Criticisms of the theory suggest that children are creative in their use of language, applying grammatical rules for sentence and word structures that are not reinforced. Adding incorrect plurals is a common mistake children make. Berko (1958)”wug’s” experiment showed children applied the plural “s” to the unknown noun which indicated children were creative and applied grammatical rules. Children experiment with language and are capable of analogy; the child takes rules from one area and applies them in another, for example adding “ed” on the verb “went” shows that children experiment with language. Language is not always shaped by grammatically correct adult models as parents reinforce incorrect grammar on occasions. A child’s language does improve even though incorrect grammar is reinforced. As in Corpus 11 Sophie’s mother reinforces the incorrect word for biscuit allowing Sophie to continue to use the word “bissy”.
The Nativist’s approach to language acquisition suggests “language is specific to humans” (Wood. 1997.63) and that language is an innate human feature “that the child somehow has the concepts available before experience with language” (Aitchison.1994.235). Noam Chomsky a linguist believes that all languages have the same basic grammatical features such as consonants, vowels, syllables, nouns and verbs irrespective of the final language the child will learn. This is known as linguistic universal. Nativist’s believe all children are born with a Language Acquisition Device (LAD) which organises language and discovers the rules of grammar which govern the combination of words into meaningful sentences. “fast and efficient retrieval must be based on a structured system” (Aitchison.1994.9) with an extremely efficient mental lexicon. Accepting the concept of a language acquisition devise, D McNeil suggests that the LAD must be highly structured because the input is often highly unstructured.
Chomsky suggests the LAD instinctively works out the language structure applying correct rules of grammar which emerges as the child matures resulting in the child producing speech, suggesting that “children are able to understand new sentences and constructions without having had any previous experience of them” (Thorne. 1997.166). Baby talk shows skills are in-built, from seven months children understand rules this is evidence that language is innate and supports the Nativist approach. Chomsky Nativist theory suggests there are two parts to language, the actual sentence which he called ‘the surface structure’ and the meaning of the sentence ‘the deep structure’. It is possible for a single sentence to have two meanings and the LAD’s innate ability helps to transform words into meaning. Chomsky called this “Transformational Grammar”. The sentence “They are eating apples” has one surface structure and two deep meanings. A child’s ability to understand and recognise negatives and plurals is the innate ability due to the LAD creativity. “telegraphic speech suggests some underlying mechanisms that are probably innate” (Wood.1997.65). This supports Noam Chomsky’s theory that all children acquire language in the same way.
The Nativist theory explains the universal stages of speech, how children acquire language quickly and supports the role maturation plays in the development of speech and why speech and grammar develops as the child matures. Biological evidence supports the existence of a LAD, the brain, vocal organs and auditory system are highly specialised, explaining why children have speech and animals do not. Research by Paul Broca (1860) in post mortem examinations identified damage to a particular part on the left side of the brain which became known as Broca’s Aphasia. This is now known to be responsible for providing grammatical sentence structure and muscular control of the speech organs. Damage to this area of the brain results in comprehension of others being intact, however syntax impairment and slow speech results in others finding it difficult to understand what is being said. In 1870 Carl Wernicke discovered that patients who had suffered damage to another part of the left side of the brain displayed rapid and fluent speech with normal rhythm and intonation but could not comprehend what was being said. This research supports the Nativist theory of the existence of a Learning Acquisition Devise. Additional evidence to support the existence of the LAD and the role of maturation is that deaf children who have no input from the environment still begin to babble and use gestures as in the holophrases of language acquisition.
The theory does not take into account environmental influences, the child’s need for social interaction, especially parental reinforcement and imitation and the critical age aspect. Eric Lenneberg (1967) suggested that language is linked with biology and that a critical period for language acquisition exists. “the child must be exposed to speech during the sensitive period in order for language to develop successfully” (Wood.1997.64). This theory is supported by evidence of Genie, a child who was physically mistreated, deprived of human contact and stimulus for the first thirteen years of her life. Her exposure to language immediately stimulated her to respond with one word utterances, the holophrase of language acquisition. She then progressed to the two word telegraphic stage, but never progressed further despite many efforts to develop her vocabulary. This could be as a result of her disabilities which could have been a result of birth defects or due to mistreatment. Genie was not integrated into a normal family unit and doctors continually used her to further their understanding of children deprived of language. She was placed with numerous foster parents and at one stage returned to her biological mother. After receiving a severe beating from a foster parent Genie unfortunately lost her ability or will to speak. Other examples of children in similar situations support the theory of a cut-off age for language. Isabelle a child of six was placed in a normal environment and acquired language rapidly. Within one year she was no different from any other seven year old.
Neither of the theories on language can fully explain all the elements of child language acquisition, both agree that language is developed within established relationships, a complex interaction between social and biological events. If one of these is missing language does not occur. Neither explains an individual’s idiolect or a child’s creativity of language. Both approaches have limited methods of research due to lack of finance. The duration of the studies, the research methods which are conducted in clinical situations and use of small groups of children are inconclusive evidence for each theory.
