Chomsky and Piaget: Assimilation and Accommodation.

Authors Avatar

Chomsky and Piaget: Assimilation and Accommodation

By Sarah Brayshaw

This account compares the Piagetian and Chomskian views on language acquisition and attempts to present a framework in which each has a place. The majority of the evidence suggests that the domain specific processes are predominant in language acquisition, supporting Chomsky’s (1983) claim that the abstract structure of language is innately specified in humans. However, as the innate specification can not explain the acquisition of language in its entirety, there is still support for cognitive involvement as prescribed by Piaget. This is the mapping of innate predispostions to the input of the child’s native tongue through a complex process of semantic and syntactic bootstrapping.

A substantial amount of evidence now supports a Chomskian view of language development with a number of studies providing support for the involvement of innate mechanisms in language acquisition (Gardner, Kornhaber, & Wake, 1996). The following account compares the Piagetian and Chomskian views on language acquisition and attempts to present a framework in which each has a place. The report presents the proposal that early ‘sensorimotor’ cognitive development, as described by Piaget (1983) is not necessarily a precursor to the development of language, but a co-occurrence. This proposal is supported by considering the underlying neurological subsystems that are common to both sensori-motor and language functions. Finally a Piagetian influence is discovered with the involvement of cognitive processes in the mapping of innate predispostions to the input of the child’s native tongue (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992; Mandler, 1993).

In this context language can be considered to be that faculty that permits communication by voice in a distinctively human manner using structured syntactic arrangements of grammar (Delbridge & Bernard, 1995). This unique human talent has attracted widespread interest, resulting in a comprehensive debate regarding the acquisition and origins of language (Piatelli-Palmarini, 1980; Rieber & Voyat, 1983). The two opposing sides have debated whether language acquisition is a domain-general process or a domain-specific process (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992).

Leading the domain specific camp is a nativist view. Authors who take this approach argue that the "... possession of human language is associated with a specific type of mental organization..." (Chomsky, 1972, p. 70). This idea of ‘mental organization’ emphasises a language (or domain) specificity that is related to Fodor’s (1983) notions of modularity, in which the brain is structured as modular processing units, each dedicated to a specific function. These processing modules contain innately specified linguistic structures called ‘universal grammars’ that constrain the child’s processing of linguistic input (Bloom, 1990; Chomsky, 1983; Pinker, 1989).

Piaget (1955), following a domain-general view, looked at development in terms of a change in the level of intelligence. Intelligence in this case, refers to the acquisition of more complex domain-general structures and processes that lead to an improvement in cognitive abilities (Slobin, 1973). The term intelligence is also used in a phylogenic sense to explain language acquisition (e.g., Bickerton, 1995). Chomsky (1972) strongly opposed both these views, "As far as we know, possession of human language is... not simply a higher degree of intelligence" (in the phylogenic sense, p. 70), but this report will focus on intelligence in terms of a developmental approach as supported by Piaget (1955, 1983).

Piagetian views traditionally do not accept the existence of any innate knowledge that may contribute to the development of language (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992). Piaget (1983) argues that the acquisition of language is a product of the development of intelligence during the sensorimotor period (0-24 months of age) and the associated capacity for symbolic (or semiotic) representation. This occurs in the form of the semiotic function which includes symbolic play, deferred imitation and mental imagery. The onset of language is associated with the development of symbolic representation which is dependent upon the progressive coordination and internalization of sensorimotor action schemes.

Join now!

If Piaget was correct in his assumptions of cognitive prerequisites for language development, it would be expected that linguistic retardation would accompany severe cognitive deficits (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992). However, competent linguistic abilities have been shown to coexist with severe cognitive impairments such as that occurring in cases of hydrocephaly and spina bifida (e.g., Cromer, 1994; Udwin, Yule, & Martin, 1987). Other research indicates that deaf children can develop sign language skills when they are only partially through the sensorimotor period (Orlansky & Bonvillian, 1985). These findings indicate that sensorimotor development is not necessarily a precursor for language development.

While language and ...

This is a preview of the whole essay