this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2026
7 points (100.0% liked)

Linguistics

2199 readers
27 users here now

Welcome to the community about the science of human Language!

Everyone is welcome here: from laypeople to professionals, Historical linguists to discourse analysts, structuralists to generativists.

Rules:

  1. Instance rules apply.
  2. Be reasonable, constructive, and conductive to discussion.
  3. Stay on-topic, specially for more divisive subjects. And avoid unnecessary mentioning topics and individuals prone to derail the discussion.
  4. Post sources when reasonable to do so. And when sharing links to paywalled content, provide either a short summary of the content or a freely accessible archive link.
  5. Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
  6. Have fun!

Related communities:

Resources:

Grammar Watch - contains descriptions of the grammars of multiple languages, from the whole world.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Babe, wake up, a new episode of Pirahã/Everett drama has dropped! In 2024 LangSciPress published a Festschrift for Daniel Everett, with an article by Geoff Pullum where he fiercely defended Everett's work and attacked Chomskyans, available here: https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/434 (Daniel Everett on Pirahã syntax)

Now an American linguist who works in Brazil, Denny Moore, has published a response to the article: https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/009832

Geoffrey K. Pullum has repeatedly made severe accusations that the linguist Daniel L. Everett suffered mistreatment in Brazil because his research on the Pirahã people and their language threatened Chomskyan theory. The present article presents a large trove of previously unavailable evidence (official Brazilian government documents, citizen information requests, interviews, etc.) that are directly relevant for assessing the claims that Everett was slandered and unjustly blocked from field research. The evidence disproves these claims, which have circulated widely in what I am designating as the Persecution Hoax. The evolution of Everett’s problems with Brazil’s National Foundation for Indigenous Peoples (FUNAI) is traced and found to be due to his own behavior and not to the action of Noam Chomsky or his affiliated linguists, nor to envious linguists in Brazil. Some variants of the Persecution Hoax myth, which are incompatible with the evidence and with each other, are described, along with comments. This myth is unfavorable for the development of indigenous linguistics in Brazil, as are Pullum’s suggestions for fieldwork. This is discussed briefly and alternative suggestions are offered.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

Yeah. In other words he has no grounds to claim anything. At most he could relay what Everett said, that's it.