Chomskyian/generative linguistics completely dominated a generation of young linguists in the 1970s and 1980s: it provided a research program for writing dissertations. But the results were often dubious; generative grammar has great things to say about syntax, but little about morphology, phonology, semantics, &c. Moreover, Chomsky has radically changed his theories several times: his earliest theories, that were most influential, have been all but completely abandoned. Then he went to principles-and-parameters (which is where he lost me, with the argument that pro-drop is conditioned by binary brain switches), and then to the Minimalist Program, which I haven't really bothered to read as much about. But this is a minority paradigm these days. Chomsky's ideas start to really fall apart when you look too closely at some of his premises, like the poverty of the stimulus.
Then there are more traditional linguists (who do more fieldwork and comparative linguistics), applied linguists, and cognitive linguists. All of these groups tend to have separate conferences and have all the problems of scientists in different paradigms, always talking past each other.
EDIT: Chomsky made real, lasting contributions in formalizing the field. He completely transformed the discipline of linguistics for good and bad—but I think his good contributions will endure for a long time, once we get over the Chomskyan hangover.
Chomskyian/generative linguistics completely dominated a generation of young linguists in the 1970s and 1980s: it provided a research program for writing dissertations. But the results were often dubious; generative grammar has great things to say about syntax, but little about morphology, phonology, semantics, &c. Moreover, Chomsky has radically changed his theories several times: his earliest theories, that were most influential, have been all but completely abandoned. Then he went to principles-and-parameters (which is where he lost me, with the argument that pro-drop is conditioned by binary brain switches), and then to the Minimalist Program, which I haven't really bothered to read as much about. But this is a minority paradigm these days. Chomsky's ideas start to really fall apart when you look too closely at some of his premises, like the poverty of the stimulus.
Then there are more traditional linguists (who do more fieldwork and comparative linguistics), applied linguists, and cognitive linguists. All of these groups tend to have separate conferences and have all the problems of scientists in different paradigms, always talking past each other.
EDIT: Chomsky made real, lasting contributions in formalizing the field. He completely transformed the discipline of linguistics for good and bad—but I think his good contributions will endure for a long time, once we get over the Chomskyan hangover.