rgb writes:
Your position's always seemed to be that there's some kind of grammar machine in each person. Yet, we have a clear example that contradict this claim.
I don't think so
What we consider to be grammatically correct, even in the same language, varies from one group to another. If there is such a grammar machine, shouldn't the grammar in a language be universal with all communities speaking that language?
No.
I see ebonics as an example of what nwr has been trying to say, that grammar in a language is based on centuries of language evolution and not based on any particular grammar rule. Linguists try to impose these rules onto the language, but more often than not these rules just don't fit.
that's a failing of the atempt to cast human languages inside a rigidly ruled structure. Not necessarily a failing of the idea that human beings make use of mental structures evolved specifically for the purpose of dealing with human language.
™ Version 4.2