Language Acquisition Theories

This essay examines the debate surrounding language acquisition, focusing on two contrasting theories: nativism (Chomsky) and behaviorism (Skinner). It delves into each theory's core tenets, exploring the concept of universal grammar and the role of environmental input in language development. The essay also analyzes the limitations of each approach and ultimately suggests that a more comprehensive understanding of language acquisition likely requires integrating elements from both theories.

Running head: BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
The term language acquisition refers to the process through which one individual learns
the use of language for everyday communication. A number of theories have been developed for
the better understanding of the process of the acquisition of language. The process quite naturally
begins from the very early age. As soon as a child starts to understand or at least have an idea of
the environment he is belonging to the process of acquisition starts to develop. There are various
theories about how individuals start learning the basics of language. Grammar, being an
inevitable part of language, it is necessary to understand how a child acquires the knowledge of
grammar in the process of acquiring language. This essay is going to focus on the idea of
whether innate learning of grammar is necessary for a child to acquire the learning of grammar.
The essay is going to focus on both the sides of the idea basing on the recent studies over the
idea.
How a child acquires the skill of grammar is one of the most researched topics in the field
of language. Noam Chomsky is one of the first linguists to shed light on this issue. He gave the
idea of language acquisition device or LAD (Chomsky, 2014). This implies that all the human
beings are born with an innate quality for acquiring language and it does not take any additional
effort to acquire the language in order to communicate in the basic level. The LAD works as a
hardwired device that is naturally installed in the brain and helps in the process of acquiring
language. This concept of the brain having a pre-wired device to acquire language had been
brought forward in order to make the process of children learning language understandable.
According to it all the children posses the same kind of syntactic order and grammar inside their
head and no effort from outside would be necessary to make the children understand the basic
rules of grammar. However, LAD being more of a theoretical device explains the process of
evaluation that the human mind possesses that makes it particularly spectacular in learning

2BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
languages (Kessel, 2013). However, this view of acquiring grammar and language had been
contradicted by behaviourists. According to them, language acquisition, rather than being an
innate tool is rather developed by behaviours. The pioneer linguists of theory further argued that
human beings learn languages by different kinds of conditionings like classical conditioning and
operant conditioning. Another theory that behaviourists put forward are that language acquisition
is also done in the process of imitation and observation (MacWhinney, 2014). Behaviourists
explained the process of learning in children by suggesting that they learn language by attaching
objects to sounds and also by following the gestures of the surrounding people, he is growing up
with.
This difference of view between the innate theory and the behaviourist theory continues
even in the modern times. Amid modern day linguists the names of Pinker and Tomasello may
be mentioned who are supporters of the two different views. Pinker has dealt quite
sympathetically with Chomsky’s theory that all the humans are born with an innate capacity of
learning language. He has fiercely criticized the ideas, which refer to the notion that children
have to be taught grammar as well as the proper use of language (Mitchel, Myles & Marsden,
2013). Pinker’s theory bases itself on the idea that language is an ability that is unique to human
beings which is there to solve the problem of communication among them. He compares
language to an instinct that comes naturally to human beings just as making a web comes
naturally to a spider or making dam building comes naturally to beavers (Mitchel, Myles &
Marsden, 2013). As Pinker calls language an instinct, he means that it is not an invention of
human beings like writing or reading is. In support of his argument, he states that while only
some cultures posses the acquired skills like reading, writing, or some kind of metalwork,
language is universal to every culture and every individual (Mitchel, Myles & Marsden, 2013).

3BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
He further points out that even children, from a very early age start to invent and follow a
coherent grammatical pattern and speech which is known as a ‘Creole’ even if they belong to an
atmosphere where no consistent grammatical rule is followed and the population belongs to a
mix culture society (Mitchel, Myles & Marsden, 2013). Children with no speaking abilities, i.e.
deaf and dumb children too blabber with his hands in the same way a normal child would have
used language with the help of speech (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 2014). Pinker further argues
that children also adapt to sign languages and convey their thoughts or ideas that they want to
convey (Saville-Trolike & Barto, 2016). This proves that language, rather than being an
invention of the human beings is an innate ability that each and every individual is born with.
About the rules of grammar Pinker opines that strict grammatical rules are generally not
necessary in everyday use of language thus it should not be taken into consideration.
However, according to the innate theory, language, being an innate instinct should also
help to grow grammar continually within the learning individual, as it should also be treated as
an instinct only (Guasti, 2017). The generative grammar states that all individual children posses
a grammatical instinct that is universal as well as innate. According to this theory, there is the
capacity of learning language as well as grammar hardwired in the brain of an infant, which is
known as LAD or language acquisition device (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 2014). Generative
theory also argues that the universal grammar remains same throughout the life span of a person,
which implies that even infants and children have the syntactic sense of grammar as adults do
(Guasti, 2017). The generativist theory bases itself on two processes -- the first being learning
the constructions and words of the language and the second is connecting the learned words,
rules and constructions to the language. But this theory being completely based on selection

4BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
faces problems while explaining the grammatical understanding of certain kind of sentences
(Tribushinia & Evers-Vermeul, 2017).
This is the point where the innate theory is contradicted by the usage based theory or the
behaviourist theory (Tribushinia & Evers-Vermeul, 2017). Michael Tomasello, one of the key
exponents of the usage theory opines that “children are not very productive with their early
language, suggesting that they do not possess the abstract linguistic categories and schemas
necessary to effortlessly generate infinite numbers of grammatical sentences” (Dittmar et al.,
2014). This is the area where the two ideas associated with the process of grammar acquisition in
the children are debated the most (Kessel, 2013). Tomasello’s approach to language acquisition
is a constructive one. According to this approach, “language is an inventory of constructions of
various sizes and various levels of abstraction, each of which serves some communicative or
socio-pragmatic function” (Ambridge & Lieven, 2015). Constructivism states that the acquisition
of language has to go through a number of developments of the understanding of the various
forms (syntactic groups like nouns and verbs) through the functionality of meanings (Ambridge
& Lieven, 2015). Contradicting the theory presented by Pinker about language being an innate
instinct Tomasello argues that a child must get sufficient input in order to learn both the language
and the grammar of it.
The usage-based approach can be said to be basing itself on two basic principles. One is
the principle that implies that understanding the meaning of a particular term leads to the proper
use of it (Kessel, 2013). In the words of Tomasello ‘meaning is use’ which “represents an
approach to the functional or semantic dimension of linguistic communication” (Tomasello,
2014). The second principle is based on the idea that ‘structure emerges from use’ which

5BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
“represents an approach to the structural or grammatical dimension of linguistic communication”
(Tomasello, 2014).
The usage-based theory emphasizes on the communications, which are made in a pre-
linguistic phase. The understanding of communicative function in the usage-based view is
important (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 2014). The human infants, before they acquire any speech
communicate by pointing to things and thus trying to communicate about their demands and
thoughts (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 2014). Tomasello argues that this proves “that all human
pointing and other gestures may already embody forms of social cognition and communicative
motivation that are unique to the species, and that are necessary as a first step on the way to
linguistic conventions both phylogenetically and ontogenetically” (Tomasello, 2017). This view
is completely different form the generativist theory because according to the theory grammar
acquisition is an innate instinct just like language acquisition is.
Tomasello has been very pointed on his attack against the theory backed by Pinker.
According to Tomasello language cannot be treated as an instinct because as according to the
definitions of instincts they should either be a relatively stereotyped expressions of behavior or
they would appear in ontogeny even when the individual is being raised in a situation, which is
completely isolated of his own species. However, the term language does not even slightly fulfil
one of these mentioned definitions (MacWhinney, 2014). Language has a large amount of
variations, which change in accordance with the particular culture or community along with the
grammatical constructions as well. An individual can only acquire one single language and the
grammar of it and that to only after living in the company of other similar language-using group
of people (Ambridge, Pine & Lieven, 2014). This rule applies to any language one wants to learn
and thus proves the theory of language being an instinct invalid. Tomasello has accused Pinker

6BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
and other fellow Chomskyans of treating the different communicative languages as not tools of
communication but as something termed as universal grammar, which is unlearnable as it is
something that is pre-wired into the human brain and which is also same for each and every
individual (Ambridge, Pine & Lieven, 2014).
The essay can thus be concluded by saying that both the theories discussed above have
their own merits and demerits. The process of grammar acquisition in children cannot be defined
by one single theory as it is quite a complex procedure and each theory has its own limitations.
Neither the innate theory nor the behaviourist theory can explain all the questions associated with
the process of language as well as grammar acquisition in children. It should also be kept in mind
that by language acquisition the second language acquisition should also be kept in mind, which
cannot be flawlessly analysed, by any of the single existing theories.

7BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
References:
Ambridge, B., & Lieven, E. (2015). A (neo-) constructivist account of child language
acquisition. The handbook of language emergence. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Ambridge, B., Pine, J. M., & Lieven, E. V. (2014). Child language acquisition: Why universal
grammar doesn't help. Language, 90(3), e53-e90.
Chomsky, N. (2014). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (Vol. 11). MIT press.
Dittmar, M., Abbot‐Smith, K., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2014). Familiar verbs are not
always easier than novel verbs: How German pre‐school children comprehend active and
passive sentences. Cognitive science, 38(1), 128-151.
Guasti, M. T. (2017). Language acquisition: The growth of grammar. Mit Press.
Kessel, F. S. (2013). The development of language and language researchers: Essays in honor of
Roger Brown. Psychology Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (2014). An introduction to second language acquisition
research. Routledge.
MacWhinney, B. (2014). Mechanisms of Language Acquisition: The 20th Annual Carnegie
Mellon Symposium on Cognition. Psychology Press.
Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E. (2013). Second language learning theories. Routledge.

8BRAIN MIND AND BEHAVIOUR
Saville-Troike, M., & Barto, K. (2016). Introducing second language acquisition. Cambridge
University Press.
Tomasello, M. (2014). Beyond names for things: Young children's acquisition of verbs.
Psychology Press.
Tomasello, M. (2014). The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to
language structure (Vol. 1). Psychology Press.
Tomasello, M. (2017). What did we learn from the ape language studies?. Bonobos: Unique in
Mind, Brain, and Behavior, 95.
Tribushinina, E., & Evers-Vermeul, J. (2017). Language acquisition and language teaching in the
usage-based framework. Usage-Based Approaches to Language Acquisition and
Language Teaching, 55, 1.