Implicational universals indicate that the presence of one feature in a given language can be taken as an automatic indicator that certain other features will also be present. Universals of this kind provide an indication of the limitations of natural language, since only certain combinations of properties are permissible. For instance, if a language has voiced fricatives (property X), it will also have unvoiced fricatives (property Y). The reverse however may not be true, since many languages have unvoiced fricatives, but not voiced fricatives. For an implicational universal to make sense, there must also exist languages that have neither properties (Eifring & Thiel, 2005, p.3). Non-implicational universals are properties in the language that are independent of other properties (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p 83). These classifications enable one to deduce the norms in language acquisition and learning of the different developmental stages as well as cultures.
First Language (L1) Acquisition
It is important to note that the above universals apply to all aspects of grammar. Studies have shown that the stages of the various components of language acquisition are reflective of the shared language universals.
After the pre-linguistic stages of vocal production, there are four components of grammar to first language acquisition: phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p 45).
In the acquisition of phonology, children typically acquire the /a,i,u/ vowels first and the front consonants before the back with the acquisition of interdental fricatives late since these are rare features in the world’s language. In the syllabic structures of words, children acquire the consonant-vowel first. These observations establish the fact that because these phonological segments are common among the world’s languages, they are acquired first (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.46-47). Evidently these absolute universals also point to Chomsky’s theory that a genetic blueprint for language is present in all human beings for the acquisition of language (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.69).
Greenberg states that inflectional and derivational affixes are implicational universals as, if a language has inflection; it always has derivation (Gaeta, 2003). In acquiring morphology, children are able to use inflectional affixes [PLU] first over the other morphemes as it affixes to nouns, the smaller domain of the language structure versus [POSS] as it is attached to a noun phrase and [PRES] which is affixed to a verb in a sentence. The complexity of derivational affixes is attained much later.
In the acquisition of syntax; the universals in play are not absolutes but statistical (Eifring & Thiel, 2005, p.5). Although all languages have subjects and verbs in their syntax structures, the word order varies in languages. Yet it is evident that all languages are structure dependent and rule-governed (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.70). In the acquisition of questions, the earliest structure acquired seems to be the rising intonation structure of the yes-no question type. This pattern of acquisition is also commonly observed in other languages too (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.58).
In semantics, the lexical universals are more approximate than precise since some of the equivalent words are more of a shared concept (Eifring & Thiel, 2005, p.5). This therefore does not affect the child’s acquisition of his first language since the actual word varies in different languages.
Awareness of the language universals gives one a clear insight of the milestone developments and limitations in language acquisition. It also helps explain the seemingly arbitrariness of the components of acquisition in the different elements of grammar.
Second Language (L2) Acquisition
In acquiring a second language, the learner constructs a rule-governed interlanguage (intermediate grammar) between L1 and L2 which evolves as the learner goes through the phases of learning. Besides language transfer, other linguistic factors such as language universals, markedness relationships between the languages and the typical language developmental processes influence the acquisition (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.81).
The understanding of language universals pre-empts the likely limitations as well as ease the learner will encounter in acquiring a particular language. For example in the absence of the /th/ interdental fricative in many world languages, a learner will have challenges pronouncing words such as ‘the’ therefore he will likely replace it with a stop fricative /d/ which is more common in the world languages. Yet there are some grammatical features to be learnt that cannot be assumed from data they have prior knowledge of. The ability to acquire could mean then the learner has access to language universals when acquiring L2 (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.83).
Another feature, markedness is also related to language universals. Markedness refers to features that are inconsistent with language universals while unmarkedness are those consistent with the universals. Eckman (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.84) proposed a Marked Differential Hypothesis. He propounds that the areas of difficulty a language learner will encounter is predicated on the systematic comparison of the grammars of L1 , L2 and the markedness stated in universal grammar (Study Guide, p. 2-17). He thus predicted that only the parts of the L2 grammar which are more marked that L1 will cause difficulty in acquisition and that unmarked phenomena are usually acquired before marked ones (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.84).
In the developmental process of L2 acquisition, a learner goes through the same stages as in L1 acquisition. He will attain the consonant-vowel mode prior to consonant clusters. He will also apply similar strategies as in acquiring L1 to simplify challenges such as breaking-up consonant clusters. Likewise in L1 acquisition, he will acquire lexical morphemes then syntax structures, inflectional before derivational affixes and wh-movement in forming questions prior to I-movement (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.84).
It is important to note that though L2 learners are influenced by their L1 language interference or facilitation, their language developmental process mirrors the L1 learners relatively closely with the universals playing a key role in affecting the process.
Conclusion
When considering language universals and its relevance to our understanding of L1 and L2 acquisition, one must consider if the properties of language which are present universally predispose a learner’s ability as well as limitation to acquire the language. It is interesting to note that none of the universals that linguists have listed are logically necessary yet learners acquire them independent of instruction and experiences (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.71). The acquisition and application of the universals is also marked by a systematic and uniform progress (Linguistics for Non-Linguistics, p.69-72). Thus Chomsky’s theory of a genetic blueprint that specifies the general properties of language being present in all human beings, preconditioning the acquisition of the complex language structures, seems a most viable explanation for this observable fact.
Word Count: 1425
Reference List
Ard, J. & Gass, S. (1980). L2 Data : Their Relevance in Language Universals. TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. XIV, No. 4, December 1980. Retrieved from assessed on 16th April 2011.
Basic Language Structures. Retrieved from http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/ basiclangstruct.html, assessed 16th April 2011.
Demet, Y. (2006). Language Universals. Retrieved from . 8k.com/demet.html, assessed on 16th April 2011.
Eifring, H.& Theil, R. (2005). Linguistics for Students of Asian and African Languages: Language Universals, Chapter 3, p. 1- 17. Retrieved from , assessed on 16th April 2011.
Gaeta, L. (2003) Word Formation and Typology: Which Language Universals?
Retrieved from
Parker, F. & Riley, K. (2010). Linguistics for Non-Linguists (5thEd). New Jersey, USA: Pearson Education.
