Is Language Development an Innately or Environmentally Guided Process - Essay Example

?Nature vs. Nurture: Is Language Development an Innately or Environmentally Guided Process 0 Introduction An issue, which is widely debated concerns about the question of whether individuals’ language capacities are innate or not. Is language development in children a result of inherent biological endowment or is it a result of conditions in which children are raised and nurtured? Nativists assert that children possess an inherent linguistic knowledge upon the day they were born. It further proposed that the human mind has preexisting structures, which mainly function to interpret and organise experience (Hoff, 2009, p.18). In contrast, empricists claimed that children learned language from their linguistic experience (Carroll, 2008, p.42). This paper espouses the nativist’s view that children possess an innate linguistic knowledge that facilitates language acquisition and development. This paper discusses language development according to the nativist perspective. In addition, it presents evidences that support the proposition that language development is an innately guided process. Lastly, the paper presents alternative perspectives in explaining language development. 2.0 How Language Develops According to Glidden (2006, p.2) the brain is designed to have the ability to acquire language. Chomsky (cited in Curtis & O’Hagan, 2003, p.54) reiterated that every child is born with Language Acquisition Device (LAD), which allows him/her to structure his/her language. He demonstrated that children can generate sentences, which they have not heard before (cited in Curtis & O’Hagan, 2003, p.54). Each child possesses the capacity to learn a particular language. This capacity consists of implicit or tacit knowledge of the characteristics common to every language and the constraints on manners wherein languages can differ. The children’s capacity to learn language functions in a modular manner (Glidden, 2006, p.2). It involves mechanisms especially tuned in processing various linguistic representations, which consequently entail minimal input from mental functions or general cognitive processes. The child only needs to learn limited number of primary examples of the input language to grasp the language-specific rules and categories (Glidden, 2006, p.2). These examples reflect the basic facts about a particular language; thus, it is present in virtually all environments. Variations in the children’s environments may not have a significant impact on language development (Glidden, 2006, p.2). Bjorklund and Blasi (2011) asserted that the processes and structures of processing language are biologically inherent. Children utilised these mechanisms in learning their mother tongue when they are exposed to the typical language context. This nativist’s view refutes the premise that language is a result of classical and operant conditioning. Eric Lenneber (1967 cited in Bjorklund & Blasi, 2011) espouses the position that language is based on biology. He proposed six characteristics that make language dissimilar from any other learned abilities. He contends that (1) it is case-specific, (2) uniform among species, (3) hard to prevent, (4) acquired and learned in regular sequence, (5) it has specific anatomical structures related to its use, and lastly (6) it is highly affected by language disabilities (cited in Bjorklund & Blasi, 2011). Similarly, Chomsky (1993 cited in Hoff, 2009, p.18) stressed that language development has three salient facts namely: (1) children learned language rapidly, (2) it is acquired effortlessly, and lastly (3) children learned language even without direct instructions. Chomsky (1993 cited in Hoff, 2009, p.18) asserts that learning a language is not something that the child consciously does. It is something that occurs when a child is placed in a suitable environment, in a similar fashion that the child’s body matures and grows in a predetermined manner with the appropriate environmental stimulation and nutrition (cited in Hoff, 2009, p.18). 3.0 Language Development as an Innately Guided Process Evidences that validate nativist’s views are derived from studies of children who have limited linguistic experience. Children appear to possess the ability to learn certain aspects of language in conditions wherein they are not presented with a consistent linguistic model. This is especially true for deaf children who have parents who don’t teach or believe in American Sign Language (ASL) (Carroll, 2008, p.42). Somehow, these children developed their own form of gestural language, which is similar to ASL, despite the absence of sign or speech. They could not have learned this gestural language from their parents since their knowledge and facility of signs exceed that of their parents (Carroll, 2008, p.42). Nativists support the premise that language learning is different from other human learning in such a manner that children learn to communicate without the support of caregivers or parents (cited Guzzetti, 2002, p.411). 4.0 Alternative Explanations Interactionist perspective posits that a child’s biological competencies interact with his/here environment to determine the course of the language development (Sigelman & Rider, 2008, p.284). Proponents of interactionist perspective adhere to the behaviorist’s belief that the environment plays a crucial role in language development. In addition, these researchers support the nativist’s belief that children possess inherent predisposition to learn language (Guzzetti, 2002, p.411). A child brings preexisting information in learning a language. Her/his environmental input has a crucial role in language development (Shulman & Capone, 2010, p.72). This perspective stresses that biological predisposition, as well as a supportive environment, contribute to language acquisition and development (Weiten, 2008, p.326). The interactionist perspective is somewhat similar to constructivism. Proponents of constructivism support the premise that language development occurs through the interaction of biology and the environment (Sandra, et al., 2009; Oates & Grayson, 2004, p.17). 5.0 Conclusion The paper raises a nature-nurture debate, which does not only predate on the study of language acquisition but also emergence of Psychology. The nativists assert that children possess an innate linguistic knowledge upon the day they were conceived into the wombs of their mothers. Language development occurs in a similar manner that the body matures and grows in a predetermined way with sufficient environmental stimulation and nutrition. Evidences that support the nativist’s views involve studies of children who possess limited linguistic experience. These children have managed to learn their own form of gestural language that is similar to ASL even when their parents don’t believe or teach ASL. However, some researchers argued that the nativist’s perspective failed to account the complexity of language development as well as the influence of environment in learning a language. Thus, the interactionist and constructivist’s perspectives emerged to propose that biological and environmental factors contribute to language development. These perspectives support the premise that the biological competencies of a child interact with his/her environment to guide the course of language development. The two perspectives mediated the views posited by the nativists and empiricists. References Bjorklund, D. & Blasi, C.H., 2011. Child and adolescent development: an integrated approach. USA: Cengage Learning. Carroll, D., 2008. Psychology of Language. USA: Cengage Learning. Curtis, A. & O’Hagan, M., 2003. Care and education in early childhood: a student’s guide to theory and practice. USA: Routledge. Glidden, L.M., 2006. International review of research in mental retardation, volume 32. USA: Academic Press. Guzzetti, B., 2002. Literacy in America: an encyclopedia of History, theory and practice. USA: ABC-CLIO. Hoff, E., 2009. Language development. USA: Cengage Learning. Oates, J. & Grayson, A., 2004. Cognitive and language development in children. USA: Wiley-Blackwell. Sandra, D., Ostman, J. & Vershueren, J., 2009. Cognition and pragmatics. USA: John Benjamins. Sigelman, C.K. & Rider, E.A., 2008. Life-Span human development. USA: Cengage Learning. Shulman, B.B. & Capone, N.C., 2010. Language development: foundation, processes, and clinical applications. USA: Jones & Barlett Learning. Weiten, W., 2008. Psychology: themes and variations. USA: Cengage Learning. Read More