How Children Learn Language

Chomsky’s theory of language acquisition was and still is controversial. The purpose of this essay is to briefly go back over some of the main aspects of his theory so as to reflect upon their light.

By the mid 20^th century, Chomsky came up with his nativist theory as a response and critique to the accepted behaviourist theory of language, which posed that reinforcement was essential in language acquisition (for correct grammar to be repeated and incorrect grammar to be eliminated). Chomsky differs from Behaviourism mainly in that he understands that human language acquisition is an innate biological ability that all humans possess; in this regard, reinforcement would play a secondary role.

Chomsky postulates that human beings are equipped with a mechanism, which he calls Language Acquisition Device. This device is responsible for the acquisition of any human language in any child. According to him, the LAD analyses the primary linguist data (input) the child hears, so as to set the parameters of the Universal Grammar. 

Universal Grammar is a set of principles and parameters shared by all human languages. According to Chomsky, children can acquire their first language, naturally, without special instruction, because of UG. He states that UG facilitates acquisition because it consists of innate grammatical categories (pronouns, nouns, verbs, etc.) which are activated in accordance to the stimulus the children receive. Such stimulus is said to be poor and scarce, however, “our knowledge of grammar is complex and abstract”. This represents one of the main tenets of Chomsky’s innatist theory. He says that “the things that are missing from the input are added by the UG”. The reason why we can get to have such a complex knowledge of grammar out of limited and imperfect stimulus is attributed to the innate properties of the mind.

The way I see it, it is very difficult to go deep in Chomsky’s views since they are complex and require a lot of research. In my opinion, some of his postulates may be arguable, especially because there is no concrete evidence of them. Even though his postulates may be difficult to picture, I agree with his poverty of stimulus argument. I think that if language acquisition was merely dependant on input, it would be impossible for children to acquire the tools to produce the amount of sentences they utter. 

In addition to this, I think the poverty of stimulus argument does account for the fact that language acquisition could be innate to some extent. This element in Chomsky’s theory proves that language acquisition is more than just imitation. There must be an internal process, as Chomsky states.  Furthermore, apart from being surprising, the fact that children from all cultures of the world follow a similar pattern in their language development (production of the same kind of grammatical mistakes,  readiness to acquisition, non-production of certain grammatical errors such as word order) could explain the existence of a universal grammar innate to human beings.

On the other hand, I do not agree with Chomsky on his view about input and experience. In his theory, he states that experience is just needed to activate the innate processes for language acquisition. However, I think those factors have a more important role in acquisition. The primary linguistic input involved in language acquisition is different from other kind of input (such as dialogues in a tv programme). I think the tone of voice, the rhythm, and the gestures which accompany the input in motherese play a significant role.

As a concluding remark, I think that language acquisition is such a complex process that not one theory can account for it fully. Skinner was criticized in the same way Chomsky was. The same applies to Piaget and Vigotzky’s claims. In my opinion, language acquisition involves innate aspects that facilitate it and are common to all children. At the same time, I think that the experience and the social environment of the child also play a part; not only in providing him with the appropriate linguistic input, but also in supporting the child’s language development.

I hope you'll like this video. It's Steven Pinker talking about the talent children have to for learning language
How Children Learn Language

Greetings !

When it comes to Greetings in English, identifying the level of formality is very important.

Some expressions, such as How do you do?,  are used in formal contexts mainly. You should use this expression when welcoming an important visitor to your company, or in a first meeting.

This is a veeery funny video where we can find examples of greetings and introductions. When watching it, think of the level of formality of each situation

More alternatives to avoid repetitions !

More ways of

Today is the turn of "LOOK"

To see    To percive with the eyes.  "Seeing" is passive.Light comes into your eye when your eyes are open. Seeing is different from looking because looking is active- you actually try to see something.

"Did you see that car accident on route 12 last night?"

To look  to turn your eyes towards   something so that you can see it. "Looking" is active. We physically make an effort to see something. We usually look quickly and for a shorter period of time. 

"Look at that guy with pink hair!"

To watch

When we watch something we observe something happening in front of us.

We might watch a movie, watch a performance, or watch an argument.

We don't have to be actively involved in the thing that we are watching.

" Last night we watched the thunderstorm until midnight."

To glare

 

When we "glare" at someone, we are usually showing them that we are angry.

A glare usually lasts for a long time and we often have a frown or a dark look on our face.

A child might glare at his mother when she has punished him.

"The kid glared at his mom when she said that he had to go to his room."

To stare

 to look fixedly at someone or   something. "Stare" is similar to glare, but it isn't necessarily a negative thing.

 " The kids in class stared at the teacher, completely confused."

To glance

  We use this word when we move our head quickly to see something, but we don't focus on that thing for very long.

We might not want people to know that we are looking at something or someone so we "glance" at it, very casually and naturally without making it obvious. "I quickly glanced at the gas prices when I drove by the gas station."

To glimpse    

to see someone or something by chance for a very short time.

I glimpsed a figure at the door of the house.

To wink: to shut one eye briefly as  a signal or to show that something  is a joke. 

She winked at me and I knew she was joking. 

Vocabulary building

This week I'll be sharing some ways of saying words, by means of other, more natural words. Let's avoid repeating ourselves !

Today: ways of saying SAID

If SAID is dead, use these instead !

Focus on materials development

Although I use coursebooks with my classes, I´m always in need of materials since many times, the content suggested in the coursebook is not enough, or  doesn't match students' needs. I usually turn to the web to get ideas and then adapt them to suit my learners' needs. However, I must reckon this is very time-consuming :/

This talk is quite interesting, I hope you find it useful. BTW, by the end of the video, the speaker shares links with useful resources for material design

Focus on materials development

my favourite !

I read this book two years ago and I still find this quotation exquisite!!

 From Alice in Wonderland