APPLIED LINGUISTICS

UCM,

LANGUAGE LEARNING
2

IN

Reading

EARLY CHILDHOOD

Lightbown, P. and N. Spada (2006: l-27)

LANGUAGE

AceursrrtoN is one oF rhe most impressive and Fascinating

aspects of human development. We listen wirh pleasure to the sounds mxds by a three-month-old baby. \(e laugh and'answer' the conversarional 'ba-ba-

ba babbling ofolder babies, and we share in the pride and joy ofparents whose one-year-old has urtered the first 'bye-bye'. Indeed, learning a
language is an amazing fleat-one that has arrracted the attenrion of linguisrs and psychologists for generarions. How do children accomplish this? \Whar er-rables

a child not only ro learn words, but ro put them together iu

nreaningful sentences? Vhar pushes children to go on developing complex grarnmarical language even though rheir early simple communication is successFul for most purposes? Does child language develop similarly around rhe world? How do bilingual children acquire rnore than one language?

In this chaprer, we will look bricfly at some

language ofyoung children.

oF rhe characteristics

of

rhe

\(e will then consider several rheories thar have been offered as explanations flor how language is learned. There is an immense body of research on child language. Akhough much research has
bee n

done in middle-class North American and European families, there is a rich body ofcross-linguisric and cross-cukural research as well. Researchers have rravelled all over rhe world ro observe, record, and srudy childrerr's early langr.rage developrnenr. Our purpose in this chlpter is to couch on a few main poirrrs in rhis research, primarily as a prepararion for rhe discussion of sEcoND LANcuAGE acqr,risirion, which is rhe focus oltthis book.

The first three years: Milestones and developmental sequences

One remarkable thing abour nrnsr LANGUAGE acquisirion is rhe high degree oF similariry in the early language oF children all over rh. worl-d.
Researchers have described or:vELo
p M ENTA L sEeu EN c ES for many aspects language acquisirion. The earliest vocalizarions are simply the involurrtary crying rhat babies do when they are hungry or uncomFqlu[ls.

of first

Language learning in earfi childhood

Language learning

in early chillbood

Soon, however, we hear the cooing and gurgling sounds ofcontented babies, lying in their beds looking at fascinaring shapes and movemenr around rhem. Even though they have litrle control over rhe sounds they make in these early weeks of life, infanm are able ro hear very subrle differences berween the sounds of human languages. In cleverly designed experimenrs, Perer Eimas and his colleagues (1971) demonstrared rhat riny babies can hear the difference be rween 'pa' and 'be, for example. And yet, ir may be many months before their own vocalizarions (babbling) begin to reflecr rhe characteristics ofrhe language or languages rhey hear. By rlre end oFtheir first year, most babies rurdersrand quite a lew frcquently repeated words. They wave when someone says 'bye-bye'; they clap whcn someone says 'pat-a-cake'; they eagerly hurry ro rhe kirchen when 'jr.ricc and cookies' are mentioned. At rwelve months, most babies will have begun ro produce a word or rwo that everyone recognizes. By the age of rwo, rnosr

even more rime and may nor be complecely under control

years.

until

rhe school

Grammatical morphemes
1960s, several researchers focused on how children acquire grammarical morphemes in English. One oFthe besr-known studies was carried out by Roger Brown and his colleagues and students. In a LoNGttuotleL studyoFtlre language development of three children (called Adam, Eve, and Sarah) rhey found that fourteen grammatical morphemes were acquired in a remarkably similar sequence. That research is reported in Brownk 1973

In the

book. The lisr below (adapred From thar book) shows some
morphemes they studied. present progressivc -lzlg (Mornrry rurt
n

of

rhe

rzg)

children reliably produce at least fifry diffi:renr words and some producc many more. Abour this tirne, rhey begin to conrbine words inro simple senteuccs such as 'Momrny juice' and 'baby fall down'. These senrcnccs arc somcrirnes called'telegraphic' because thcy leave our such things as articlcs, prepositions, and auxiliary verbs. \7e recognize them as senrences because, even though FUNcr'roN woRDs and cnnuunrlcAL MoRpHEMEs are nrissing, the word order refects rhc word order of rhe language rl-rey arc hcaring and because the conbined words havc a meaning relarionship rhat rnakes rhenr nrore rhan just a list oFwords. Thus, for an English-speakirrg child, 'kiss baby' docs nor urean rhe sarne rhing as 'baby kiss'. Rcmarkably, we also see evidence, even in these early seurences, thar children are doing rnorc rlrar) irnperfectly irnitaringwhar thcy have lreard.'fheir rwo- and rhrceword scnrences show signs that

plurrl -s(1ivo bookr)

irregular past fbrrns (Baby
possessive
arazrr)

i(Daddy i hat)

copula (Annie rs happy) uricles the and rt

rcgular pasr -azl(She wa'lkefl third person singular simple Prescnt -r (She runr)

auxiliary

/r (Hc

rrconring)

Brown end his collergucs found that a child who had nrastered the
gran)matical morphcrncs ar rhe bottom of rhe list was sure to havc mastcrcd those at thc top, but thc reverse was llot true. Thus, rhere was evitlcnce ltrr a 'devcloprncntal sequetrcc' or order of ac<;uisiriort. Howcvcr, the children did not accluire the nrorpherncs ar the same rge or rate. Eve had mastered ncarly all the rnorphenres bcforc shc was rwo-lnd-a-half ycars old, whilc Sarah and Adrm wcre still working on them whctr rhey were thrce-and-a-half or [our.

on dro
Pre

'n"r*:lifiTffll,.'il:ff ffit,ril; hr mcan 'Daddy

please do rhar

lcll down' or'Daddy funuy rhing whcrc you

Brownt longitudinal work w:rs cotrfirnrcd in a cnoss-stc't'loNAI- study of rwcnty-onc children. Jill and Peter de Villiers (1973) found that children
who correctly used thc nrorphcmes rhat Adanr, Eve, and Sarah had acquired latc werc also able ro use rhc ones that Adanr, Eve, and Sarah had acquired eerlicr.'l'he childrcn rnrstered the nrorphemes at different ages, just as Adanr, llvc, arrd Sarah had done, but the order of thcir acquisirion was very -l'hey were sin-riler to each othcr and similar to Adam, Evc, and Sarah. similar. Many hypothcses hrve becn advanccd to explain why thcse gramu-rarical rrrorphcrncs are acquircd irr the obscrvcd order. Researchcrs have studied the frcquency with which tlrc morphe mes occur in parents' speech, the cognirive complcxiry of tlre Irtcauitrgs rcprescntcd by each nrorpheme, and rlte difficulry of perceiving or protrouncing them. ln thc end, there has been tro siurple satisfactory explnnation fbr thc scqucnce, and most researchers irgree

children s cognitive developmenr. For example, children do not use reurpor.al adverbs such as tonrorrow or'lasr wcek' until rhcy dcvclop some undersranding o[time. In orhcr cases, the devcloprnental sequcnces sccm ro rcflcct the gradual rnasrery ofthe linguistic elenrenrs for expressing ideas th:rr have been present in children's cognirive undersranding for a long rinre. For example, children can distinguish betwecn singular and plural long before they rcliably add plural endilgs ro nouns. Masrcring irrcgular plurals rakes

ltngutge lurttittg itt

e,trly

tlti//lno/
Stage

Language learning in ear$ cbildhood

that the order is determined by an inreracrion amons a number of di(ferenr lactors.

To supplemenr the evidence we have from sirnply observing children, some carefully designed procedures have been developed ro further explore children's knowledge of grammarical morphcmes. One of rhe firsr and best known is the so-called 'wug tesr' developed by Jean Berko Gleason in rhe 1950s. In this 'test', children are shown drawings of imaginary creatures with novel nanres or people perlorming mysterious acrions. For example, rhey arc told, 'Here is a wug. Now there are rwo of rhenr. There are rwo or 'Here is a man who knows how to bod. Yesrerday he did rhe same ching. Yesrcrday, -'. he By completing these sentences widr 'wugs' and 'bodded', children demonsrrate rhat they know rules for the formarion of plural and sinrplc pasr in -'. Engli.sh. By generalizing rhese pamerns to words they have never heard before, they show rhar rheir language is nor jusr a lisr of mernorized word
pairs such as 'book/books'and irod/nodded'.

The negative elenrent is inserted into a more cornplex sentence. Children may add forrns of rhe negative other than'no', including words like'can't' and 'doni'. These senrences appear to follow che correct English patrern of arraching rhe negative to the auxiliary or rnodal verb. However, children do
not yet vary these Forms for differenr persons or tenses: I crn't do it. He dont want it.
Stage

4
oF

Children begin to attach the negarive eletnent to the correct Form

auxiliary verbs srrch as'do' lnd 'be':
You

didnt

have supper. She doesn't want

it.

Even thor-rgh their languagc systern is by now quire complex, they nray still havc t{if ficrrlty with sorne othe r Features rclared to negatives.

The acquisition of other

language fearures also shows how childrcn's

I doni have no nrore candics.

language develops sysremarically, and how rhey go beyond whar rhcy havc heard ro create new forms and srructures.

Questions
The chellenge oFlearning courplcx language systcms is also illustrated in drc developnrenrll srrges through which children lcarn ro ask questions.

Negation
Children learn rhe funcrions of negarion vcry carly. Thar is, they learn to
commenr on rhe disappearance of objecrs, ro refirse a suggesrion, or rejecr an asscrrion, evcn ar the single word stage. However, as Lois Bloonr's (1991) longitudinal srudies show, even rhough children urderstand thesc fu'ctions ard cxp'css rhcr' wirh single words a.d gesrures, ir rakes some tirnc bcfore rhey can express thern in sentences, using the appropriare words and word order. Thc lollowing srages i' rhe developmenr oF .egario. havc bee' observed in rhe acquisirion ofE'glish. si.rilar stagcs have becn obscrvcd i' other languagcs as well (Wode 198 I ).
Stage

'Ihcre is a rernarkable

<prestiorrs in English. For onc

forrn order in which rhe 'lah w<-rrds'ernerge (Bloonr l99l). 'What' is generally tlre 6rsr rzL quesrion worcl to bc uscd. It is oftcn l.'arncd as prrr of a crruNK ('Whassar?') and ir is some tirnc bc[ore rhe child learns tl'rat therc irrc varilrions of rhe fonn. such
cor-rsisrency

in the way children lcarn to

thing,

rhe re is

l predictable

es'What is that?'and'WIrat arc rhese?' 'Wherc' arrd 'who' enrcrgc vcry soon. ldentifying and locaring pcople and objccts arc wirhin thc childt undersranding oF rhe world. Furrhermore, adults rcncl to ask childcen jusr rhese rypes ofquesrions in rhe early clays oF lrurguagc lcarning, For cxarnplc, '\(hcre'.s Monrmy?', or'Vhoi thar?'

I
as rhc

Ncgarion is usrrally expressetl by thc word 'no', cithcr rll alonc or word in thc uttcrance. No. No cookic. No conrb hair.
Stage

firsr

'Why' cmerges around drc end of the second yerrr and becomes a Favourire lor the ncxt year or two. Children scenr ro ask an endless number oF
questions begirrning with 'why', having discovercd how effecrively this lirrlc word gers adults to engagc irr conversariorr, fbr exanrple, 'Vhy thar lady has blue hair?'

LJrrerances grow longer and rhe scnrencc subjcct mly be includecl.'fhe negative word appears.jusr bcfore the verb. Se'tences expressi.g rejecrior or

prohibition often use'don'r'.

Daddy no comb hair. Don't touch thar!

finally, wlren thc child hls a bctrer uudcrsrlnding of mauncr and time,
'how' l nd'when' enrcrgc. ln conrrast ro'what','wher e', and'who' questious, children somctimes ask rhe rnore cogrritively diFficulr 'why', 'whcn', and 'how' qucstions without always ulrdersrauding rhe answers rlrcy get, as the lollowing convcrsarior.r with a [our-year-old clearly shows:

Language learning in early childhood

Language learning in early chiAhool

Child Vhen

can we go ourside?

Parent In about five minutes. Child l-2-3-4-5tlCanwego now?

The abiliry ro use rhese quesrion words is ar leasr pardy ried ro children's cognitive development. It is also predicted in part by rhe questions children are asked and the linguistic complexiry of quesrions wirh differenr uL words. Thus it does not seem surprising rhat rhere is consisrenry in the sequence o[ their acquisition. Perhaps more remarkable is the consisrency in the acquisition of word order in qucstions. This developmenr is not based on learning new meanings, but rarher on learning differenr linguisric forms ro express
meanings that are already undersrood.
Stage

Stage 4 At ,"t"g. 4, some questions are formed by subject-auxiliary inversion' The q,r..ri'on, resemble those of stage 3, but there is more variery in the

auxiliaries that appear be[ore the subject. Are you going to plaY with me?

At rhis

be srage, children can even add'do' in quesrions in which rhere would no auxiliary in the declarative version o[ thc senrence.

Do dogs like ice cream?

Even at this stage, however, children seem able to use either inversion or a word, bur-nor borh. Therefore' we may find inversion in 'yes/no'

ub

I
Cookie? Mummy book?

Children's earliest questions are single words or sirnple rwo- or rhrce-word scntertces wirh rising intonarion:

quesrions but l)or in xut questions, unless rheyare 'What's that?'

Stage

ronvulntc

units such

as

5
Arc rhcsc your boom? Vhy did you do thar? Does Daddy lrave a box?

Ar rt^ge 5,1>orh wh- and'yes/no' questions are formed correctly' correcr questrons-correcr

At rlre same rinre, tlrey may produce some

because they havc been learned as chunks:

Negative qucstions may still be

bir too dif6cult.

outside?

Vheret Daddy? Vhar's

Stage

rhar?

Vhy

the teddy bear can't

gt.r

As they bcgir ro ask rnore new questions, children use the word order of the declarative senrence, wirh rising intonarion. Yotr

likc

rhis?

have some?

And cven though performance on rlrosr quesrions is correct, there is still one more hurdle. Ylhen wh- words appear in subordinate clauses or embedded quesrions, children overgetteraliz.c the inverted lorm thar would bc correct for simple questiotrs and produce sentences such as: Ask him why can'r he go out.
Stage

-l'hey

conrinuc to produce rhe correct chunk-lcarned forms such thar?' alongside rllcir own created quesrions.
Stage

as'Whatt

3
as:

At this srage, children

Passage

Cradually, children norice rhar rhe strucrurc of questions is diFferent and

bcgin to produce quesrions such Can I go? Are you happy?

are able to corrcctly fornr all question rypes, including negative and conrplex cmbeddcd qucstions-

Although some quesrions ar rhis sragc match the adulr parrern, rhey nray be right.forthe wrong rerson. To describe this, we need to see the patter' fror'
the childt perspccrive rather than from the perspective of rhe adul, grrrn-"r. 'Wc call this stage 'fronring' because the child's rule seems to be rhat quesrions

through developmental sequences does not always follow a sready uninterrupced path. Children appear to learn new things and then fall back on old patterus when there is added stress in a uew situacion or when they are using other uew elements in their language. But the overall path takes them toward nrastery of the language that is spoken around thcm.

are formed by purring

'front'of

a senrence ,

sonrerhing-x verb form or question word-ar rhe leaving thc rest of the se ntence in its starcrnenr lorm.

The pre-school years

By the age o[ [our, most children can ask questiotts' give commands, rePort ,e.l everits, aud create stories abour intaginary ones-using correct word order and gramtnatical markers trost of the time. In fact, it is generally accepted that by age four, childrcn have mastered the basic srrucrures oFrhe

Is the reddy is tired? Do I can have a cookie? \Vhy you don't havc one? \(hy you catched ir?

Lttryutge lcnrnitry in etrly cLiLlbool

language or languages spoken to them in these early years. Three- and fouryear-olds continue to learn vocabulary ar rhe rare ofseveral words a day. They begin ro acquire less frequent and more complex linguisric strucrures such as
passives and relative clauses.

Language learning in early childltool

Much of children's language acquisition efforr in rhe lare pre-school years is spent in developir.rg rheir abilicy to use language ir) a widening social environment. They use language in a greacer variery of situarions. They interact more often with unfamiliar adults. They begin to ralk sensibly on the telephone to invisible grandparcnts (younger childrcn do nor urrdcrstand that their telephone parrner canllor see wnar rhey see).'I'hey rcquire the aggressive or cajoling language rhrr is nceded to defend their roys in rhe playground- They show that chey hlve learned rhe diFferencc berwcen how adults ralk to babies and how rhey ralk to each orher, and rhey usc this knowledge in elaborate pretend play in which rhey practise using rhcse differcnt'voiccs'. ln this way, rhey explore and begin to undersrand how and
why language varies.

'caterpillar' is a longer word than 'train', even though the obiecc it represents is substantially shorter! Metalinguistic awareness also includes the discovery of such rhings as ambiguiry. Knowing thar words and sentences can have muhiple meaning gives children access to word iokes, rrick quesrions, and riddles, which they love to share wirh their Frie nds and family. One of the nrost impressive language developments in the early school years is rhe astonishing growth of vocabulary. Many words are acquired in early childhood, when rhe repetirion oIordinary events and experiences provides frequenr cxposure to a lirnired nurnber of words. Children enrer school wirh thc ability to undcrstand and produce hundreds or evetl a few rhousand words. Many nrore are learned at school. In both the spoken and written language Jt school, some words (lor exarnple, 'homework', 'ruler', and 'workbook') appear frequeutly in siruations where their meaning is either

immediately or gradually revealed. Vords like 'poPulation' or 'latitude'

occur less freqtrently, bur rhey are made important by their significance in acadenric subject n)atter. Vocabulary grows at a rate berween several hundred and morc than a thousand words a ycar, depending mainly on how much and how widcly children rcad (Nagy, Hernratr, and Anderson 1985). Thc kind o[vocabulary growth requircd for school success is likely to conre From both reading for assignmeurs and rcading for pleasure, whethe r llarrative or non-ficrion. Dce Gardner (2004) suggests thar reading a variery of text rypes is an essenrial part of vocabulary growth. His research has shown how the rangc ofvocebulary in uarrativc texts is differenc From that in non-ficrion. 'l-herc arc words in non-Gction tcxrs thar arc unlikely to occur in stories or novels. In eddition, non-fiction tcnds to include nrore opportuuities to see a word in its diffbrcnr lornrs ([or exarnple, 'nrumnry', 'nrumrnies', 'munrnrified').'l'he importance o[ reading fbr vocabulary growth is scen whcrr olrservaur pxrcnrs rcporr a child using r new word bur nrispronouncing ir in a way thar revcals it has bcen encountered only in written forrtr.

In thc pre-school years, they also develop METALrNculsi'rc AvARENEss, thc abiliry to treat language as an ob,ject separlre From the meaning it
children can rell you thet itt'silly'to say'drink rhe chair', because it doesnt make sense. However, llthough rhey would never say'cakc thc eat', thcy arc less sure that rhcrc's anyrhing wrong wirh ir. They nray show th:rr thcy know itt a bir odd, bur they will focus rnainly on rhc Fact rhar they can undcrstand whar ir nreans. Five year-olds, on rhc orhcr lrand, know rhat'drink rhe chair'is wrong irr a diffcrent way frorn'cal<e rhc ear'. They can rell you rhar one is 'silly' but the orhcr is 'rhc wrong wrry lrorrnd'.
corrveys.

-fhrec-year-old

The school years

Alrhough pre-school children acquirc cornplcx knowledgc and skills fbr
languegc and language use, rhe school settingwill requirc ,li* *"y, ol-using languagc and bring new opportunitics [br Ianguage dcvelopnrcn t.

Anorher iurpolrant dcvclopnrent in the school years is the acquisirion oF different language REGIs'r'DRs. Childrcn leern how writrcn language dilFers frotn spoken language, how the languege used ro speak to rhc principal is

dif

childrc'devclop

u'dcrsra'd la'guage a'd r<l usc ir ro cxprcss rhemselves in rhe pre-school years. ln the school years, rhese abiliries expand and grow. Children also develop morc sophisricated rnetalinguisric awareness. Leaming ro read gives a nrirjor boost ro rhis aspecr of langulgc
the abiliry to

development. Seeing worcls rcpresentcd by letters and orher symboli on r page leads children ro a new undcrstanding rhar languagc has fornr as well as meaning. Reading reinforces rhc undersranding rhar :r 'word' is scpar:rrc from the rhing ir represenrs. Unlike rhree-year-olds, children who carr rcad understand that'rhe'is a word, jusr as'house'is. They understand thar

rent frorn the lengulge oFthe playground, how rhe language of a sciencc reporr is differcnt Frorn rhe language of a narrativc. AsTerry Piper (1998) lud orhcrs lr:tvc documcnted, sonrc childrcn will have cvcn nlore ro lcarn. 1-hey conre ro school speaking an erhnic or rcgional vARlETy of rhe school language thar is quite diflerenr from rhe one used by rhe teacher. They will havc tt-r lcarrr thar inorhcr variety, o[ten lelerred to as the s'fANDAnr) vARIETy is rcquired lor succcssful acadernic work. Other children arrive at school speaking a diffcrenr language alrogerher. For thcse childrcn, rhe work of language lcarning in the early school years preser)ts additional opporruniries and chellenges. Ve will retunl to this topic whcn we discuss Br LINGUALTsM in early childhood.

Lrtgrr,rye learning in early chillhood

Language learning

in early childhood

ll

Explaining first language acquisition

These descriptions of language development from infancy rhrough the early school years show thar we have considerable knowledge of whar children learn in their early language developmenr. More conrroversial, however, are questions about how this remarkable developmenr takes place. Over rhe past 6fry years, three main rheoretical positions have been advanced to explain ir: behaviourist, innatist, and inreracrional/developmenral perspecrives.

(24 months) is playing wirh a dump truck while rwo adults' Patsy and Lois. look on.
Perer

Peter

Lois
(later)

Get more. You're gonna Put more wheels in the dump truck? \(iheels. Dump truck'

Peter Dump truck'

Patsy

P.te.

\What happened to it (rhe truck)? (looking under chair for it) Lose it. Dump truck! Dump truck! Fall! Fall!
Yes, the

The behauiourist perspectiae: Say what I say

BEHAvrouRrsM was a rheory of learning thar was very influenrial in the 1940s and 1950s, especially in the Unitcd Srates. Virh regard ro language learning, the best-known proponenr of rhis psychological rheory was B. F. Skinner. 'lraditional behaviourisrs hyporhcsized that when children imitared the language produced by rhose around rhem, rheir attemprs ro
reproduce whar they heard received'posirive reinforcemenr'. This could take rhe form of praise or.jusr successful conrmunicarion. Thus encouraged by

Lois

dump truck fell down.

P.

Peter Dump truck fcll down. Dump truck.

(Unpublished data from

M. Lighrbown)

rheir environment, children would continue to imitate and pracrise rhese sounds and parrcrns unril rhey formcd 'habits' of correct languagc use. According ro this view, rhe qualiry and quanriry of the language thc child Irears, as well as the consisrency of rhe reinforcemenr oFfered by others in the environlnenr, wor,rld shape the childk langurgc behaviotrr. This theory givcs great importancc ro rhe environmenr as rhe sourcc of evcryrhing rhc child needs to lcarn.

If we analysed a larger sanrple oFPeter's speecl-r, we would see that 30-40 pcr cent of his r",,,.n.", werc ir.irations of whar someolle else had irrst said' We would also see that his inritations wcre not random. That is, he did not sirnply inritarc 30-40 per ccnr of evcrything he hcard- Detailcd rnalyses oF l"rg. .r,r-,p1., o[ ['eter's speech over about a year showed that he irnirated *.rids at',d sentettce structures that werejtrsr beginning to appear in his

Analysing children's speech: Definitions and examples

-fhe
behaviourists viewed imitati'nand, practiceas the prinrary proccsses in languagc developmcnr. To clarifi what is nreirnr by rhese rwo rcrms, consider rhe following dcfinitions and examples.

just begun ro uuderstand and usc, nor simply on what is 'available' in the environnrenr- For examplc, considcr how Cindy imitates and practises languagc irr thc lollowing c<lttvcrsatiotts. Cindy (24 n)onths, l6 days) is looking ar trying to gct Patsy's attetttion.
a

picture of a carrot in a book and

lru::r::. Lt.y

word-fbr-word reperition

o[ all or part of

someonc

clsc's

Mother

Shall we play with rhe dolls? Play wirh dolls.

oF

Cindy Patsy Cindy Patsy Cindy

K.rwo? kewo? kawo? kawo? k:rwo? are the rrbbits eating? They eating... kando? No, that's a carrot.

\flhat

Pracrice: repctirive manipulation

[orrn.

Carror. (poinring to each carrot on the pagc) 'f cerrot. Thc other carrot. hc orlrer carrot'

-l-he

othcr...

Cindy

*j:r:

carrors. The other one ear carrors. They borh ear

were all s rhey played wirh percr imitates rhe

(A lcw nrinutcs later, Cindy brings Parsy a stufFed toy rabbit.)

Fr abour rwenry-four monrhs old a visiring adulr. Using thc defi

Now exarnine the transcripts
adult in rhe following dialogue.

ryn.

-fhev

Patsy Vhat does this rabbit like to cat? Cindy (incornprehensible) cat rhe crrrots.
(Cindy gcts another sruffed rabbir.)

Cindy He (incomprehensible)
They both eat carrots.

eat carrots. The other one at cartots.

-r-

ttryttt!t' lntrnittg

itr

ttrly rltilllnotl

Language learning in early chillltood

t3

(Onc week later, Cindy operrs the book ro the same page.)

Lois
Kathryn

Inside. It's in the box.

choo? (taking

Cindy Heret the carrots. Patsy Yes.

(pointing) Is thar a carrot?

ljf"
(Frorrr Bloorn and Lahey

out Part of train) This is a choo choo

(Unpublished data from P M. Lighrbown) Cindy appears ro be working hard on her language acquisirion. She pracrises
new words and structures in a way thar sounds like a sttrdent in some Foreign language classes! Perhaps mosr interesting is that she remembers the 'lanBuage lesson' a week later and rums straight to the page in rhe book she had not seen since Patsyt last visit. What is mosr striking is thar, like Peter, her

1978 135)

Like Cindy, Karhryn sometitnes repeats herself or Produces a series of related 'practice' sentences, but she rarely imirates the other speaker. Instead, she qucstions and elaborarcs on rhe other speaker's questions or

*:.il.*:lt-.rs
Thus, clrildrcn vary in rhe amoullt of imitation they do' In addition, meny o[rhe things they sey show rhar rhey are using language crearively, nor iust repeating what they have hcerd. This is evident in the following cxanrples.
Patterns in hnguage

imitation iurd practice appear to be focused on whar

on'.

she is

currently'working
co

The sanrples ofspeech from Peter and Cindy scenl to lend sonre supporr

the behaviouri.st explarlation of language acquisition. Evcn so, as we saw, rhe choice of whar to imitare and practise seerued deterrnined by somerhing inside tl're child rather than by the environment.

The firsr cxanrple shows a chilcl in the

process of learning parrcrtrs iu languirge, in this case thc rules oF word formariott, and overgeneralizirlg thctn ro new contexts. Randall (36 months) Irad a sore on his hand'

Not all children irnitare and 'pracrise' as much as Pcrer and Cindy did. Thc arnount of inritation in the speech of orhcr children, whose developnrenr proccedcd ar a rate comparable ro rhar of Cindy and Perer, has been
calculatetl at less than I 0 per cenr.

Mother

Mrrybe we nced to takc yotl to rhe doctor. Randall \flhy? So hc can doc nry litrle bunrp?

l{andall fbrn-rs thc vcrb 'doc' fi<-rrn the troun 'doctor', by arlalogy with tlrnrcrs wlro finn, swimtners who swittr, atttl ,tctors who act.

Considcr tl're exlmples of imiration and practice in the Following conversation betwccn Klthryn and Lois. Kathryn (24 rnonths)

tfu. plates oo

Lois

/Yo* nea,n, l

Did you see rhe roys I broughr? Kathryn I bring toys? Choo choo? Lois broughr rhe choo choo rrain? Lois Yes, Lois brought rhe choo choo rrein. Kathryn (reaching for bag) I want play wirh choo choo train. I want play wirh choo choo train. (raking out slide) Wanr play.

the ptaLes ont

TuE
e

\.'

t4ble

-/Nor l putF,4'
tJtmnon,al!

Lois

Whar's rhis?

rrytelt

b1

Oh you know what rlrar is. Kathryn l)ur dowrr on floor. This. I do dris.

(Kathryn prrrs rhe slide on the floor.)

Kathryn (rakingout rwo cars of train) Do

Lois

rhis. I wanr do this. (trying ro pur rrain togerher) I do rhis. I do this. OK. You can do ir. You can do ir. Look I'll show you how.

(Lois puts it together.)

Kathryn (searchilrg in box) I get more. Ccr a more. No more clroo choo rrain. Ger rruck. (raking out rruck) Kathryn truck.
Vhere? \7here a more choo choo rrain?

UrtfaniliarfontruLu
Evcrr older children havc to work out sotnc puzzles, for exatlplc, when lanriliar language is uscd in uufinriliar ways, rs irr the cxlmplc bclow \i?hen

t4

Lttttguilgt lutrttittu i tt r'tt

l.y t

ltilrllnol
language as

Language learning in early childhottd

r5

I monrh) was at his older sister's birrhday party, toasts were proposed with grape juice in stemmed glasses:
David (5 years,

Fadrer I d like to propose

a roast.

fully and rapidly as those who imirare a lot. And although behaviourism goes some way to explaining the sorrs of ovERGENERALIZATIoN that children make, classical behaviourism is not a satisfactory exPlanation for the acquisition of the more complex grammar rhat children acquire.

Several minutes later, David raised his glass:

David

Id

like to propose

a piece

ofbread.

These limitatior-rs led researchers language acquisition.

to look for

diFferenr exPlanations for

Only when laughter sent David slinking lrom the table did the group realize that he wasn't inrentionally making a play on words! He was concentrating so hard on performing the lascinating new gesture and the formulaic expression 'Id like to propose ...' that he failed to realize thar the word he thought he knew-'tox51'-yyx5 llot the same toast and could nor be replaced with its apparent near-synonym-'a piece of bread'. Randall (2 years, 9 rnonths) asked the following questions in various siruariorrs over the course of a day.
Are dogs can wiggle rheir tails? Are those are my boots? Are this is hoc? Ranclall had conclucled that the rrick of asking quesrions was to pur'are' ar the bcginning oFrhe sentence. His quesrions lre good examplcs of Stage 3 in
q[restior) developrnen t. Question

The innatist PersPectiae: Ifs all in your mind

Noam Chomsky is one o[the mosr influenrial figures in linguistics, and his ideas about how language is acquired and how ir is srored in dre mind sparked a revolution in rnany aspects of linguistics and psychology, inclrrding the srudy of language acquisition. A central part of his thinking is

formation

that all hurnan languages are fundamentally innare and rhat the same universal principles underlieall o[rhem.In his 1959 reviewo[B. F. Skinner's
book Verbal BeLauior, Chomsky challenged the behaviourisr exPlanation [or
lar.rguage acquisition. He argucd that children are biologically Programmed for language and that language dcvelops in the cltild in just thc sarne way that

Order of euents Ilandall (3 years, 5 rnonths) was looking for

a rowe l.

other biological functions develop. For exanrple, every child will learn ro walk as long as adequatc nourishmetrt and reasonable Freedom oFmovement are providcd. The child does uot have to be taught. Most children learn to walk at lbour rhe sanre age, ancl walking is cssentially the slme in all noln-ral hurnan beings. For Chomsky, language accluisition is very similar. The environrnenr n-rakes only a basic contribution-in this case, the availabiliry of pcople who speak to drc child. The child, or rathcr, the child's biological endownrent, will do the rest. Chomsky argued rhar rhc bchaviorrrist theory lailcd to account For 'the logical problenr of language ac<luisition'-the ltact rhar children cone to
know more about thc structurc ofrhcir language than they could reasonably bc expectecl to lc:rrn on the basis of the samplcs of language they hear. The languagc children arc exposcd to includes false starts, incomplere sentences, and slips oF the tongr.rc, and yet thcy learn to distinguish berween gramnratical and ungr:rnrrnatical sentences. He concluded rlrat children's nrinds are not blank slares to bc filled by imitating language rhey hear in rhe environrnent- Instead, he hyporhesized, cbildren are born wirh a specific innate abiliry to discover fbr rhenrselvcs thc underlying rtrles ofa language systeln on the basis ofthe samples oFa natural language they are exposed to. 'l'his irrnate crrdownrent was secn as a sort oF tenrplatc, containing the principlcs that are universal ro all human langueges. This untvens.llcRAMMAIt (uc) would prever)t the child frorn pursuing all sorts of wrong hypotheses about how languagc systen)s nright work. If children are preequipped with UG, then what they have to lcarn is the ways in which the language they are acquiring m:rkes use o[these principles.

You took all the towels away because I can't dry rny hands.

He nreant 'l cant dry my hands because you took all the towels away', but hc madc a misrake about which clause comes firsr. Children ar rhis stage of language dcvelopmenr tend ro rnenrion evenrs irr the order of their occurrence. In rhis case, the rowels disappeared before Randall atrempred to dry his hands, so that's whar he said firsr. He did nor yet understand how a word like'before' or'because' changcs the ordcr o[cause and eflecr.
These examp.les of childrens speech provide us wirh a window on rhe process of language learning. lmirarion and practice alone cannot explain sorne oFrhe

forms createcl by the children. They are not merely reperirions oFsentences that they have heard from adulrs. Rather, children appear to pick out parrerns and generalize them ro new conrexts. They create new lorms or new uses of
words. Their new senrences are usual[y comprehensible and often correcr.

Behaviourism seerns ro ofFer a reasonable way oF undersranding how children learn some of rhe regular and routine aspecrs of language, especially ar the earliest stages. However, children who do litrle overr imitarion acquire

IC'

It

t t gr

t,tg,

l,:, n' t r i r tg i

t t t rly,

h i Ir /

l,oul

Language learning in carly childhool

t7

Consider rhe Following sentcnces, takcn fronr a book by Lydia Vhire (1989). These English sentences contain the rcflexive pronoun 'himself'. Borh rhe pronoun and the noun it refers to (rhe antecedent) are printed in iralics. An asrerisk ar the beginning ofa sentence indicates rhat the sentencc
is

The innatist perspecrive emphasizes the fact that all children successfully acquire rheir narive language (or languages if they live in a multilingual
communiry). Childrcn who are profoundly deaf will learn sign language if rhey are exposed to it in infancy, and their progress in the acquisirior: ofthat language sysrem is similar to hearing childrent acquisition of spoken language. Even children with very limited cognitive abiliry develop quite complex language systems iFthey are brought up in environments in which people interact with them. Children master the basic syntax and morphology of rhe language spoken to them in a variety 6f 6sndi6ier15-56n-rs which would bc expected to enhance languagc development (For example,
cariug, attentive parenrs who focus on rhe child's language), and some which might be expecred ro inhibit ir (for exanrple, abusive or rejecring parents). Childrcn achicve difFerent levels ofvocabulary, creativiry, social grace, and so on, but virrually all lchieve nlasrery oF the srruccure oF rhe language or' languagcs spoken ro rhem. Tlris is scen rs support for rhe hyporhesis thar language is sornehow separate from other aspects oFcognitive developrnenr and may depend on a specific module oFthe brain.

ungrammatical.

r
b
rcFers

Jobn saw himself * Himselfsaw John.

reflexive pronoun must Follow the noun

ln (a) and (b), ir looks rs if the

to. But (c) disproves this:

it

Looking after ltintselfbores John.

as:

IIwe consider sntences such

e *Joltnsild that Fred liked

d John said that Fred|ked

himsclJ.'

hirnsclf.

John rcld Billrcwash bimself *Joltn told Bill to wash bimsalf

irher:

wc rnighr conclude rhar the noun clclsest to rhe reflexivc pronoun is rhc
:.rnrcccclent. However, (h) shows that this rulc won't work
e

h
Anr{
it'.s

Joltnprontiscd Bill to wtsh

himvlf

The Critical Period Hypothesis Chomsky's ide:rs are oFten linked ro the cn.r-rrcAL pEnroD Hyl,o'r'nrsrs (cnu)-rhe hypothesis that aninrrls, inclLrding hurnans, are gencrically
prograrnrled to acquire cerrain kinds of knowlcdge and skill ar specific timcs in lile. Ilcyond rhose'crirical pcriods', ir is eirher difficult or impossible ro actpire rhose abilitics. Wirh rcgarcl ro llngurge, the CPH suggcsrs rhar children who arc nor given acccss ro l:rngr.rage in infancy and eerly childhood
(becatrse ofdeafness or exrrcrne iso[ation)

evcn nlore complicared than rlret. Usually tlrc reflcxivc mr.rst be irr thc sanre clausc as the antecedenr as in (:r) and (d), but not always, as in (h). l:urrhermore, thc reflexive can be in the strbjcct position in (i) bur nor in (j).

i j

Joltttbclicves bimself rc be intelligent (non-finitc clausc). ^Joltn bclievcs rhrr himsell'is intclligenr (linire clausc).

will ncver acquire language if

these

dcprivations go on lor roo long.

Irr sorne cases, rnore rhan one aurecedclrt is possiblc, as in (k) whcrc thc rcHexive could rcfer ro eitherJohn or Bill:

It

is difficult to 6nd evidence fbr or againsr rhe CPt-l , since rrearly ell children lre cxposed ro languagc ar arr carly age. Howcver, history has docuurenred

John showed Bill a picrure of hinrsclf.

a fcw 'narural experinrenrs' where childrcn hevc bcen dcprived of conracr wirlr langrragc. li,vo of thc rlost femotrs clrscs arc rlrose of Vicror and Genie.
a boy who became known as Vicror wes found wandcring naked in rhe woods in Frunce. Whcn he was caprured, hc was abour rwelve years old and conrple rcly wild, lpparently having hud no conract wirh humans.

When wc lool< rrr this kind oFconrplexiry, it secrns ir would be very hard ro Ic:rrn. And yer, nlosr school age children would be able ro correctly inrcrprer the granrrnirtical seutences and recognize rhe ungrammaricality oF thc
othe

In 1799,

'fhey

rs. l{cscarchcrs who srudy langrrage ac<lLLisition lrorn thc innarist perspectivc argue that such colnplcx grarnntar could nevcr bc learned purely on rhe basis oF irnitating and pracising senrences available in the inpur.
hyporhesize that since all childrcn ecquire rhc languegc of rheir environnrenr, they nrust have some inu:rte r.ncchanisnr or knowledgc that allows rhenr to discover such cornplex syunu in spite of lirnitations of rhc input. They hyporhesize Furthcrmore thar rhc innarc mechanisrn is used
exclusively ftrr lenguage lcrluisi rion.

Merc-Caspard ltard, a young docror accusromed ro workir.rg wirh deaf children, devoted five years to socializing Vicror and rrying to reach hinr language. Although he succeedcd ro sorne exrenr in developing Vicror's sociabilicy, memory, and ,judgcrncnr, rhere was litrle progress in his language abiliry. Victor responded only ro sounds that had had nreaning for him in rhe lorest, such as the cracking of a nur, animal sounds, or rhe sound of rain. He eventually spokc only rwo words, his favourite food 'lait' (milk) and his governesst frequcnt exclamarion 'O Dicu!' (Oh, Codl). He said 'lait' only when he saw a glass of nrilk. He never uscd rhe word to ask for it.

Jean-

lluyutt( fun,tittg

irt

url.y

tl,i/llnol

Language learrring in early chiAhooct

t9

Nearly rwo hundred years larcr, Ge nie, a rhirtcen-year-old girl who had been isolated, neglected, and abused, was discovered in California (Rymer 1993). Because of the irrational demands of a disturbed father and the submission and fear of an abused morher, Genie had spent more than eleven years tied to a chair or a crib in a small, darkened room. Her Father had forbidden his wife and son to speak to Genie and had himself only growled and barked at her. She was beaten when she made any kind of noise, and she had long since resorted ro complete siler:ce. Genie was undeveloped physically, emotionally, and inrellectually. She had no language.

markers are expressed through specific hand

researchers studied the

or body movemens. The abiliry to Produce and comprehend grammatical markers in Narive signers (who were exPosed ro ASL from birth), Early learners (who began using ASL berween four and six years ofage), and Late

learners (who began learning AS L after age rwelve).

Afrer shc was discovered. Genic was cared lor and educated wirh thc
participation

of many teachers and therapists, including

Susan Curtiss

They found no dilference berween rhe groups in some asPects of rheir use of ASL. However, on tests focusing on grammatical markers, the Native group used the forms more consistently rhan rhe Early group who, in turn, used the rn nrore consistently than the Late group. The rese:Irchers concluded thet their study supports the hyporhesis that there is a crirical period For first langrrage acquisition, whcther thar Iangtrage is oral or gestural.
'\7e

(1977). After a brief period in a rehabilitarion centre, she lived in a losrer home and attended special schools. Cenie made remarkable progress in becorning socialized and cognitively aware. She developed deep personal relationships and strong individual rasres and traits- Neverrhelcss, after five
ycars of exposure to langLrage, Ge nie's language was nor like that of a rypical five-year old. There was a larger rhan normal gxp between cornprchensiorr lnd procluction. She used grarnmaricll lorms inconsisrenrly and ovcruscd firrrnr.rlaic and routinc spcech.

will rcrlun to a discussion of the CPH in Chapter

3 when we look at che

age issuc in sccoud languagc acquisirion.

The innatisr pcrspective is thus partly based orr evidence [or a crirical period. It is also seen as an explanarion for'the logical problem of langtrage acquisition', that is, thc question of how adult speake rs comc to ktrow the complex structure of their first lauguage on rhc basis of languagc that thcy acrually

Alrhough Victor and Cenie appear ro provide evidence in suppor:r of thc

CPLI, it is diFficult to argue rhar thc hypothesis is confirmed on thc besis of cvidcnce fionr such unusual cases. \0(e cannor know with ccrtainry what orher I:rcrors besides biological maruriry mighr havc corrrributed to rheir inabiliry t<r lcanr lenguagc. It is nor possible ro dercrnrinc wherhcr either oIthem suffered fiorn brain clanrlge, developmenral de lays, or a spccific language inrpeirrncrrr, cvcn befole thcy were separated fronr rrorrnal lruur:rn iureraction. Flowcvcr, there arc sornc clrildren who comc from ordinary honres, yet do not hrve ilcccss to hngtrage ar rhc usual rimc. This is rhe casc for somc prof<rundly deaf childrcn who l-rrve hearir-rg parenrs. Hearing parcnrs may not realize thar rlrcir child car-rnor hear because rhe child uses othcr senscs to irrreracr in an apparcnrly nonnal way.'fhus, rlre carly childhood period may be norrnal and loving bur devoid oFlanguage drar rhe childreu can acccss. l'hesc childrcn's llter cxpcrience in learning sign language has bccn rlre subjccr of sourc importanr rcselrch related ro rhe critical period.
Elissa Newporr (1990) and her colleagues studied deaf users oInvpnrr:nN LANG uAcE (AS L). Only 5-l 0 per cenr of rhe profotrndly dealarc born ro dea[parcnr.s, and only rhcse children:rre likely to be exposcd ro ASL fronr birrh. The rcnreinder of the proloundly deaf population begin learning AS L at different ages, oFren when rhey start atrending a residcntial school where sign languagc is used for day-ro-day cornmunicarion.

Inte ract i o n is t/ deu e lopm en ta I P ersP Learningfrom inside and out

e c tia es

Cognitivc antl t{cvelopnrcntal psychologists argue tllat the innatists place too mrrch enrphrsis on rlrc 'finel state' (thc cortale'reNcE of adult NrrtvE

and not enough on rhe dcvclopnrcntal aspects of language acquisirion. In thcir view lrrnguage rcquisition is bur orre example oFthe hunrln clrild's lenrarkable abiliry to lerrn fronr experience, and thcy see rro rueed ro assurre that therc :rre specific brairr structures devotcd to languagc -l-hcy accluisition. hypothcsize rhar whirt childrcn need to kuow is cssentially available in the language rhcy are exposed to as rhcy hear it rrsed in thousands of hours of intcrecrions with the people and objecrs aror.rnd chern.
sPEAKERS)

slc N

Devclopnrcntal psychologists and psycholirrguists have focr.rscd on rlrc intcrplay betwecn the innatc learning abitiry of children and rhe cnvironn)el)t in which thcy develop.'l-hesc rcsearchers attribrrre considerably rnorc importance to the environurent than the innatists do even thoLrgh they also rccognize e powcrful learning rncchanisrn in rhc hunran brlin. Thcy sce
language acquisition as sinrilar ro and inHucnccd by the acquisition ofother kinds ofskill lnd knowledgc, rathcr thau as sornething thar is different from and largely inclcpendenr oF rhe chilcl's experiencc and cognitivc dcvelopnrent. lndeed, rescarchers such as Dan Slobin (1 973) have long ernphasizcd the close relationship betwecn childrcrr'.s cognitive dcvelopnrent and their

Like oral and written lenguages, ASL rnakes use oIgrammarical markers to indicatc such things as rinre ([or cxanrple, past tense) and number. Thcsc

acquisition of lan guage.

20

Langrnge learning in early childhood

Language learning in early chilclltool

Piaget andVygotsky
One of the earliest proponenrs oFrhe view that children's language is builr on their cognitive developmenr was rhe Swiss psychologist/episremologisr, Jean Piager (1951/1946). In che early decades oF rhe rwentieth century, Piaget observed infants and children in their play and in rheir inreraction wirh objects and people. He was able to trace the development of rheir cognitive understanding of such things as object permanence (knowirrg rhat things hidden from sight are srill there), rhe srabiliry ofquanriries regardless o[ changes in their appearance (knowing rhar ren pernies sprcad out ro lorm a long line are not more nunrerous than ren pennies in a tighrly squeezed Iine), and logical inferencing (figuling our which properries sf x 5ss sf 1ed5-5i2s, weight, marerial, erc.-cause some rods to sink and orhers ro floar orr warer). It is easy to see from thi.s how children's cognitive development would partly dererrnine how rhey use language. For example, rhe usc ofcertain terms such as 'bigger' or 'morc' dcpend on the childrcn's undersranding of rhe conccprs rhey represent. The developing cognirive undersranding is built on rhe inreractiorr becwcen rhe child end the things rlrar can be observed or nranipulated. For Piager, language was one of a nurnber of symbol sysrerns thar are developcd in childhood. Language can be used ro represerlr chilclrcn have acquired rhrough physical inreracrion wirh thc
psychologisr

volumes devored to international research on language acquisirion, providing examples and analyses of child language and rhe language learning

.rruiron-.,'r, Frotn communities around rhe world. One of rhe

remarkable resources for

most

child language researchers is the Child Language

Data Exchange Systenr (curloes), where researchers have conrributed millions of words of child language data in dozens of languages in recorded and transcribed Forms (MacVhinney 1995; http://childes.Psy.cmu.edu/)'
One result of the crossculrural research is the description oFthe differences in childlearing pattcrns. Catherine Snow (1995) and others have studied the apparent effecrs on language acquisition of the ways in which adults ralk to and inreract with young children. In middle-class North American hotnes, researchers obscrved thar adults often modif' the way they speak wlren -I-his c tl I ro-ol nEcr ED sPEEcH may be characre rralking to litrle children.

ized by

slowcr ratc of delivcry, higher pitch, more varied inronation,

I;fj:t::,:l*

shorter, sirnplcr sentellce pattertrs, stt'css otl key words, Frecluent rePetitioll, and parephrase. Furrhernrore, ropics of conversation emphasize the child's imrlediatc environnreur, the'here and tr,:w', or experiences thar the adulr knows thc child has had. Adults oFtetr repcat rhe content o[a child's urrerance, bur they cxpand or llEcAst ir itrto :t gr:rnrruatically correct sentencc. For exarrple, when Pcter says, 'Dunrp truck! Durnp truck! Fall! Fa[l!', Lois responds, 'Yes, the dump rruck Fcll down.'

Anothcl inflrrential srudent o[ child devclopmcnr was rhe

l-cv Vygorsky (1978). He observed inreractions ernong children and also berweer children .nd adulrs i' schools i' rhe soviet Unio' in rlre 1920s a.d 1930s. He concluded rhat language develops prinrarily from social inreractio'. Hc rrguccl that ir a supporrive interactive enviro'menr, childre' arc ablc to.advance ro a higher level of knowledge and pcrformance. Vygotsky referrcd to rhis rncraphorical place in which the children could do more than thcy would be capable of independenrly as rl.re zoNE oF pRoxrMAL I)EvELOpMriN'r- (zpo). He observed rhe imporrance of conversations that children have wirh adulrs and with othcr children and saw i' rrrese

Cross-cultural research
Since the 1970s, researchers havc srudied childrent language learning environmenrs in a great ma'y different culrural communiries. The research has focused not only on rhe development oflanguage icself, but also on the ways in which the environmenr provides whar children need for language acquisirion. Starring in the mid-1980s, Dan Slobin has edired a s..i., oF
Rcscarchcrs working

in a 'language soci'.rliz:rrion' Frarlrework have sttrdied

language acquisition in children from a variery of culrural groups. They have

found thar the kind oI child-clirccred speech observed in nriddle-class American homes is by no means universal. In some societies, adults do n<lr engage in conversation or verbal play with very young children.

22

Language learning in early childhood

Langrage learning in early chiUhood

)7

For example, Bambi Schieffelin (1990) found thar Kaluli mothers in Papua

New Guinea did not consider cheir children to be appropriate conversarional partners. Martha Crago (1992) observed thar in traditional Inuit sociery children are expected to watch and listen to adults. They are not
expected or encouraged to participate in conversarions with adults uncil they are older and have more developed language skills. Other researchers have observed that in some societies, young children interact primarily with older siblings who serve as their caregivers. Even within rhe United States, Shirley Brice Hearh (1983) and others have documented substantial differences in the ways in which parents in different socioeconomic and ethnic groups

to-one interaction gives the child access to language that is adjusted ro his or her level o[ comprehension. When a child does not undersrand, the adult may repeat or paraphrase. The response of the adult may also allow children

to find our when their own utcerances are understood. Television, for obvious reasons, does not provide such interaction. Even in children's programmes, where simpler language is used and topics are relevant to younger viewers, no immediate adjusrment is made for rhe needs of an individual child. Once children have acquired some language, howevet television can be a source oflanguage and culrural informarion.
Connectionism
Another recenr view of language acquisirion comes from coN ue crloN IsM.
Connectionists diFfer sharply from rhe Chomskyan innarists because they hypothesize that language acquisition does not require a separate'module oI the mind' but can be explaincd in rerms of learning in general. Furrhcrrnore, connectionists argue that whlr children need to know is essencially available to them in the language rhey are exposed to. Some of the research has involved conrputer simularions in which language sanrples are provided as input to a fairly sirnplc program. The goal is ro show thar rhe compurer prograrn can 'learn' certain rhings if it is exposed ro rhem enough. The program can even generalize beyond whar it has acrually been exposed ro and meke thc sanre kinds of crcativc 'misrakes' that children rnakc, such as

inreracr wirh rheir children. Thus, the patterns of parent-child interaction and child-directed speech that were firsr observed in middle-class North American families are far from universal. Nevertheless, in every sociery, children are in situarions in which they hear language that is meaniugful to them in their environment. And chey achieve full comperence in rhe comuruniry language. Thus, it is di[6culr ro judge the long-term effect of dre modi6cations that some adults make in speech addressed ro children.

The importance of interaction

The role of interaction becween a languagc-learning child and

cases
(

an

rNTEuLocul'on who responds in some way ro the child is illuminated by

whcrc such inte racrion is missing. Jacqueline Sachs and her colleagucs rhey called Jim. He was a hearing clrild oFdelf parents, and his only conracr wirh oral languagc was thlough telcvision, which he warched Frequer.rtly. The family was unusurl in thar thc parcnts did not use sign languagc wirh Jirn. Thus, alrhough in othcr respccts hc was well carcd for, Jim did nor begin his linguistic dcvelopruerrr in a norrnal environment in which a parenr cornmunicated wirh hirn in eirher oral or sign language. A language asscssnlcnr ar rhree ycars and nine monrhs indicared that he was well below ege level in all aspects of language.

l98l ) srudicd the language developmenr of a child

putting

a regular

-elending on an irrcgular verb,

For exam

ple, ented.

Researchers such as JefFrcy Elnran and his colleagues (1996) explain language acquisition in rerms of how children acquirc linlcs or'connecriorrs' berween words and phrases an<l thc situarions in which they occur. They

Although hc artempted ro express ideas appropriarc ro his age, he

un usual, ungramrnarical word order.

uscd

clainr thar when childrcn hear a word or phrase irr the conrext of a spccific objecr, cvcnt, or person, an associariorr is creared in the child s mind bctween the word or phrase and whar ir represenrs. Thus, hearing a word brings to mind rlre object, and seeing the objecr brings ro rnind the word or phrase. iggcr rhe
c, a

conversarional sessions with an adulr, his cxpressive abilitics began to improve. By the age of four years and rwo monrhs nrost of thc urrusual speech parterns had disappeared, replaced by srructures morc typical of his age. Jims younger brorher Glenn did nor display rhe same rype oF larrguage delay. Glenn's linguistic environmenr was different in rhat he had his older brother as a conversarional partner.
Jirn showed very rapid acquisition ofthc srrucrures oFEnglish once hc began to interact with an adult on a one-ro-onc basis. The fect rhar he had failcd to acquire language normally prior to rhis experience suggesrs that inrpersonal sources oFlanguage such as television or radio alonc are not sufficicnt. One-

Vhen Jim began

child

and only

hcard in more contexts-picture books, frrrry toys, sorneonc else's cat-thc child rccognizcs and uscs rhe word as tlic lebel fbr all thesc cats. Howcver, at a latcr point, the word nray bc generalized ro orhcr lurry crearures as well, indicaring thar conncctions heve been nrade ro clraracreristics of the car and nor to an cntity rher adults know as 'cat'. -fhen there is anorher learning proccss involved in'pruning' rhc connectiorrs so rhar'cat' applies only to lclines-tt lcasr until rnorc rnctaphorical urearrings are learncd larcr

in life.

.1,4

Language learning in early childhood

Language learning in early childhood

25

In a connecrionist model, language acquisirion is not iust a Process oFassociaring words with elements of external realiry. It is also a process of associating words and phrases with the other words and phrases rhat occur wirh thern, or words wirh granmatical morphemes that occur wirh them. For example, children leaming languages in which nouns have grammatical gender learn to
associate the appropriare article and adjecrive [orms wirh nouns. Similarly, they learn to associace pronouns with the verb Forrns that tnark person and nutnber. They learn which remporal adverbs go with which verb tenses. According to

fuJim Cummins (1984, 2000)

cor)nectionist theory, all this is possible because oIthe child's general abiliry to
develop associations berween things thirt occur togcrher-

OF particular inrporrance to the connectionist hypothesis is rhe fact that childre n are exposed to many thousands of opportunities to leltrn words and phrases. Leaning takcs place gradually, as the number oF links berween lenguage and nreaning are built up. They argue that acqtrisition oflanguage, while rernarkable, is not rhe only renrarkeblc Fear acconrplished by tlre child. They cornparc it to orher cognitive antl perceptual learning, including lcarlring to'scc'.

Language olsoroers an(t oelays

Alrhough rrrost childrcn progres.s through thc st:rgcs of language clevclopnrcrrt wirhout significant difhculry or dclay, therc are some chiltlrcn For wl'rorn this is not rhe casc. A discussion of rhe various rypcs o[disabilitiesinclrrding deafness, arriculatory problems, dyslexie, etc.-rhat sonrcrimes allcct larrgtragc rlcvelopnrcnt is outs.ide the scope of this book. lt is esscntial thet parctrrs atrd teachcrs be cncouraged to scek pr:oFessional advicc if they lccl rlrar a child is not dcveloping languagc nornrally, kceping in rnirrd rhat
thc rirngc fbr ir<.rrnral' is wide indeed.

t.

and others have poinred out, one particular group of children who have ofren bcen misdiagnosed as having language delays or disorders are children who arrive at their first day oFschool without an age-appropriare knowledge of the language of the school. This includes immigranr children who speak anorher language at home, minoriry language children whose home language is different from the school language, and children who speak a differenc variety ofthe school language. Unlortunarcly, it often happens that these children's knowledge of a different language or language variety is interpreted as a lack oIknowledge oflanguage in general. As a result, they are sonretimes placed in remedial or special education classes. It is often rhe case thar the school is not equipped to provide err adequare asscssrnent of children's abiliry to use rheir home language. Schools may nor have programnres for second language learuers that allow the nr to continue ro usc their lrome language. The development oI bilingual or second language learning childrcn is ofenornrous inrporralrce. Indeed, the rnajoriry of the world's childrelr are exposed to Inore than one language, either in early childhood or Fronr the time they enter school. Rescarchers havc recently medc irnporrant progrcss in providing guidelines thar can lrclp cducarors disringuish berween disabiliry and divcrsiry (Seymour and Pelrson 2004).

Childhood bilingualism
childhood bilinguelisnr is a realiry lor rnillions oFchildren throughour the world. Sonre children learn mulriple languages from carliesr childhood; orhers accluirc additional languages whcn thcy go to school. The acquisirion
EaLly

and nrainrcnance of rlore rhan one language can open doors ro rlany personal, sociel, lnd economic opporrunities. Chiklren wlro lcarn rnorc rhan onc lenguagc fronr earlicsr chikihood are rc[errcd to as 'simultaneous bilinguals', whcrcas tlrose who leanr anotlrcr
language lirtcr nray be cllled'sequential bilinguals'.'l-herc is a considcreblc body of rescnrch on chiltlrer-r's lbiliry ro learn nrore rhan one languegc in their earliest years. We sourerinles hear pcople cxpress rlrc opinion that it

Whilc rnost children producc recognizablc firsr worcls by rwclve rnorrrhs, sonre mey not speak before the age of rhrec years. ln vcry your)g childrcu,
orre way to deterrnine whether delayed languagc rrHecrs a problcnr or sirnply an individr-ral difference within the norrnel range is to dcte rrninc whether rhe

child responds to language and appears ro rrndcrsrard cvcn iFhc or she is rrot spcrking. For older childrcn, delays in leerning to rearcl that sccrn our olkee ping with a child's overall intellecturl frrncrioning may suggcsr that thcre is a specific problem in that donrlin Sonre children seem ro begin rc'rding elrnost by magic, discovering thc rnystclics of prinr with lirrlc direcr instructiott. For rnost children, instructiorr thlr inclucles sonre s)/ste,natic :rttcnt;on to sound-lcrrer correspclndenccs allows thent ro unlock the treit.sure chest of reading Both groups fill with e norrnrrl rangc. For solnc children, however, re:rtling presents such great challenges thrt thcy neecl
cxpcrr help beyond whar is available in a typical clrrssroonr.

is roo diflctrlt for childrcn ro cope wirh two languages. They lear rhar thc childrcn will be confusecl or will nor learn eithr:r language well.

Howcver, rhcre is lirrle suppolt fbr the rnyth rhar learning rrore thau one larrguage in carly childhood is a protrlcrn Forchildrcn (Cenesee, Crago, rurd Paredis 2004). Although sonrc srudies show rninor cerly delays for simul-

trncous bilinguals, therc is no cvidcrrcc rhar learning rwo langulges substanti:rlly slows dowlr rhcir linguisric dcveloprncrrt or inrerf'ercs wirh cognirive and ac:rdcmic devclopnre nr. lndeecl rnany simulrlneous bilinguals echicve high lcvcls of proficiency in borh languagcs. Ellen Bialvsrok (1991,

'26

Langnge learning in early cbildhood

Language learning

in earfi cltildhool

27

2001) and other developmental psychologists have found convincing

evidence that bilingualism can have posirive effects on abilities rhar are relared to acadernic success, such as metalinguistic awareness. Limitations rhat may be observed in the language of bilingual individuals are more likely ro be related ro the circumstances in which each language is learned than to any limitarion in the human capaciry to learn Inore than one language. For example , if one language is heard much more ofien than the other or is more highly valued in rhe communiry that language may eventually be used berter than, or in preFercnce to, rhe other.

Summary
In rhis chapter we have Focused on solne of rhe research on children's language rhar has inf r.renced second language acquisirion research. W'e have described three broad theoretical perspecrives lor explaining first language acquisition. In Chapter 2, we will look at rhe theorerical perspecrives rhar have been proposed to explain second language acquisirion.

There nray be relson to be concemed, however, abour situarions where children are cut off from their family language whetr they are very young. Lily Vong-Fillmore (1991) observed rhat when children are 'subnrerged' in a dilfcrent language lor long periods in pre-school or day care, their dcve lopnrent of che Family language nray bc slowcd down or sralled bcfore rhcy have developed an age-appropriare mastery of the new language.
Eventually they rnay stop speaking rhe fanrily llnguage altogether.
\Wallace Lanrbert

Sources and suggestions for further reading

Baker, C. 2001 . Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 3rd
edn. Clevcdon: Mulrilingual Marrers.

Berko Gleason, J. (ed.). 2005. The Deuelopment of Lnngurtge 6rh cdn. London: Allyn and Blcon and Longrrrln [)ublishers.
Cummins, J. 2000. Language, Power anl Pedtgogy: Bilingual Children irt the Crossfirc. Clcvedon : MulriIi ngual Marrcrs.
Elman, J. L., E. A. Bates, M. H. Johnson, A. Karmiloff-Smith, D. Parisi, and K. Plunkert. 1996. Rethinking Inndtutus: A Connectionist Persprctiuc ott Deuelopntntt. Cambridgc, MA: MIT Prcss.
Genesee, F.

987) callcd this loss of one larrguage on rhe way ro lcarning anclther sulr-r'I{ACTIvE Brr.rNGUALrsM. It cen have negative consequcnces [or chilclrcn's self-esteenr, lnd their relationships wirh Family menrbers are also likely to be affectcd by sucl-r carly loss oF rhc Family Irngrragc. ln thcsc crrses, children secrn ro conrinrrc ro bc ceughr bcrwccrr two l,rrrgrurgcs: thcy havc nor yet mastercd rhe one hnguage, and thcy hlve not conrinued to devclop the other. Drrring the rransition pcriod, rhey may fall bchind in rheir acadcnric learning. Unforrunarely, rhc 'solurion' cducarors somctinrcs propose to parents is rhar rhey should stop speaking rhe fhrnily langu:rgc ar horne and concenrrate insread on speaking rhe school languegc witlr their children.'fhc evidence suggesrs rhar a bcrrer solurion is to strive lbr noutr lvD ull.rNGUA1.1514-1hg maintenancc oF rhc hornc language whilc rhc sccond langtrage is bcing learned. This is cspecially rruc if rhc p:rrclrts are:rlso lcarners o[rhc sccond language. If parents conrinue to use rhc larrgtragc that rhey know besc, rhey are ablc to exprcss their knowlcdge lnd idc:rs in ways that are richer and nrore clabortte rhan they can nranage in e lenguage rlrcy do not know as wcll. Using rlrcir own language in faruily sctrings is also l way For parenrs ro mainrain the ir own self-esreern, especially as they may bc srruggling with rhc ncw langulge outside rhe lrourc, at work, or itr the c<,tnmunity. Mrintaining thc fanrily language also creates opporrunitics lor thc children to continue both cognitive and alfective developmenr in a language rhey understand easily while rhey are srill learning the sccond lauguage. As Virginia Collier (1989) and others hevc shown, the process oFdeveloping a second language takes years. Bu t reachcrs, -'rts, arrd srudcrrts necd to know thar the bcncfirs ofadditive bilingualisnr "rd oatience and effort.
(I

(cd.). 1995, Eluating Seconl Ltnguage Children: l-he lVholc Child, tfulVhole Curritulun, theWhole Conrtturtity. Crnrbridge: Crrrnbr idge University l)rcss.
ment: An Inrruductiott. Englcwood Clifl's, NJ: Prcnrice-Hirll.

Ginsburg, H. and S. Opper. 1969, Piageti 'l'heory of Irttellecuml DcuchtpOller, D.

De

K. rrnd R. E. Eilers (cds.). 2002. Lnnguage antl

t

Lircruq

uc Ltpntc tt

in B ili ngr t l

Clt

iUren. Clcvcdon : Multilingual Marrers.

Pinker, S. f 994. Tlte Lungtnge Insrrzcr Ncw York: Villianr Morrow. Piper, T. 1998. Lntryutgt rtnl Leuruiug:'l'he Horne tnd Scbool yeurs 2nd edrr. Uppcr Srddlc Rivcr, NJ: Mcrrill/Prcnticc-llall.

Schieffelin' B. and E. ochs (cds.). lg86. Lartgutge socializttion Atross C) ult ures. Oanrbridgc: Carrrbridge Univcrsity Press.

Vells, G. 1986. Children Learning Lttngutge and using ltutgrnge to Learn.

Portsnrouth, NFI: l [cincnrann.

Vertsch, J. V. 1985. Vygotsky atd tlte MA: Harvard Univelsiry Plcss.

So,

inl Fonttation of Mind. Canrbriclgc,