Why does the poverty of the stimulus argument support the theory of Universal Grammar?

💡 Explanation

The poverty of the stimulus suggests children acquire complex grammatical knowledge without sufficient explicit input because they possess innate linguistic structures, supporting Universal Grammar, therefore it suggests pre-wired knowledge rather than solely relying on environmental exposure.

• Why does ironic or sarcastic text online often require explicit markers like "/s" or specific emojis, even when context seems clear?
• In a cognitive experiment using EEG to monitor brain activity during natural language comprehension, what distinguishes the brain's response to garden path sentences compared to syntactically unambiguous sentences?
• Why does emoji usage differ significantly across online platforms, leading to potential misinterpretations?
• An infant is exposed to two languages with differing phonotactic constraints. Why does the infant still exhibit canonical babbling before diverging to language-specific phoneme use?
• During a tense negotiation, a negotiator subtly hints at potential concessions without explicitly stating them. Which mechanism facilitates the other party's accurate interpretation of these implied offers?
• Which outcome occurs when a signed language interpreter must manage rapid code-switching between American Sign Language (ASL) and Signed Exact English (SEE)?