018). The explanatory power of linguistic theory. İçinde N. Hornstein, H. Lasnik, P. Patel-Grosz & C. Yang (Ed.), Syntactic Structures After 60 Years (ss. 225–242). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Lidz, Jeffrey., Waxman, Sandra., & Freedman, Jennifer. (2003). What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Experimental evidence for syntactic structure at 18 months. Cognition, 89(3), 295–303.
Lizarraga, Andrew., Honig, Edouardo., & Wu, Ying N. (2025). From stochastic parrots to digital intelligence: The evolution of language models and their cognitive capabilities. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 17(3), e70035.
MacWhinney, Brian. (1987). The competition model. İçinde B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition (ss. 249–308). Lawrence: Erlbaum Associates.
Maddieson, Ian. (1984). Patterns of Sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mandler, Jean M. (2004). The Foundations of Mind: Origins of Conceptual Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Marcus, Garry F. (1993). Negative evidence in language acquisition. Cognition, 46(1), 53–85.
Marcus, Garry F. vd. (1992). Overregularization in language acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 57(4), i–182.
Morgan, James L., & Bonamo, Katherine M. (1995). Negative evidence on negative evidence. Developmental Psychology, 31(2), 180–197.
Naigles, Letitia. (1990). Children use syntax to learn verb meanings. Journal of Child Language, 17(2), 357–374.
Neville, Helen J., & Bavelier, Daphne. (2002). Human brain plasticity: Evidence from sensory deprivation and altered language experience. Progress in Brain Research, 138, 177–188.
O'Grady, William. (2005). Syntactic Carpentry: An Emergentist Approach to Syntax. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Palmer, F. R. (2001). Semantics (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pearl, Lisa. (2022). Poverty of the stimulus without tears. Language Learning and Development, 18(4), 415–454.
Pearl, Lisa., & Sprouse, Jon. (2013). Syntactic acquisition in the absence of POS evidence. Language, 89(1), 63–109.
Perfors, Amy., Tenenbaum, Joshua B., & Regier, Terry. (2011). The learnability of abstract syntactic principles. Cognition, 118(3), 306–338.
Peters, Stanley. (1972). The projection problem: How is a grammar to be selected? İçinde Goals of Linguistic Theory (ss. 171–188). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Piaget, Jean. (1938). Çocukta Dil ve Düşünme (Çev. E. S. Sivayuşgil). İstanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi.
Piattelli-Palmarini, Massimo (Ed.). (1980). Language and Learning: The Debate Between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Pine, Julian M., Lieven, Elena V. M., & Rowland, Caroline F. (1998). Comparing different models of the development of the English verb category. Linguistics, 36(4), 807–830.
Pinker, Steven. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Pinker, Steven. (1994). The Language Instinct: The New Science of Language and Mind. London: Penguin Books.
Pinker, Steven. (1996). Learnability and Cognition: The Acquisition of Argument Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Pinker, Steven. (2010). Boş Sayfa: İnsan Doğasının Modern İnkârı (Çev. Mehmet Doğan). İstanbul: Alfa.
Pinker, Steven. (2018). Düşüncenin Maddesi: İnsan Doğasına Açılan Pencere Olarak Dil (Çev. Mehmet Doğan). İstanbul: Alfa.
Pinker, Steven., & Bloom, Paul. (1990). Natural language and natural selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 707–784.
Pinker, Steven., & Prince, Alan. (1988). On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition, 28(1–2), 73–193.
Pullum, Geoffrey K. (1996). Learnability, hyperlearning, and the poverty of the stimulus. Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 498–513.
Pullum, Geoffrey K., & Scholz, Barbara C. (2002). Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 19(1–2), 9–50.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Türkçe

Konular

Bilişsel Dilbilimi, Çocuğun Dil Edinimi

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Caner Kerimoğlu ^*
0000-0002-8514-8578
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi

30 Haziran 2026

Gönderilme Tarihi

29 Nisan 2026

Kabul Tarihi

14 Mayıs 2026

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2026 Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.66119/babur.1939913

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA53NB33XE

APA

Kerimoğlu, C. (2026). Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı. BABUR Research, 5(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.66119/babur.1939913

AMA

1.Kerimoğlu C. Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı. BABUR Research. 2026;5(1):1-28. doi:10.66119/babur.1939913

Chicago

Kerimoğlu, Caner. 2026. “Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı”. BABUR Research 5 (1): 1-28. https://doi.org/10.66119/babur.1939913.

EndNote

Kerimoğlu C (01 Haziran 2026) Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı. BABUR Research 5 1 1–28.

IEEE

[1]C. Kerimoğlu, “Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı”, BABUR Research, c. 5, sy 1, ss. 1–28, Haz. 2026, doi: 10.66119/babur.1939913.

ISNAD

Kerimoğlu, Caner. “Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı”. BABUR Research 5/1 (01 Haziran 2026): 1-28. https://doi.org/10.66119/babur.1939913.

JAMA

1.Kerimoğlu C. Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı. BABUR Research. 2026;5:1–28.

MLA

Kerimoğlu, Caner. “Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı”. BABUR Research, c. 5, sy 1, Haziran 2026, ss. 1-28, doi:10.66119/babur.1939913.

Vancouver

1.Caner Kerimoğlu. Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı. BABUR Research. 01 Haziran 2026;5(1):1-28. doi:10.66119/babur.1939913

Deniz Demiryakan

Dilin Doğuştanlığı ve Uyaran Eksikliği Argümanı

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

Linguistic Innateness and the Poverty of the Stimulus Argument

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kaynakça

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Konular

Bölüm

Yazarlar

Yayımlanma Tarihi

Gönderilme Tarihi

Kabul Tarihi

Yayımlandığı Sayı

DOI

IZ

Kaynak Göster