>

Free Essays

>

Literature & Languages

>

Languages

>

Language Acquisition: A Critical Discussion of Innate and Learning Approaches Introduction

Updated: September 7, 2019

Language Acquisition: A Critical Discussion of Innate and Learning Approaches Introduction

Essay

Paper Type: EssayMajors: Literature & Languages (2537)Languages (114)Pages: 6Language:

EnglishUSWords: 2154

Table of Contents

Introduction

Arguments for Innate Acquisition of Language

Criticism

Arguments for Learning Approach

Criticisms

Conclusion

Reference List

Introduction

The debate on whether language acquisition is mainly determined by innate predispositions

or environmental factors has been of interest to many researchers for decades now. Various
schools of thoughts have emerged over the years in an attempt to explain how human beings
acquire their language. In all these, a major concern has been to comprehensively
understand how the language abilities are picked up by very young children after only
inputting little efforts towards acquiring the language under normal circumstances (Harley,
2004).
Advertising

We will write a custom essay sample on Language Acquisition: A Critical Discussion of Innate
and Learning Approaches Introduction specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page

Learn More

The capacity to speak and be able to communicate with others has always been carried with
a lot of importance especially in the contemporary world, yet controversy continues to
persist regarding how this important component of life is acquired. It is, therefore, the
purpose of this paper to critically discuss the available evidence supporting innate and
learning approaches to language acquisition, and their potential criticisms

Language acquisition can be described as the process by which individuals attain the ability
and competence to perceive, generate and employ words to comprehend and communicate
(Harley, 2004). This unique ability entails acquiring varied capacities, including a wide-
ranging vocabulary, grammar, semantics, and phonetics. The capacity to acquire and use
these components in our daily communications is a fundamental feature that differentiates
human beings from other closely linked primates and other animals.

According to Guasti (2004), the fact that animals have a wide range of communication
channels to use cannot be denied, but this forms cannot be in any way qualify to be called
languages since they have an inadequate variety of non-syntactically prearranged vocabulary
which lacks in consistence and cross-cultural variation.

This not withstanding, it still amazes many how humans, especially infants, are able to
acquire language faculties with much ease. Behrens (2009) posits that “…there must be a
genetic component in this capacity because every … child is able to learn language, and there
must be an environmental component because no one is born with a specific language” (p.
383).

Arguments for Innate Acquisition of Language

The approach that language is acquired through innate predispositions is viewed as largely
traditional, with many of its proponents arguing that the mechanisms involved in are
predetermined by biological and evolutionary endowments rather than environmental
predispositions (Guasti, 2004). Plato felt that language acquisition, by any standard, was
innate since it is beyond our realms of understanding to structure how an infant as young as
one year old is able to comprehend the facets of language.

Other advocates such as the Sanskrit grammarians argued that language was God-given,
implying that it is innately acquired (Guasti, 2004). According to Behme & Helene (2008),
proponents of innateness “…postulate a species-specific language faculty as a largely
genetically determined part of our biological endowment and claims that facts about
language acquisition support this view” (p. 642).

Advertising

Looking for essay on languages? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15%
OFF

Learn More

Noam Chomsky, one of the most vocal advocates for innate acquisition of language, argued
that many features of the linguistic capacity of a well seasoned speaker cannot be elucidated
using a data-driven broad-spectrum learning mechanism.

According to this particular proponent, human beings must be endowed with an innate
module for them to actively yield or generate a particular language through direct interaction
with a myriad of presented experiences (Behme & Helene, 2008).

The advocate’s argument finds strength in the interpretation of systematic empirical studies,
which reveals that not only does language acquisition in infants happens at a faster pace, but
also has some well structured distinguishing phases whose order and time-frame seems
principally independent from environmental influences.

What’s more, Chomsky argued that all children share the same inner limitations which
distinguish intently the grammar they are able to construct. Chomsky concluded that the
momentum and accuracy of language acquirement leaves no factual substitute to the
conclusion that the young child, one way or another, “has the concepts available before
experience with language and is basically learning labels for concepts that are already a part
of his or her conceptual apparatus” (Behme &Helene, 2008).
According to the theory of generative grammar, the syntactic knowledge acquired by children
or other language learners is, by any standards, underdetermined by the environmental
input. This implies that language is innately acquired. The proponents of this theory argue
that neither biological processes nor cognitive orientations of an individual can literally be
equated to learning (Eisenbei, 2009).

This theory corresponds with the Nativist Model, which presupposes that language learning
or acquisition is not really something that the youngster does; rather, acquisition occurs to
the child when he or she is placed in a suitable surroundings, much as the child’s physical
body develops and matures in a predetermined manner when proper diet and
environmental stimulation are provided (Chomsky, 2000). As such, language can only be
acquired innately.

The innate approach, therefore, assumes that language acquisition is rapid and
instantaneous, not mentioning the fact that acquisition occurs without direct instruction,
and can also occur in spite of inadequate input. Instantaneous acquisition of language,
according to the proponents, implies that the process is effortless, error-free, and occurs
without the child passing through the various developmental phases (Behme & Helene,
2008).

Advertising

We will write a custom essay sample on Language Acquisition: A Critical Discussion of Innate
and Learning Approaches Introduction specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page

Learn More

In arguing that acquisition occurs without direct instruction, the proponents of this school of
thought implies that there is no negative evidence involved in acquiring language, a
preposition that further reinforces the fact that children do not make errors and therefore do
not get negative evidence (Morgan et al, 1995). Ultimately, acquisition becomes innate.

Criticism

The innate approach to language acquisition, despite receiving support from some of the
most refined scholars and philosophers, has a variety of setbacks. First, it is a well known fact
that children go through precise developmental phases, and they do make systematic errors
as they negotiate these phases (Stemmer, 1987).
Available literature reveals that children undergo various changes before they can begin to
drift near to adult-like capacities in comprehending and generating a first language. For
instance, Children must first break into the communication stream before even attempting to
associate the words with any particular meaning.

Children must then learn to combine the words or phrases in specific ways before engaging
in another phase of understanding more intricate syntactic combinations. In all these phases,
children make numerous errors before commanding the language (Harley, 2001). For
instance, children engage in over-extensions of actual meaning of words, and the word ‘cow’
may be applied to various animals, including the actual cows, zebras, donkeys, horses,
among others.

By any standards, the argument that children do not get negative evidence goes against what
has been empirically researched. In the course of development, youngsters are known to
espouse grammars and other language aspects that appear over-generalized.

As such, “…a logical alternative is that children receive negative evidence: corrective
feedback providing information that certain sentences are not acceptable” (Morgan et al,
1995, p. 18). Such an intervention, according to the critics of innateness approach, is
fundamentally important as it permits children to recover from the common mistakes of
overgeneralizations.

Arguments for Learning Approach

This school of thought is of the opinion that the human cognitive structure is adequate to
learn language devoid of postulating extra factors or influences such as an inborn language
system (Harley, 2001). Many of the proponents of this school simply argue that language is
learned through positive interactions with the environment.

Advertising

Looking for essay on languages? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15%
OFF
Learn More

This approach is more flexible to the notion of language acquisition, with some proponents
suggesting that the capacity to acquire language or the deep-seated hunger to draw in large
amounts of verbiage is inborn and coincides with the child’s developmental phase, but the
whole process of acquisition depends upon the immediate environment in which the
youngster resides (Harley, 2001). This is a more associative approach as it appears to
associate a particular ingredient – the environment – with language learning.

The connectionist models to learning language also presents a firm backing to this school of
thought by fronting the notion that children “…learn from exposure to a language
environment and are sensitive to the statistical structure of this environment” (Westermann
et al, 2009. P. 413).

The connectionist models can be described as computer models whose purpose is loosely
instigated by neurons found in the brain. The models assume that the major objective of the
biological neurons is to be activated if the summed inward activation coming from other
neurons is adequate enough. It is imperative to note that neurons are interconnected, and
can learn from data flowing through them (Westermann et al, 2009).

The proponents of these models argue that learning indeed happens by altering the
potencies of the interconnections between the mentioned neurons as a result of contact to
external stimulus. As such, children learn language by exposing the network of neurons to an
instruction environment that is representative of the issues of interest. This scenario is used
in schools when children are requested to memorize words or phrases in grammar learning
tasks to activate the neurons into learning.

The empiricists are yet another group of proponents to learning school of thought. They
punch holes in some of theories supporting innateness such as the generative theory for the
reason that most of their concepts, including the popular Language Acquisition Device (LAD),
can never be sustained by evolutionary anthropology, which reveals a gradual adaptation of
the child’s brain faculties and vocal chords to the utilization of language (Stemmer, 1987).

For the empiricists, the solid environmental experiences that children endure in the process
of learning language as well as the learning mechanisms that facilitate the youngsters to
process the data gathered in these encounters are fundamentally important for language
learning to be effected (Stemmer, 2002).
The world renowned psychologist Jean Piaget took an empiricist approach to language
learning by arguing that there exists neither a specific language component in the minds of
individuals nor explicit predetermined knowledge about language.

Rather, according to Piaget, individuals, especially youngsters, create knowledge about a

particular language from scratch by employing brains that are exclusively tailored and
inclined to extract patterns and construct ever more complicated and supple representations
of the universe (Harley, 2001).

B.F. Skinner also hailed from this school of thought, and proposed that individuals, like other
organisms, discover their capacities from scratch through the environment. Skinner
postulates that the learning environment reinforces some responses while limiting others
depending on the repeatability of a certain action.

Consequently, human beings have the capacity to undertake more complex learning such as
language acquisition since their brains are much more developed and complex unlike those
of other animals. The above, therefore, implies that language acquisition in humans can be
explained comprehensively without referring to innate and predetermined knowledge or
other brain structures (Harley, 2001).

Criticisms

The learning approach to language acquisition also fall victim to the problem of
generalizations. For instance, when an instructor exposes the child to a picture of a giraffe in
the hope of instilling correct syntax, this particular child will end up applying the word not
only to the original animal, but also to other similar animals (Stemmer, 1987).

Second, some behaviorist models of language learning seems incapable of explaining some
observed realities about language acquisition such as the speedy acquirement of language
by young children, otherwise known as lexical explosion.

According to Noam Chomsky, one of the harshest critics of the learning approach, a child’s
linguistic capacities appear to be fundamentally underdetermined by the proof of verbal
behavior extended to the child in the short episode in which he or she articulates those
capacities (Graham, 2007).
Conclusion

Both approaches have their own strengths and weaknesses, but from the deliberations
above, the learning approach to language acquisition appears to have more credibility and
support, especially when scrutinized under modern conditions.

It is, indeed, gratifying to note that some proponents of language learning salutes the
important role played by brain structures in the acquisition of language, but they steadfastly
argue that the whole process must depend upon the immediate environment in which the
youngster resides for it to be a success (Harley, 2001). Such an understanding continues to
draw support for the learning approach.

Second, some of the weaknesses identified in the innate approach raise more queries about
the credibility of the approach. For instance, we all know that children make systematic
errors when learning the language, and get negative evidence from parents as they attempt
to master the syntax.

The innate approach, however, denies the existence of such concepts in language
acquisition, and bases its argument on the fact that language acquisition occurs due to
specific innate capacities, including the Language Acquisition Device (Stemmer, 1987).

How then can one explain instances of children who have failed to develop their language
capacities after being alienated from environmental stimulus for longer periods of time?
What’s more, the innate approach presupposes that language acquisition occurs in spite of
inadequate input, otherwise known as the poverty of stimulus (Chomsky, 2000).

Again, this assertion does not hold much water since a multiplicity of studies have reveled
that the rate of language acquisition in a child is directly related to the amount of stimulus
received (Guasti, 2004). Consequently, the learning approach comes out much stronger.

Reference List
Behme, C., & Helene, D.S. (2008). Language learning in infancy: Does the empirical evidence
support a domain specific language acquisition devise? Philosophical Psychology, Vol. 21,
Issue 5, p. 641-671. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier Database.

Behrens, H. (2009). Usage-based and emergentist approaches to language acquisition.

Linguistics, Vol. 47, Issue 9, p. 383-411, p. 383-411. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier
Database.

Chomsky, N. (2000). New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Eisenbei, S. (2009). Generative approaches to language learning. Linguistics, Vol. 47, Issue 2,
p. 273-410. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier Database.

Graham, G. (2007). Behaviorism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from

<https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/behaviorism/>.

Guasti, M.T. (2004). Language acquisition: The growth of grammar. Boston: Massachusetts
Institute of Technology Press.

Harley, T. (2001). The psychology of language: From data to theory. Hove, East Sussex:
Psychology Press Ltd.

Morgan, J.L., & Bonamo, K.M., & Trauis, L.L. (1995). Negative evidence on negative evidence.
Developmental Psychology, Vol. 31, Issue 2, p. 18. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier
Database.

Stemmer, N. (2002). Empiricist views on the innateness hypothesis. Web.

Stemmer, N. (1987). The learning of syntax: An empiricist approach. First Language, Vol. 7, p.
97-120.
Westermann, G., Roh, N.S., & Punkett, K. (2009). Connectionist approaches to language
learning. Linguistics, Vol. 47, Issue 2, p. 413-452. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier
Database.

This essay on Language Acquisition: A Critical Discussion of Innate and Learning Approaches
Introduction was written and submitted by user Sterl1ng to help you with your own studies.
You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper;
however, you must cite it accordingly.

You can donate your paper here.

Tags: Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, California, Colorado Desert, Imperial County, Mojave
Desert, Salton Sea, Sonoran Desert

Post navigation

Previous

Next

Find free essays, topics

More Languages Paper Examples

Sexism in the English Language

Education of Australian Aboriginals and the language barrier.

Derewianka and Tompkins Teachings of Grammar

Language Evolution in Human Being

Language Intervention – Accents and Dialects

Cultural Sensitivity and Language Use

Second language in English Classes in Saudi Arabia: A teaching Support or a Learning

Hindrance?

“Translanguaging in the Bilingual Classroom: A Pedagogy for Learning and Teaching” Article

English as a Communication Language

Students Language Skills Project

Check the price of your paper

Follow Us

Contact Us

Study Hub

Company

Legal

About IvyPanda

This is IvyPanda's free database of academic paper samples. It contains thousands of paper
examples on a wide variety of topics, all donated by helpful students. You can use them for
inspiration, an insight into a particular topic, a handy source of reference, or even just as a
template of a certain type of paper. The database is updated daily, so anyone can easily find
a relevant essay example.

Copyright © 2019 IvyPanda.com