NATURE OR NURTURE?

First language acquisition theories

Behaviourism

Watson, Pavlov and SkinnerTabula rasaFocus on

observable behaviour role of the environment

Imitation and practice

Pavlov and classical conditioning

Developing unconditioned responses through stimulus–response-reinforcement

Skinner: operant conditioning

We are goverened by the consequences of our actions

Behaviouristic pedagogy

Objections

1. "What children say"Jean Berko (1958): wug-wugs, gling-glinged-glangwented, taked, mices, mouses, sheepsett, kenyért, lót, tégem> Analogous thinking

2. "What children don't say"McNeill (1966):

CHILD: Nobody don't like me.MUM: No, say "nobody likes me". CHILD: Nobody don't like me. (eight repetitions of this dialogue)MUM: No, now listen carefully, say "nobody likes me". CHILD: Oh! Nobody don't likes me. > Inability to imitate

Nativism/Innatism

Chomsky: genetic pre-programming

Based on

1. the Argument from the Poverty of the Stimulus

2. evidence of rule governed language generation

LAD, language universals

Example: SVO components in sentences

- 75% of the world's languages: SVO (English, French, Vietnamese) or SOV (Japanese, Tibetan, Korean)

- 10 - 15% VSO ( Welsh) or VOS (Malagasy)- 10-15% free word order (Latin, Hungarian),

but SOV common: Márta tortát evett.

„Setting the parameters” – matching UG to particular language

Criticism of Chomsky1. Competence – performance

- Performance igored- Competence judged on the basis of intuitions?

2. Core grammar – peripheral grammar- focus on core grammar(?) only ?We was there. I ain’t no fool.

3. Syntax vs. semantics- Colourless green ideas sleep furiously. - My mother, he no like bananas.

4. Ignoring meaning, function, context- situation for child FLA

Functionalism

Focus on imput: Interaction vs. exposure Bruner’s Language Acquisition Support System

(LASS)- parents communicate in ritualistic scenarios- easily comprehensible and predictable language- emotionally charged situations- repetition of acts and language

Motherese, parentese (interaction, initiation, response)

1. Simplified in grammar and meaning 2. Shorter sentences - about 4-8 words/

sentence, when speaking to 2-year olds 3. More restricted range of sentence patterns 4. Expansion and repetition of sentences

5. Slower speech

6. Use of special words and sounds

7. High pitch

8. High, rising intonation - looking for feedback.

9. Embedded in the here and now.

Findings from motherese

Not so partial and ungrammatical as suggested byChomsky a large number of WH forms

However No close correlation between motherese and

child speech

Not all social groups adapt speech to young children

Children do not simply repeat the language they hear from their caretakers.

They also produce

utterances that they

have never heard.

Eszel tégem?

Mummy sock.

Motherese: focus on meaning, not on grammar

Child : Mamma isn't boy, he a girl. Mother : That's right. Child : And Walt Disney comes on

Tuesday. Mother : No he does not.

Children’s mistakes not random errors - own grammar.

INTERLANGUAGE

Negation sequence of English-speaking children

1. No and Not appear as single word sentences. 2. Two-word (pivot) sentences: No car, Not gone3. Negative words used within constructions:

You no do that, Mummy 4. Negative auxiliaries appear: Won't, can't5. Not replaces no. Double negatives 6. Any, hardly, scarcely during early years of school.

Connectionism

Focus on neuro-programming: neurons, synapses, wiring, circuits

Where does language reside in the brain? Is there a LAD?

Answer from neurology

- Lateralisation

- Left hemisphere:

language and logical functions

Aphasia studies

Paul Broca 1861: „Tan” Broca’s aphasia: inability to form correct

sentences, patient is aware of difficulty Broca’s area: responsible for grammatical

structuring

Carl Wernicke, 1874: Wernicke’s area Wernicke’s aphasia: grammatical correctness,

semantically meaningless utterances, unaware of problem

Relation between Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas

Phases of development

Before birth: neurons, wiring for life functions

0/1: "biological exhuberance„neurons connect in response to environmental impulsesLanguage: - vocal map of L1 is formed

1/10: flexible synapses, easily formedLanguage: - sensorimotor connections flexible (no accent!) - vocab.learnt through repeated exposure and interaction

After 10: "pruning"Language: fixed synapses

GENETICALLY PROVIDED BRAIN POTENTIAL

RICH ENVIRONMENT

RICH BRAIN "Experts now agree that a baby does not come into the world as a genetically preprogrammed automaton or a blank slate at the mercy of the environment ... Learning happens by the interaction of the genes and the environment.„ (S. Begley)

Critical period in FLA:

- no hope after CP

Critical period in SLL/SLA:

- weak version: difficult

- strong version: impossible

Alternative considerations and counterevidence

Left/Right cooperation in SLL strategies of acquisition guessing meaning formulaic utterances

Hill (1970), Sorenson (1967): multilingual tribes, no accent

Areas of change

Neurological Pruning Lateralisation

Psychomotor Accent

Cognitive Concrete Formal thinking

Affective Inhibition Motivation

Personality factors

Talent: neurological flexibility New wiring for L2 Talent cluster

Motivation, + attitude, involvement

Strategies Active

Conclusion

Language learning, a unique human capacity: neurological basis

Genetic programme + environmentLearning capacity limited by time (CPH)

Loss of unconnected neurons and unused synapses

Also influenced by personality factors