PREFACE

First of all, thanks to Allah SWT because of the help of Allah, we finished writing
the paper entitled “Theories and Differences between Language Acquisition and First
Language Acquisition”.
The purpose in writing this paper is to fulfill the assignment that given by Mr. Yani
Lubis ,S.Ag, M.Hum as lecturer in psycholinguistic major.
In arranging this paper, wetrully get lots challenges and obstructions but with
help of many individuals, those obstructions could passed. We also realized there are
still many mistakes in process of writing this paper.
Because of that, we says thank you to all individuals who helps in the process of
writing this paper. Hopefully Allah replies all helps and bless you all. We realized this
paper still imperfect in arrangment and the content. Then we hope the criticism from the
readers can help we in perfecting the next paper. Last but not the least Hopefully, this
paper can helps the readers to gain more knowledge about Psycholinguistic major.

Medan,1 january , 2020

Ulfa Rianda

1
 TABLE OF CONTENT

PREFACE.......................................................................................................................... 1

TABLE OF CONTENT ..................................................................................................... 2

CHAPTER I .........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

INTRODUCTION ................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

A. Background of Study .................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B. Formulation of Study .................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

C. Objective of Study .....................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

CHAPTER II ........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

DISCUSSION......................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

A. Theories of Language Acquisition...........................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B. Theories of First language Acquisition ...................Error! Bookmark not defined.

C. The Differences Between language acquisition and first laguage acquisitionError! Bookmark
not defined.

CHAPTER III .......................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

CLOSING ............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Conclusion ...........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Reference ............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

2
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Backgroud of the study

Language acquisition is the process by which humans acquire the capacity to

perceive, produce and use word to understand and communicate. This capacity
involves the picking up of diserve capacities including syntax, phonetic, an extensive
vocabulary. This language might be vocal as with speech or manual as in sign.
Language acquisition usually refers to first language acquisition, which studies infants’
acquisition of their native language, rather than second language acquisition that deal
with acquisition (in both children and adults) of additional languages.

Several theories and approaches have emerged over the years to study and
analyze the process of language acquisition. The main schools of thought, which
provide theoretical paradigms in guiding the course of language acquisition are, innatist
theory, cognitivist theory and motherese theory. The Innate theory asserts that
language is an innate capacity and that a child‟s brain contains special language-
learning mechanisms at birth in which the main proponent of this theory is Chomsky
(Pinker, 1994). On the other hand, the cognitive theory by Jean Piaget (Wilburg, 2010)
claims that language is just one aspect of a child‟s overall intellectual development.
Sassonian (2009) asserts that language is a symbolic representation which allows the
children to abstract the world. In this essay I will be critically examining the input theory
that the child-centered “Motherese” is universal, and there are cultures in which speech
is never addressed to language-learning children. More so, the essay will critically
discuss the cognitive theory and also the Chomsky innateness theory of children having
innate ideas to learn language and also how this language acquisition is learned and
developed by social interacting with environments such as adults and the cognitive
development. Also, I will be highlighting studies that have critiqued Motherese and the
other theories of not being helpful to children in acquiring language.

3
 B. Formulating of the Study

Based on the bacground above, this problem can be formulated as follows :

1. What are the theories of language acquisition?

2. What are the theories of first language acquisition?
3. What are the differences between language acquisition and first language
acquisition?

C. Objectives of the study

From the problem of the study above, the author can take objective. That
purpose are:

1. To know the theories of language acquisition

2. To know the theories of first language acquisition
3. To know the differences between language acquisition and first language
acquisition

4
 CHAPTER II

DISCUSSION

A. Theories of Language Acquisition

1. The innateness theory

The Innateness theory by Noam Chomsky (Pinker, 1994) shows the innatist
limitations of behaviorist view of language acquisition in 1960‟s to the alternative
„generative‟ account of language. The main Argument in this theory is that children are
born with an innate knowledge which guides them in the language acquisition task. The
children‟s ability makes the task of learning a first language easier than it would
otherwise be (Crain & Lillo-Martin, 1999). Pinker (1994, p.26) claims that “the
universally of complex language is a discovery that fills linguists with awe, and is the
first reason to suspect hat language is not just any cultural invention but the product of a
special human instinct”. It is an innate biological function of human beings just like
learning to walk. On the other side, Clark (2009, p.2) poses that “even if children are
born with a learning mechanism dedicated to language, the main proposals is to focus
only on syntactic. The rest has to be learnt.” This essay believes that children have the
innate ability to learn language as Chomsky believes, but this needs to be learn and
develop by social interacting with environments such as adults and in cognitive
development.

2. The Input theory

According to the input or Motherese theory, there are cultures in which speech is
never addressed to language-learning children; therefore it must be possible to learn to
talk by listening to adults talking to each other or by the environments surrounding them.
The studies of Motherese in the 1970 focused upon the maternal input, that parents do
not talk to their children in the same way as they talk to other adults and seem to be
capable and adapting their language to give the child maximum opportunity to interact
and learn (Lieven, 1994 ). This implies that the child moves ahead a little at time. Adults

5
do talk differently to children than to other adults using what is sometimes
called“Motherese”. Crain and Lillo-Martin (1999, p.14) argue that “adults mumble less to
children, they use fewer incorrectly formed sentences, they use shorter sentences, and
they frequently use different intonation patterns with young children”.

3. Cognitive theory

This is a learning theory which is based on cognitive psychology and

encompasses the manner in which people think and ultimately acquire knowledge and
skills. This theory was developed by Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget (1896-1980) and
focus on exploring the links between the stages of cognitive development and language
skills. The links clearly shows from the earliest period of language learning up to 18
months, relating to the development of what Piaget called „sensory motor‟ intelligence,
in which children construct a mental picture of a world of objects that have independent
existence. During the latter part of this period, children develop a sense of object
permanence and will begin to search for the objects that they have seen hidden (Clark,
2009). The outcome of cognitive development is thinking, “the intelligent mind creates
from experience generic coding systems that permit one to go beyond the data to new
and possibly fruitful predictions” (Bruner, 1957, p. 234).

B. Theories of First Language Acquisition

1. The Behaviorist Perspective

In psychology, during the first half of the 20th century behaviorism was the
dominated philosophy of the mind as a reaction to the pitfalls of introspectionism.
According to Schultz and Schultz (2012) introspection is the inspection of one’s own
conscious thought and feeling. It refers exclusively to the decisive and rational self
observation of the one’s mind status and it is directly connected to the theoritical notion
of human self-reflection, and is constrasted with external observation. Behaviorist
theory, founded by J.B Watson, is in fact a theory of first language acquisition,
advanced partly as a reaction to the traditional grammar. The main tenet of this theory
relates to the analysis of human behavior in term of observable stimulus-response

6
interaction and association. On the whole, “the behaviorist theory of stimulus-response
learning, particularly as developed in the operant conditioning model of Skinner,
considers all learning to be the establisment of habits as a result of reinforcement and
reward” (Wilga Rivers, 1968, 73). Therefore, babies acquire mother tongue habits by
the use of varied babblings which are similar to the word uttered by a person around
them. Because the babies are rewarded for babblings and mutterings, more production
of similar type into combination of syllabels and words uttered in the same
circumstances will be reinforced.

2. Criticism of Nativist Theories

The theory encompasses numerous theoretical constructs that cannot probably
be attained from any quantity of input.These theoretical constructs for instance, are
strict binary branching, empty categories, movement and complex underlying
constitutions. In view of the fact that the theory is, quintessentially, unlearnably difficult,
subsequently it should be necessarily innate. However a different theory of language
possibly will offer diverse interpretations. Lexical functional grammar, head-driven
phrase structure grammar, and a variety of construction grammar are cases of
alternative theories that do not employ empty categories and movement. Despite the
fact that the entire theories of language acquisition hypothesize some amount of
innateness, a less complicated theory may engage less innate structure and additional
learning. The input, in cooperation to common and language-specific learning
capabilities, in the company of such a theory of grammar may be satisfactory for
acquisition.
3. Chunking Theory
Chase and Simon (1973) originally put forth the Chunking theory. The chief
principle of this theory is that learning takes place in consequence of the accumulation
of chunks. Miller (1956) introduced the term ‘chunking’ and believed that it is feasible to
efficiently enhance short-term memory for lowinformation-content items by mentally
recoding them into a smaller number of high-information-content items. Two most
important problems have remained unsettled regarding chunking theory. Regarding the
first problem, even half a century after Miller’s article (1956), the description of a chunk
is still astonishingly tentative (Mathy & Feldman, in review). Various researchers have

7
defined chunks in different ways. The second problem is that there are many different
terms used for the same notion of ‘chunks’ in the literature. There is not a unanimous
term on which all scholars and linguists agree. To refer to ‘chunks’ in language
acquisition studies, most researchers and linguists have created their own idiosyncratic
terms.
4. Relational Frame Theory
Taking into account a gamut holding different approaches towards learning in
general and language learning in particular, according to the following figure one can
put Relational Frame Theory (RFT) somewhere between Empiricism – which is at one
of the extremes - and Cognitivism – which is located somewhere in the middle of the
continuum.
5. Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory
Vygotsky (1981cited in Foley and Thompson, 2003) summarizes his socio-
cultural theory as:
Any theory in the child’s cultural development appears twice, or on two planes.
First, it appears on the social plane, and then on the psychological plane. First it
appears between people as interpsychological category, and then within the child as an
intra psychological category. This is uniformly accurate with regard to voluntary
attention, logical memory, the formation of concepts, and the development of volition.
He believes that language grows completely from social interaction, and children are
only able to develop to an advanced level of knowledge only via employing a helpful
interactive environment.
6. Environment in Vygotsky’s Theory
Vygotsky believes that the environment is "the socially organized world of culture
created by the individual who developed, in the process, his latent forces and abilities"
(Yaroshevsky, 1989 cited in Ghassemzadeh, 2005). The environment in this sense is
not considered as “an absolute and immutable concept which is already present when
the child is born, but a factor, or rather a set of factors, which vary according to the
peculiarities of the organism (e.g. the developmental stage of the child) and which
possess some regulations that can be internalized according to a transformational and
developmental system” (Ghassemzadeh, 2005). Van Der Veer (1986, cited in

8
Ghassemzadh, 2005) differentiates between the child’s environment and the animal
environment in that “human” environment is a social environment, that the child is part
of a living environment, that the environment is never external to the child".
7. Activity Theory
Activity theory explains the nature and development of human behavior based on
Vygotsky’s view that human behavior is the result of “the integration of socially and
culturally constructed forms of mediation into human activity” (Lantolf, 2007 p8). Activity
In this theory refers to something which is provoked by a biological desire, like as
hunger, or a culturally made need such as the need to be educated in specific cultures.
Needs would develop into motives to attain specific objectives. When an individual
make a decision to eat or be educated, needs become motives. According to Lantolf
(2000) an activity has three levels: a) level of motivation, b) level of action (or goal) and
c) level of conditions. Activities can only be observed at the level of conditions while
levels of motivation and goal are not observable.
8. Piaget and Vygotsky: Piaget’s Theory of Child Language and
Thought
The first one who looked into child perception and logic systematically by
focusing on the typical features of the child thought was Piaget (Vygotsky, 1986). He
believed that the distinction between adult and child thinking was qualitative not a
quantitative difference. He investigated the child’s use of language and concluded that
all the particular features of the child’s logic are the egocentrism of child’s judgment. He
placed egocentrism as “occupying an intermediate position, genetically, structurally, and
functionally, between autistic and directed thought” (Vygotsky, 1986).
9. Internalization and Inner Speech
Vygotsky (1986, p.225) rejects the earlier definitions of “inner speech” by Mueller
and Watson. Mueller defined it as “speech minus sound” and Watson as “subvocal
speech”. He believes these elucidations are in no way adequate since silent
“pronouncing” of terms is not the same as the whole process of inner speech. He says,
“Inner speech is speech for oneself; external speech is for others”, so difference in
functions will lead to difference in structures.

9
 10. Inner Speech and Gesture
David McNeil (1993 cited in Lantolf, 2007) claims that gesture is both an
indivisible part of our communicative activity with others and a very important feature in
our activities with ourselves. He argues that some meaning is conveyed by gesture not
as a substitute for a verbal sign but as a complement to it. Therefore, as we interact with
someone we read his verbal signals and at the same time his gestural signals. For
example, the movement of hands, their direction of movements and the speed of
movement may convey meaning not expressed verbally.

C. The Differences Between Language Acquisition and First Language

Acquisition

There is no significant differences between language acquisition and first

language acquisition. Language acquisition is the psocess by which humans acquire the
capacity to perceive, produce and use words to undestand and communicate. First
language acquisition is the ability of the human to acquire their mother togue from their
early age. There are four theories to describe the process of children in understanding
and practicing their first language, behavior/imitation, innateness, cognitive, and
interaction.

The significant of first language acquisition for children are to express needs and
get what they want, used to tell others what to do, and tell stories and to create an
imaginery situation.

10
 CHAPTER III

CLOSING

A. Conclusion

Language acquisition is the psocess by which humans acquire the capacity to

perceive, produce and use words to undestand and communicate. First language
acquisition is the ability of the human to acquire their mother togue from their early age.
There are four theories to describe the process of children in understanding and
practicing their first language, behavior/imitation, innateness, cognitive, and interaction.

There are several theories of language acquisition, such as : The innateness

theory, The Input theory and Cognitive theory. And first language acquisition also have
a several theories, that are: the behaviorist perspective, criticism of nativist theories,
chunking theory, relational frame theory, environment in vygotsky’s theory, vygotsky’s
sociocultural theory, activity theory, piaget and vygotsky: piaget’s theory of child
language and thought, internalization and inner speech, and inner speech and gesture.

B. Suggestion

The author is certainly still aware that if the paper above there are still many
errors and far from perfection. The author will refine the paper based on many sources
and constractive criticism from readers.

11
 REFENCES

Bruner, J. S. (1957). Going beyond the information given. New York: Norton.

Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 55-
81.

Clark, E.V. (2009). First Language Acquisition(second edition).Cambridge : Cambridge

University Press.

Crain, S., & Lillo-Martin, D. (1999). An Introduction to Linguistic Theory and Language
Acquisition. Oxford : Blackwell Publishing.

Foley, J. & Thompson, L. (2003). Language learning: A lifelong process. London:

Arnold.

Ghasemzadeh, H. (2005). Vygotsky’s Mediational Psychology: A New Conceptual of

culture, Signification and Metaphor. Language Science 27, 281-300.

Lantolf, J. P. (2007). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Lieven, E.V.M. (1994 ). Crosslinguistic and Crosscultural aspects of Language

addressed to children . In C. Gallaway & B.J . Richards,( Eds.) Input and
Interaction in Language Acquisition. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Mathy, F., & Feldman, J. (in review). What’s magic about magic numbers? Chunking
and data compression in shortterm memory. Retrieved 18 January 2011 from
http://slhs.univfcomte.fr/rech/psycho/filesMathy/MathyFeldmanChunking. pdf

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our
capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.

Pinker, S. ( 1994). The language Instinct. England: Clays Ltd.

Rivers, M. Wilga (1968). Teaching Foreign Language Skil1s. Chicago: Chicago

University Press.

Schultz, D. P.; Schultz, S. E. (2012). A history of modern psychology (10th ed.).

Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Peters, A. M. (1983). The units of language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

12