The narrow faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how is it defined?

Abstract

In 2002, Hauser, Chomsky and Fitch introduced a terminological/conceptual distinction that became central to the entire field of language evolution research, by dividing the faculty of language into FLN (Faculty of language – narrow sense) and FLB (Faculty of language – broad sense). Unfortunately, three years later the three authors dropped their original definition and replaced it with another (Fitch et al. 2005). Far from achieving their goal “to clarify misunderstandings and aid interdisciplinary rapprochement” (Fitch et al. 2005: 179), the existence of two conflicting definitions of FLN/FLB had the effect of further adding to the confusion. This paper argues that a) the concept of FLN/FLB has acquired central importance in the evolution of language and has also achieved recognisable status beyond that field; b) the two definitions of the FLN/FLB concept do not just differ insignificantly, but rather they differ fundamentally in a way that precludes their reconciliation c) because of the centrality of the FLN/FLB concept, the conflict between the two definitions is not a trivial terminological matter but has important consequences for the research field of the evolution of language. As a conclusion, it is astonishing that such a major conceptual inconsistency between the two definitions of FLN/FLB has remained essentially unnoticed or ignored. It may signal a need for a radical top-down examination and discussion of the terminological-conceptual inventory of the evolution of language before this field extends its own tertiary literature.