Keywords
Grammar Didactics
Grammar Teaching
Biolinguistics
Grammar Learning
Brain and Grammar
Lingüística
didáctica de la gramática
enseñanza de la gramática
Biolingüística
aprendizaje de la gramática
cerebro y gramática
Abstract
This article discusses the mediation strategies that have been used for the teaching of grammar both at the secondary and higher education levels.Neurolinguistics has taken advantage of the progress of medical advances in neurology to better understand how the human brain works in everything related to the
communicative capacity of speakers, not only in terms of their production and listening capacities, but mainly their abilities. construction and interpretation of
messages; area that is more related to logic and the parts of the brain that are linked to it. In such a way that when pretending to mediate in the learning process of
grammar if students are induced to fragment a text or a sentence into parts, they are being asked to use their left hemisphere, but when they are asked to identify the
components syntactic through questions of the type Who? What? and whom? for sentence components, you are misled because this type of question implies the
concept of animity, which the right brain recognizes well, so that it fails to give non-animated answers to questions that demand an animated response. Hence, there is a constant idea to respond with animated subjects and animated indirect objects, while there is a tendency to consider direct objects as inanimate, which limits the analysis and understanding of texts.
References
Barón, L. (2010). La teoría lingüística de Noam Chomsky. Revisión crítica centrada en el innatismo semántico y su estudio empírico [Tesis de maestría no publicada]. Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Barón, L., Müller, O. & Labos, E. (2013). Los conceptos innatos en la obra de Chomsky: definición y propuesta de un método empírico para su estudio. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 31(2), 324-343.
Berwick, R. & Chomsky, N. (2011). The biolinguistic program: The current state of its development. En A. M. Di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (Eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise. New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty (pp. 19-41). Oxford University Press.
Berwick, R., Friederici, A., Chomsky, N. & Bolhuis, J. (2013). Evolution, brain and the nature of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(2), 89-98. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2012.12.002.
Chomsky, N. (1969). Lingüística cartesiana. Gredos.
Chomsky, N. (1970). Aspectos de la teoría de la sintaxis. Aguilar.
Chomsky, N. (1978). Estructuras sintácticas. Siglo XXI.
Chomsky, N. (1980). Sintáctica y semántica en la gramática generativa. Siglo XXI.
Chomsky, N. (1988a). El lenguaje y los problemas del conocimiento. Conferencias de Managua I. Visor.
Chomsky, N. (1988b). La nueva sintaxis: teoría de la rección y el ligamento. Paidós.
Chomsky, N. (1992). El lenguaje y el entendimiento. Planeta-De Agostini.
Chomsky, N. (1998). Una aproximación naturalista a la mente y al lenguaje. Prensa Ibérica.
Chomsky, N. (1999). El programa minimalista. Alianza editorial.
Chomsky, N. (2005). Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry, (36), 1-22.
Chomsky, N. (2007b). Of minds and language. Biolinguistics, (1), 1009-1027.
Chomsky, N. (2010). Some simple evo devo theses. How true might they be for language?. En R. Larson, V. Deprez & H. Yamakido (Eds.), The Evolution of Human Language (pp. 45-62). Cambridge University Press.
Chomsky, N., Place, U. T. & Schoneberger, T. (2000). Correspondence 1993–1994. The Analysis Verbal Behavior, (17), 7–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392953
Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2002). Unraveling the enigma of human intelligence: Evolutionary psychology and the multimodular mind. In R. J. Sternberg & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The evolution of intelligence (pp. 145–198). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
De Vega, M. (1984). Introducción a la psicología cognitiva. Alianza.
Eddy, J. K. & Glass, A. L. (1981). Reading and listening to high and low imagery sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 20(3), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90483-7
Fasanella, A. (2009). Los parámetros en la teoría sintáctica: historia y revisión crítica [Tesis de maestría no publicada]. Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, España.
Fernández, P. & Ruiz, M. (1990). Facultades horizontales vs. verticales o de cómo la mente es explicada con dos términos. En P. Fernández & M. Ruiz (Eds.), Cognición y Modularidad (pp. 34-46). PPU.
Fodor, J. (1986). La modularidad de la mente. Morata.
Gardner, H. (1985). La nueva ciencia de la mente. Paidós.
Gleason, J. B. (2010). Desarrollo del lenguaje. Una visión y una vista preliminar: Pearson Educación.
Hauser, M., Chomsky, N. & Fitch, W. (2002). The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?. Science, (298), 569-1579.
Hierro, J. (1976). La teoría de las ideas innatas en Chomsky. Labor.
Longa, V. (2006). Sobre el significado del descubrimiento del gen FOXP2. Estudios de Lingüística de la Universidad de Alicante, (20), 177-207.
Miranda, T. (2005). La arquitectura de la mente según Noam Chomsky. Siglo XXI.
O’ Grady, W. (2008). Innateness, universal grammar, and emergentism. Lingua: International Review of General Linguistics, 118(4), 620-631.
Osherson, D., Perani, D., Cappa, S., Schnur, T., Grassi, F. & Fazio, F. (1998): Distinct brain loci in deductive versus probabilistic reasoning. Neuropsychologia, (36), 369-376.
Owen, A. M., Roberts, A. C., Polkey, C. E., Sahakian, B. J. & Robbins, T. W. (1991). Extradimensional versus Intradimensional set-shifting performance following frontal lobe excisions, temporal lobe excisions oramydalo-hyppocampectomy in man. Neuropsychologia, (29), 993-1006.
Parkin, A. J. (1996). Explorations in Cognitive Neuropsychology. Blackwell.
Pinker, S. (1995). Language Acquisition. En L. Gleitman, M. Liberman & D. Osherson (Eds.), An Invitation to Cognitive Science (pp. 199-238). MIT Press.
Pinker, S., & Jackendoff, R. (2005). The faculty of language: what's special about it?. Cognition, (95), 201-236.
Pradas Gallardo, C. (2021). Área de Broca y Wernike: diferencias y funciones. https://www.psicologia-online.com/area-de-broca-y-wernicke-diferencias-y-funciones-4110.html
Pujadas, L. (1988). Intensión, intención, intencionalidad. Taula, (10), 29-41.
Ramus, F., Hauser, M., Miller, C., Morris, D. & Mehler, J. (2000). Language discrimination by human newborns and by cotton-top tamarin monkeys. Science, (288), 349-351.
Salvat Editores (1975). Entrevista con Avram Noam Chomsky. En Biblioteca Salvat de Grandes Temas, Revolución en la Lingüística (pp. 8-31). Salvat.
Searle, J. (1972). Chomsky's revolution in linguistics. The New York Review of Books, 18(12). https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1972/06/29/a-special-supplement-chomskys-revolution-in-lingui/
Spelke, E. (1994). Initial knowledge: six suggestions. Cognition, (50), 431-445.
Sperber, D. (2001). In defense of massive modularity. En E. Dupoux (Ed.), Language, Brain and Cognitive Development (pp. 47-58). MIT Press.
Tomasello, M. (2004). Syntax or semantics? Response to Lidz et al. Cognition, (93), 139-140.
Toro, J., Trobalon, J. & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2005). Effects of backward speech and speaker variability in language discrimination by rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 31(1), 95-100.
Van Valin, R. Jr. & Foley, W. (1980). Role and reference grammar. En E. Moravcsik & J. Wirth (Eds.), Current Approaches to Syntax (pp. 329-352). Academic Press.
Vera de la Puente, E. (1993). Neuropsicología de la representación mental en imágenes visuales [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universidad de Oviedo, Asturias, España.
Winter, B. & Reber, A. (1994). Implicit learning and the acquisition of natural languages. En N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages (pp. 115-145). Academic Press.