Editing Minimalist program (section)

==== Functionalism ====

In linguistics, there are differing approaches taken to explore the basis of language: two of these approaches are [[formalism (linguistics)|formalism]] and [[Functional linguistics|functionalism]]. It has been argued that the formalist approach can be characterized by the belief that rules governing syntax can be analyzed independently from things such as meaning and discourse. In other words, according to formalists, syntax is an independent system (referred to as the [[autonomy of syntax]]). By contrast, functionalists believe that syntax is determined largely by the communicative function that it serves. Therefore, syntax is not kept separate from things such as meaning and discourse.<ref name="newmeyer2010">{{cite journal|last1=Newmeyer|first1=Frederick J|date=2010|title=Formalism and functionalism in linguistics|journal=Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Cognitive Science|volume=1|issue=3|pages=301–307|doi=10.1002/wcs.6|pmid=26271372}}</ref>

Under functionalism, there is a belief that language evolved alongside other cognitive abilities, and that these cognitive abilities must be understood in order to understand language. In Chomsky's theories prior to MP, he had been interested exclusively in formalism, and had believed that language could be isolated from other cognitive abilities. However, with the introduction of MP, Chomsky considers aspects of cognition (e.g. the conceptual-intentional (CI) system and the sensory motor (SM) system) to be linked to language. Rather than arguing that syntax is a specialized model which excludes other systems, under MP, Chomsky considers the roles of cognition, production, and articulation in formulating language. Given that these cognitive systems are considered in an account of language under MP, it has been argued that in contrast to Chomsky's previous theories, MP is consistent with functionalism.<ref name="golumbia2010">{{cite journal|last1=Golumbia|first1=David|date=2010|title=Minimalism is functionalism|journal=Language Sciences (Oxford)|volume=32|issue=1|pages=28–42|doi=10.1016/j.langsci.2008.07.001}}</ref>