> Language is a biological phenomenon. The central issue is locating it
> within a global picture of how it fits within animal behavior. So
> skipping a bunch of steps what are animal brains (seat of behavior),
> what are they for, and how do they work? To answer those questions you
> need a theoretical model, and a philosophy of mind---that is designed
> in advance to comprehend language and other symbolic activities,
> including such specialities as mathematics.
Yes, that's a valid approach. So is saying that language is a social phenomenon so it must be studied in a sociological/anthropological context. Or that it is deeply intertwined with cognition so it must be fitted into a global picture of human psychology. Or epistemology since language has meaning.
My understanding is that an important part of Chomsky's work was the hypothesis of the "autonomy of syntax", that it makes sense to study the syntactic properties of language without regard for those other issues. Not denying the existence or importance of those issues, just saying that syntax could also be examined without taking them into account.
-- Sandy Harris, Quanzhou, Fujian, China