Generative Linguistics, Large Language Models, and the Social Nature of Scientific Success

Chomsky (1968: 3) greeted the rise of computing technology with skepticism, arguing that "the kinds of structures that are realizable in terms of [computational methods ] are simply not those that must be postulated to underlie the use of language . " 55 years later, Piantadosi (2023: 15) celebrated the release of ChatGPT by directing that same criticism toward generative linguistic s: "the success of large language models is a failure for generative theories because it goes against virtually all of the principles these theories have espoused . " Chesi ( forthcoming) may not agree with Piantadosi's criticisms, but he does take them as a harbinger of scientific crisis. The minimalist program, hampered by a lack of formal and empirical rigor, has failed to produce a comprehensive, self - consistent theory of syntax. ChatG PT's apparent linguistic competence, in tandem with the success of computational accounts of gradient acceptability and online phenomena, seem to suggest that "generative linguistics no longer dictates the agenda for future linguistic challenges" ( Chesi forthcoming: 2). In order to survive, Chesi warns, generativists need to make progress towards a theory that is based on precisely stated principles and evaluated on a common set of explananda . Chesi's target paper presents the current collision of the worlds as a debate about the intellectual merits of generativist theories. According to Chesi, the success of generativism depends on generativists' ability to resolve their deficits of rigor, so that they can parry the theoretical attacks that language model s have levied against core principles of minimalism. This response argues, contrary to Chesi's framing but consistent with current consensus in the history and sociology of science (Fleck 1935; Kuhn 1962; Mullin s 1975; Latour 1984; Law & Lodge 1984), that the generativist crisis described by Piantadosi and Chesi is social in nature, and cannot be averted by intellectual means.