以上三つの批判をまとめて，Nevins et al. (2009a)は，Everettが主張してい るようなピダハン語の特徴は決して驚くべきものではなく，ピダハン語は世 界の言語でよく知られている可能性の中から選んで使っているにすぎないと 説明している。
In the discussion so far, we have been arguing not only against the specific claim that Pirahã lacks embedding, but also against the more general claim that the facts at issue are typologically novel or particularly surprising.
It is, of course, quite likely that Pirahã syntax does contain surprises for the researcher—every language does. In the domains discussed so far, however, Pirahã seems to have chosen its properties from a familiar menu of possibilities. Where Pirahã differs from English or Portuguese, its properties
have turned out [to] be shared by other languages, like German and Hindi. (p.
376)(Italics by S.N.)
Nevins et al. (2009a)は，CONCLUSIONS, N O N C O N C L U S I O N S , A N D PROSPECTSという結論のセクションで，言語はUniversal Grammarが提供す るすべての範疇や要素を使用するのではなく，一部の範疇や要素は使用しな いことがあることがすでにKenneth Haleによって指摘されていることに注意 を喚起している。
Thirty years before the publication of CA, in a paper entitled ‘Gaps in grammar and culture’, Ken Hale (1975) reflected on the cultural and cognitive implications of a language that appeared to lack number words, most color terms, and relative clauses. The language in question was Warlpiri, whose properties, Hale thought, exemplified a more general puzzle:
If one looks at a variety of languages in the world, one is struck by the observation that certain grammatical devices are found, in virtually identical form and function, in many distinct languages regardless of genetic relationship or historical contact. I am not referring here to the various formal universals which have been identified in recent years, but rather to certain specific highly recurrent grammatical devices—for instance: relative clauses; the passive; negation with variable sentence internal scope; topicalization; and others. The overall impression one gains through such an examination of a variety of the world’s languages is that these devices are universal. Nonetheless, it is a fact that a great many languages lack specific ones. (Hale 1975:299–300)
In his response to this puzzle, Hale argued that the absence of particular lexical or grammatical items does not necessarily signal the absence of the corresponding concepts and categories, but instead may merely represent ‘gaps in the conventionalized instantiation of universally available categories’ (1975:312). (p. 396) (Italics by S. N.)
3.3 Everett (2009b). Pirahã culture and grammar: A response to some criticisms. Language, 85, 405–442.
Everett (2009b)は，Nevins et al. (2009a)に対する詳細な反論である。（なお，
Everett (2009b)はNevins et al. (2009a)をNP&R，Hauser et al. (2002)をHC&Fと表 記している。）
Everett (2009b)は，まず，INTRODUCTIONのセクションでNevins et al. (2009a) の批判を次の3つにまとめている。15
(i) the facts and analysis of embedding/recursion proposed are weak, questionable, or wrong
(ii) the culture-grammar connection proposed is both unnecessary and illusory (iii) even if Everett 2005 were right in its analyses and its claims on
culture-grammar connections, there are no implications for Hauser, Chomsky, and Fitch’s (2002, HC&F) version of universal grammar (UG). (p. 405)
そして自説の正しさを証明するには十分なデータが必要であるが，Everett (2005)が本質的に正しく，Everett (2005)ではそれ以前の分析（Everett (1983) とEverett (1986)）の間違いを訂正したのであると述べている。
It is only natural that others evaluate the claims of Everett 2005. Many of my claims are very difficult to establish convincingly without quantitative
data, and some tests are underway with colleagues at MIT’s Brain and Cognitive Sciences Department. Nevertheless, with regard to point (i), I argue that Everett 2005 is essentially correct in its description of the facts and that it corrects errors found in Everett 1983, 1986. (p. 405)
Everettは，この反論で使用するデータについて言及しているが，ピダハン 語のデータに関しては自信を持っているようである。つまり，Nevins et al.
(2009a)は，ピダハン語に関する新しいデータは提供せず，Everettのデータを 使用しているだけである。自分の方が詳しいデータを持っているということ である。
All data in this article were gathered by me from 1977–2007 or by Steve Sheldon from 1967–1976. In answering NP&R, I want to emphasize that their criticisms (unlike the present article) present no new data. They compare twenty-five-year-old data from Everett 1983 (the same data as Everett 1986) with the few examples in Everett 2005. Yet, as we see below, a good deal of other data has been collected to bear on the issues. I was in the field with the Pirahãs for twenty-one months prior to Everett 1983 and have spent an additional fifty-three months in the field since that time. (p. 405)
Everett (2009b)が(i)の批判に関して取り上げているのは次の8つである。セ クションのタイトルを示す。
2. RESPONSE TO CRITICISM ABOUT THE CLAIM THAT PIRAHÃ