15 Questions in A Dialogue with Noam Chomsky
Question 1 Joint research of linguists and experts from other fields (Biology, Physics,etc.) should help us understand the Faculty of Language better. However, in practicesuch cooperation seems not to be feasible, for various reasons. Do you think that
relevant questions about the Faculty of Language can still be asked and pursued withthe theoretical tools that have been used in Generative Grammar? This question isperhaps particularly relevant for young linguists.
Question 2 Interdisciplinary approaches seem to be necessary these days. In suchcontext, much theoretical research takes into account psycho and neurolinguistic
experiments, and other types of evidence. This brings back the possibility toincorporate usage-based approaches to language, with tools (statistical analyses,
corpus-based research, etc.) that are not always backed up with theoretically soundresearch questions. What is your perspective on this matter?
Question 3 Isn’t a more parsimonious (and more biologically sound) hypothesis tosuggest that language, qua organ, may be a variational modality, in the sense ofWagner (2014), of some already existing organ, with homologues in other, extinct orextant species, possibly serving different functions from communication (or thought)?
Question 4 What do you think about the Cartographic Project? To what extent is itcompatible with your views?
Question 5 What is the place of optionality in grammar and its interaction withinterface conditions imposed by pragmatic and semantic principles?
Question 6 Traditionally, much research has focused on locality constraints, butsome linguistic phenomena show that globality is also relevant in accounting for
certain phenomena. How can this tension be solved?
Question 7 What is the place of acceptability judgments in linguistic theory and how
do they relate to linguistic variation? How can we explain the fact that phonologicaland morphological factors (e.g., prosody, resumptive pronouns, ellipsis), may
ameliorate some syntactic violations?
Question 8 In the current version of the Minimalist Program, what are thetheory-internal restrictions that make it falsifiable?

Question 9 Wiltschko 2014 has argued that a universal categorial specification (i.e.
universal labeling) is impossible because languages may differ with respect to thecategories/labels/unit types they express. Wiltschko proposes instead that UG
should be conceived as conforming only to a category-neutral hierarchical spine.
Can you comment on the plausibility of a conception along these lines? It may
appear to conform to minimalist desiderata, but it raises a number of questions about
the learnability of a system where categorization is unrestricted (grammaticalcategories are assumed to be language-specific) and where the division between
functional and lexical elements is blurred.
Question 10 Concerning ellipsis and its place in grammar, a very widespread viewcontends that ellipsis is syntactic in nature, whereas some others, including work ofyourself with Howard Lasnik back in the 90s argue that ellipsis should be regarded asa (radical) case of deaccentuation, thus placing ellipsis at the PF side of the grammar.
How positive do you feel about the syntactic view of ellipsis?
Question 11 What is your opinion on the application of minimalism to the acquisitionof non-native languages?
Question 12 Assuming some version of Phase Theory, how does the systemproceed to assemble the different pieces of a derivation, a process that is needed byPF [Phonetic Form] and LF [Logical Form]?
Question 13 Are there reasons to maintain the PIC [Phase ImpenetrabilityCondition] as an independent condition or could it just be derived from cyclic
Spell-out of phase complements?
Question 14 What are the problems, empirical and conceptual, of the proliferation ofphases (say, beyond C, v, D), and in particular the postulation of phases within theword?
Question 15 David Hilbert famously came up with several fundamental problems formathematics in 1900, which he presented in the International Congress ofMathematicians at the Sorbonne. What would you say are today's problems forlinguistics as you understand it—and do you see any avenues for research intothem? They don't have to be 23 as conceived by Hilbert or even 10 as he presented
in the congress. But it would be good if they are serious and, in your opinion,
solvable (not mysteries).