Is linguistics worth studying, or did Chom already make the field obsolete?
>>9115506
Worth studying for what?
Chomsky is obsolete. You can't create a universal theory of human language if you only speak English.
>>9115527
For progression of the field.
>>9115506
Yes, it's worth studying if you have an appetite for formal puzzles. It basically has an infinite supply of them, and if you like logic, computational stuff, and fiddling with formal systems generally, it's basically inexhaustible.
Chomsky didn't 'make the field obsolete,' he's probably the most influential figure to its mainstream in decades.
If you like mindlessly analyzing sentences over and over and then drawing syntax trees that probably won't fit on a sheet of A4 for the better part of your academic life then yes, do so.
>>9115506
Didn't the Piraha language prove that Chomsky's theory is wrong?
>>9116552
Chomsky is working at his computer when a student rushes in.
Student: “Professor Chomsky! They’ve discovered an Amazonian tribe that has a language without recursion!”
Chomsky (slowly turning from his computer): “Can they learn Portuguese?”
Student: “Well… yes.”
Chomsky slowly turns back to his computer.
>>9116630
What did he mean by this?
>>9115726
Came here to day this. But I want to add that some courses in linguistics will help your writing because they will give you another way to think about sentence structure, meaning, diction, etc.(And most of your contemporaries will have no fucking clue what you are talking about.)
>>9115726
>You can't create a universal theory of human language if you only speak English.
That's like saying you can't create a universal theory of computation unless you can code in every programming language ever invented
You're wrong and stupid
>>9117719
MATCH THE SENTENCE STRUCTURE OF YOUR ANALOGY WITH THAT OF MY ORIGINAL STATEMENT AND SPOT THE DIFFERENCE
>>9117351
How do I get into learning linguistics in a directed way with this end goal? I've got a bunch of other stuff I'm supposed to be learning and want to keep things efficient.
>>9118138
just read one of the standard textbooks homey
>>9115506
1. Yes 2. No