More handpicked essays just for you.
Summary of language acquisition theories
Chomsky's theory on language development
Summary of language acquisition theories
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Summary of language acquisition theories
I believe both sides of the naturists’ vs behaviourist theorists have justification and reasoning with their language acquisition theories. Chomsky’s idea of each child been born with a brain capacity language acquisition device (Fellowes & Oakley, G 2014) is interesting and remarkable. As I read this week’s readings my 6 month old was happily blabbing and playing beside me, these theories made me think and relate back to my own interactions with my son and just how remarkable our brains are. The behaviourist theory also has substance as I believe the environment shapes us, “Central to this perspective is the role of the environment: language learning requires an environment that is rich in experience and language and that provides models
Behaviorism, or learning theory is one of three “grand theories” of human development. The focus of behaviorism is observable behavior, with no reference to mental processes. As a learning theory behaviorism, assumes that learning occurs via interactions with the environment, through the process of conditioning.
Behaviourism main theorist included Skinner, Pavlov and Thorndike who describes this theory as having a ‘stimulus and response’. Petty states, ‘learners are motivated by expected reward of some kind (such as praise or satisfied curiosity); learning will not take place without it’ (Petty, 2009:15-16). In addition, there should be immediate reinforcement otherwise this will cause a delay in learning. Another principle of behaviourism is the learning should be step by step and not all at once and by doing so the learner has successions of successes which increase their motivation that leads ‘to more complex behaviour’. Petty also states that ‘effective teachers stress key points and summarise them at the beginning and at the end of the class and, makes use of old learning in developing new learning’ (Petty, 2009:16).
Behaviourism is where a person learns through responding to stimuli so as to optimise their own situation. This means that humans have a need to learn so by adapting to a changing environment around to be able to survive. For instance a learner who has some sensory impairment will adapt their own learning styles to accommodate for this barrier by adapting method and using experience they are able to achieve the same learning outcomes as other learners.
There are many practical applications of the behaviourist approach, including in education, child rearing, treating phobias and advertising, using behaviourist theories to influence societies on a large scale (McLeod 2015). It is very scientific, using repeatable experiments to prove theories on behaviour and puts a strong emphasis on objective measurement (McLeod 2015). It can be used to explain a great quantity of human behaviour, using a small amount of scientifically studied theories (Hill
Chomsky and Skinner and Theories Of Language Development Many psychologists have studied and researched into how we acquire language. Some have concluded that the ability to learn language is a genetically inherited skill. Others believe that language is learned following birth and is due to environmental factors. This is part of the nature vs. nurture debate.
...ese aspect of the behaviorist theory of learning avoid the notion that human beings have any power of free will or cognitive abilities, and that “there is little difference between the learning that takes place in humans and that in other animals” (McLeod, 2013).
Behaviorism is a learning theory or a developmental theory that measures observable behaviors that are produced by the learner’s response to stimuli. On one end of the spectrum behaviorism is known as an attitude. At the other end, it is known as a doctrine. According to the behavioral views of human development, behaviorists argued that to focus attention on unobservable constructs, such as emotions, thoughts, or the unconscious, was an unscientific approach.(Craig & Dunn, Ex.: 2010)
In her article, “Babies Prove Sound Learners,” Sohn (2008) states, “Such studies show that, up to about 6 months of age, babies can recognize all the sounds that make up all the languages in the world” (para.24). B. K. Skinner suggests that the materialization of language is the result of imitation and reinforcement. According to Craig and Dunn (2010), “Language development is linked to cognitive development that, in turn, depends on the development of the brain, on physical and perceptual abilities, and on experiences. Biological and social factors also jointly influence the early development of emotion and personality” (p. 117). In her article, A natural history of early language experience.
The study of language development, one of the most fascinating human achievements, has a long and rich history, extending over thousands of years (Chomsky, 2000). As the nature-versus-nurture argument is inevitable to arise whenever human behaviors are discussed, it is not surprising that language experts have debated the relative influences of genetics and the environment on language development (Hulit & Howard, 2002). Among the various proposals concerning the mechanisms involved in acquiring a language, two opposing theoretical positions, the behaviorist and the nativist, are the most prominent and influential ones (Ayoun, 2003; Garton & Pratt, 1998; Owens, 2001). Due to the indefinite explanation of the exact process, the continuous interest of the inquiring people, and the sheer significance of the precise result, the controversy remains ongoing and popular. In view of the more obvious limitations of the behaviorist interpretation and the prevailing contributions of the nativist interpretation, the latter one is more rational to accept.
Language acquisition is perhaps one of the most debated issues of human development. Various theories and approaches have emerged over the years to study and analyse this developmental process. One factor contributing to the differing theories is the debate between nature v’s nurture. A question commonly asked is: Do humans a...
Still today, it is the commonly held belief that children acquire their mother tongue through imitation of the parents, caregivers or the people in their environment. Linguists too had the same conviction until 1957, when a then relatively unknown man, A. Noam Chomsky, propounded his theory that the capacity to acquire language is in fact innate. This revolutionized the study of language acquisition, and after a brief period of controversy upon the publication of his book, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, in 1964, his theories are now generally accepted as largely true. As a consequence, he was responsible for the emergence of a new field during the 1960s, Developmental Psycholinguistics, which deals with children’s first language acquisition. He was not the first to question our hitherto mute acceptance of a debatable concept – long before, Plato wondered how children could possibly acquire so complex a skill as language with so little experience of life. Experiments have clearly identified an ability to discern syntactical nuances in very young infants, although they are still at the pre-linguistic stage. Children of three, however, are able to manipulate very complicated syntactical sentences, although they are unable to tie their own shoelaces, for example. Indeed, language is not a skill such as many others, like learning to drive or perform mathematical operations – it cannot be taught as such in these early stages. Rather, it is the acquisition of language which fascinates linguists today, and how it is possible. Noam Chomsky turned the world’s eyes to this enigmatic question at a time when it was assumed to have a deceptively simple explanation.
Nearly every member of the human race learns a language or more to the degree of proficiency only in the first few years of life. How children achieve this astonishing skill in such little time sparks controversial debates among linguists, psychologists, and scientists throughout centuries. Some believe that language is an innate ability possessed by all human beings due to the remarkable function of the brain while others maintain that language is learned from childhood experience. However, many are beginning to realize that nature and nurture go hand-in-hand when explaining how children develop their language(s). Despite the claims that language is either pre-learned or environmentally learned alone, the combination of both genes
Chomsky describes his theory as language unfolding through natural cognitive ability (Torr, 2015). Instead of the idea of learning language from social interactions and other people, language is something already in the mind that is unlocked (Grammar before meaning, nativist’s perspective). This innate ability is called “Language Acquisition Device (LAD)” (Chomsky 1987, Cited in Harris, 2009, pp.12) and is something children are born with. This device is unrelated and unchanged by the environment and social circumstances of the child, (Torr, 2015). The theory is viewed as unpopular due to a question researchers had in its early stages, (“How could infants possibly learn the underlying syntactic rules of the language on the basis of their exposure to such poor linguistic input?” (Torr 2015, pp. 244)). The question was later answered by the idea of LAD. Finally, Halliday characterised the theory, expressing “…learning of structure is really the heart of the language learning process… not too far-fetched to recognize in the use of the term acquisition… therefore language itself, is a commodity of some kind that the child has to gain possession of in the course of maturation ' (Halliday, 1975. Cited in Torr 2015, pp. 244 ) basically stating that language development maybe a combination of both theories. Although the unpopular of the two theories, Chomsky had a grand influence
Like stated before this theory does not fit into behaviorism. It fits into constructivism which is “[N]ot believe in innate ideas, but in knowledge that is constructed by each individual in interaction with his or her environment” (Pulaski, 1980, p). Cognitive Development Theory uses the environment help to construct knowledge. “[T]hrough their make-believe were assimilating and consolidating as part of their experience the customs and manners observed in their environment” (Pulaski, 1980, p. 28). In just playing make-believe the child had learned about manners and customs without knowing it at the time. As they get older, they go into the next stage and can understand more complex concepts. With constructivism, they need to be active learner and this is something that happens in Cognitive Development Theory. With that is a need to socialize with other people or students. At a young age “[C]hildren 's verbal interactions are primarily composed of collective monologue conversations”(Wadsworth, 1970, p.69). So at a young age they are becoming active learners so when older they can have better discussion about topic and go deeper into
Behaviorism is the point of view where learning and behavior are described and explained in terms of stimulus-response relationships. Behaviorists agree that an individual’s behaviors is a result of their interaction with the environment. Feedback, praise and rewards are all ways people can respond to becoming conditioned. The focus is on observable events instead of events that happen in one’s head. The belief that learning has not happened unless there is an observable change in behavior. “The earliest and most Ardent of behaviourists was Watson (1931; Medcof and Roth, 1991; Hill 1997). His fundamental conclusion from many experimental observations of animal and childhood learning was that stimulus-response (S-R) connections are more likely to be established the more frequently or recently an S-R bond occurs. A child solving a number problem might have to make many unsuccessful trials before arriving at the correct solution” (Childs, 2004).