The first one had very dead-pan humor and the second was more animated, but it is the hyper focus on a logical system that is very separated into idea space that seems hyper-Ti to me. Chomsky is an extremely high intelligence version of Ti and each type can seem different depending on level of intelligence.
The INTP Ne does provide play, perhaps a more animated style in some cases when it is stronger, but I would say that focused Ti can seem kinda dry to outsiders because it is so focused on pure reason. I remember a thread I made on imagination and some of the INTPs shared this very esoteric, dry, logical place that they would go that is not relatable to a lot of other types. I can see how Chomsky seems to have Te as well because he annotates every detail providing sources for absolutely everything he says, but Ti can be exhaustive like that a well, and I think moreso when combined with Ne.
The second INTP I was with read all.the.time. He carried an iPad even to the bathroom, bed, walking down the hall. He was extremely intelligent and lived entirely in the world of idea space. He would talk exhaustively and at length about an idea leaving no detail left out. The persistence, focus, and relentlessness of how he approached a topic could wear me out listening. It's a different idea hyper focus than what I get from TJs. I had a former BIL who was an INTJ who loved to debate, sometimes as play to frustrate people, but there is a different sort of separation from the concrete world. His focus tended to involve the concrete world or think in applications more and perhaps the ideas were less based on personal identity than in the INTP, although I'm not sure if all Ti-doms would admit that or not.
I know that TJs can have a kinda dry style but there is a difference. Chomsky seems focused on ideas in a way that doesn't factor in anything pragmatic like personal consequences. TJs are experts at navigating careers, whereas TPs focus on ideas, but it more easily places them at odds with the external world. Ti seems like the most esoteric function to me existing purely in idea space. Te can certainly be rigid, but more requiring evidence that a different approach will provide a better applied result.
I understand Te and Ti to negotiate differently with the external world. Te has more capacity to compromise or find pragmatic applications, to engage in negotiating its conclusions with the external world, whereas Ti seems to internalize a logical system more as actual identity and the notion of compromise with external systems or being required to find pragmatic applications can even be perceived as offensive.