One can summarize that “universal grammar” believes that that there are rules that are founded in “all languages” (Cook and Newson 8). According to Ewa Da˛mentions another idea that applies to “universal grammar” is about the "poverty of stimulus" (Da˛browska 1). “Poverty of stimulus” is the idea is that one does not need to instruct a child on how to speak; rather it seems to come naturally to them (Da˛browska 8). By looking at certain tests, developments to certain languages, and similarities found in language this essay aims to demonstrate that the idea of universal grammar does exist within the human language. It has been described that children learn a language even though they are not given “…specific language instruction” (Fromkin et al. 19). A way to prove this idea is through “the wug-test” (Pinker 38). When children participate in “the wug-test” they are able to make an object plural without any instruction from any caretakers or guardians telling them to (Pinker 39). From test like the aforementioned one can see that children are able to form language without formal instructions. In Fall 2016, Mike McNulty suggested that proof of “universal properties of language is …show more content…
18). Which can be the idea that English speakers know that the letter A produces an “aah” sound. Another aspect of grammar includes “the system of meanings, called semantics” (Fromkin et al. 18). Examples of semantics are the words like the ones to describe gender (Fromkin et al. 27). Another aspect of grammar also refers to “the rules of word formation, called morphology” (Fromkin et al. 18). Finally another aspect of grammar is “the rules of sentence formation, called syntax” (Fromkin et al. 18). In Fall 2016 Mike McNulty stated that these rules are universal (CS212OC M1,
1. In his chapter “On the Need of Some Grammar” found in Modern American Usage, Wilson Follett argues that we need grammar to govern our language.
How can it be that something so uniquely human and commonplace in our everyday existence as language, could transcend the limits of our immediate understanding? We all know how to speak and comprehend at least one language, but defining what we actually know about that language an infinitely more demanding process. How can a child without previous knowledge of the construction and concepts of language be born into the world with an innate ability to apprehend any dialect? Mark Baker, in his book The Atoms of Language, seeks to address these unsettling questions, proposing as a solution, a set of underlying linguistic ingredients, which interact to generate the wide variety of languages we see today.
The Life of Language: Papers in Linguistics in Honor of William Bright. Berlin [etc.]. Mouton De Gruyter, 1998. Print. The.
Languages are continually changing and developing, and these changes occur in many different ways and for a variety of reasons. Language change is detectable to some extent in all languages, and ‘similar paths of change’ can be recognised in numerous unrelated languages (Bybee, 2015, p. 139). Since users of language all over the world have ‘the same mental processes’ and ‘use communication for the same or very similar ends’ (Bybee, 2015, p. 1), similar changes occur on the same linguistic aspects, and in many cases these changes produce similar results in multiple languages. However, language change is limited by the function it performs. Languages must be learnt to such an extent which allows communication between the generation above and below one’s own (McMahon, 1994, p. 5). Hence language change is a gradual, lethargic process, as only small changes in
These rules of language were stressed among students, with the hope that a solid grasp of abstract definitions would set them up with the tools needed to avoid errors in usage. But halfway through the 20th Century, research on the value of grammar education began to surface and there was no strong correlation between the teaching of grammar and a student’s ability to avoid usage errors, the once strict education structure was dropped. With traditional techniques abandoned, the vacuum was filled by new approaches. Structural linguistics, based around the importance of the way words form sentences, began to take the place of its predecessor but was then quickly challenged by transformational grammar, a more abstract concept than the prior two. With arguments from the structural and transformational side both pushing that the other was unscientific, the importance of grammar was abandoned. Though schools are beginning to reintroduce grammar in education, it has kept a firm separation between learning grammar and learning
The analysis of Chomsky’s argument in Christiansen & Chater’s (2008) article suggests that there may be an innate universal grammar (UG), meaning that humans are born with the biological ability obtain...
There are three main theories of child language acquisition; Cognitive Theory, Imitation and Positive Reinforcement, and Innateness of Certain Linguistic Features (Linguistics 201). All three theories offer a substantial amount of proof and experiments, but none of them have been proven entirely correct. The search for how children acquire their native language in such a short period of time has been studied for many centuries. In a changing world, it is difficult to pinpoint any definite specifics of language because of the diversity and modification throughout thousands of millions of years.
Biological foundation of language may contribute significantly to such universality. The issue here is not whether language is innate, for, clearly, language must be learned. Nor is the issue whether the aptitude for learning a la...
The stages of language knowledge develop by stages, and it is suggested, each successive stage approach more approximates the grammar of the adult usage.
How do children acquire language? What are the processes of language acquisition? How do infants respond to speech? Language acquisition is the process of learning a native or a second language. Although how children learn to speak is not perfectly understood, most explanations involve both the observations that children copy what they hear and the inference that human beings have a natural aptitude for understanding grammar. Children usually learn the sounds and vocabulary of their native language through imitation, (which helps them learn to pronounce words correctly), and grammar is seldom taught to them, but instead that they rapidly acquire the ability to speak grammatically. Though, not all children learn by imitation alone. Children will produce forms of language that adults never say. For example, “I spilled milk on hisself” or “Debbie wants a cookie”. This demonstrates that children have the desire to speak correctly and have self-motivating traits to communicate. This supports the theory of Noam Chomsky (1972)-that children are able to learn grammar of a particular language because all intelligible languages are founded on a deep structure of universal grammatical rules that corresponds to an innate capacity of the human brain. Adults learning a second language pass through some of the same stages, as do children learning their native language. In the first part of this paper I will describe the process of language acquisition. The second part will review how infants respond to speech.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J. (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, Essex: Longman Ltd.
Imitation is involved to some extent, of course, but the early words and sentences that children produce show that they are not simply imitating adult speech. Since there is an infinite number of potential sentences implied, children’s complex and creative utterances cannot be explained by a passive response to the language of the environment. In addition, imitation cannot account for common child language mistakes, which are highly unlikely to be failed imitations of what adults would say (Cattell, 2000).
Luu Trong Tuan, & Nguyen Thi Minh Doan. (2010). Teaching English grammar through games. Studies in Literature Language, 1(7), 61-75.
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.
When people learn a second language, they are sometimes influenced by features of their L1, which is called “a transfer from L1”. The transfer can be divided into two types: a positive transfer and a negative transfer. The positive transfer is thought that an influence from L1 works positively in a language acquisition and can facilitate L2 acquisition. On the other hand, the negative transfer is considered that an influence of some features L1 work negatively and can interfere with language acquisition. Therefore, the negative transfer is also called “interference”. The transfer from L1 is likely to occur in a variety of areas of language such as phonology, vocabulary, morphology, syntax and semantics. Secondly, we pay attention to that L2 acquisition also have a developmental sequence. In common with a child who acquires L1, L2 learners develop the acquisition in a certain order. Moreover, Shirahata (2010) mentions that L2 learners follow a similar acquisition order of some grammatical items even in the case of L2 leaning in a classroom. He also pays attention to the fact that some grammatical items that one learner has trouble in learning are similarly difficult for other learners even though teachers, the way to teach and textbook are different. This fact suggests L2 acquisition in a classroom setting has a certain acquisition order.