Andrew Sohn

Dr. Rosenfeld
Psychology AP, Period 3
November 14, 2013


Language Development Writing Assignment


In the course of its history, mankind is widely credited for being the only species with a
distinct language involving a vast bank of vocabulary and a complex system of grammatical
syntaxes. Many animals have been successful in learning a limited amount of vocabulary, some
even displaying a basic understanding of grammar creating simple two or three word sentences.
These developments are especially prominent in the use of sign language, as shown by Washoe
the chimp and Koko the gorilla. Regardless of these few exceptions in the animal kingdom, it is
quite evident that only humans so far have the ability to create and understand complex
sentences beyond the two or three word phrases like Alex the parrot. With this in mind, the
question now appears: are humans able to master complex languages because of their genetic
makeup or because of their formative environment?
Such a conflict is one held famously throughout time. It has been asked thousands of
years ago by Aristotle and Plato, Aristotle in favor of nurture while Plato nature. In the field of
language development, Noam Chomsky and B.F. Skinner are too major linguists who have
theorized their own perspectives of this issue. Chomsky believes that every baby is born with a
biological predisposition to learn new languages called a language acquisition device (LAD), a
trait passed down through their genetic makeup. Babies can distinguish all the different sounds
found in different languages. That is why a baby is able to learn any new language regardless of
his or her cultural background. This is all explained by the Broca and Wernickes areas, two
distinct areas in the left hemisphere of the brain that is proven to be responsible for language.
Biologically, humans are hard-wired to learn new languages. Also, regardless of their cultural
background, mothers from all parts of the world tend to speak an exaggerated and simplified
form of their respective languages called motherese.
Skinner, on the other hand, claims that babies learn new languages through their
interactions and experiences with natural speakers in the form of conditioning, usually through
the behavior of the parents. B.F. Skinner believed that babies will learn by observing key habits
of their parents and tend to imitate them. As a behaviorist, Skinner also believed that babies will
learn through an acquired sense of rewards and punishments. If the baby says Mommy the
mother will tend to praise the child, encouraging the baby to continue using the word Mommy.
This idea that nature affects the nature of humans is also reflected through Benjamin Lee Wolfs
linguistic relativity hypothesis. Wolf proposed that the language people learn will determine their
way of perception and thought. Although his original hypothesis has not been proven, the idea
that the language one learns will influence his or her way of perception has. However, the most
important reason that nurture has such an impact on language development is seen in the various
case studies of isolated and feral children found throughout the world. Children who did not have
the environmental influences of their parents will not undergo essential brain developments that
are important for them to learn a new language. Regardless if a child has a language acquisition
device or the Broca and Wernickes areas or any other trait he or she has been born with, if that
child is not raised in the proper learning conditions, these biologically inherited traits will not
matter. Genie, who was raised in isolation, will never be able to learn a complex language
despite having all the inherited language-learning factors as all humans, because of her poor
learning environment. This phenomenon is also seen in Victors case as a feral child in
nineteenth century France. For these children, it will be impossible to learn a complex language
due to their unfortunate environmental factors. Because both are in some ways correct, language
development is neither solely based on nature nor nurture; it is a combination of both.
Regardless of either approaches, both can at least agree on the importance of the critical period
in language development.
The Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) incorporates both the ideas of nature and nurture.
Eric Lenneberg first proposed this hypothesis in 1967. It states that there exists a biologically
determined period in which humans are able to acquire languages more easily and successfully.
It is believed to be a point in time between 6 months of age to sometime between the age 5 and
puberty (around 12 years of age). Once the critical period has been passed, humans can still learn
new languages, however, it would be much more difficult and less successful, especially with the
accents of native-speakers. The critical period can be broken up into three distinct stages. The
first is the Cooing or Babbling Stage when the baby can begin to practice pronouncing sounds
related to speech, especially the vowels. Babbling is a universal phenomenon found in all babies,
regardless of the language of their parents. The next state is the One-Word Stage when the baby
can understand a language before he or she can actually speak it. This results in the distinct
growths of his or her comprehension vocabulary and production vocabulary. It occurs starting
from around age one when the first words produced are often made up of babbling sounds. The
final stage of the critical period is the Two-Word Stage when children begin forming telegraphic
speech or simple sentences of (as the name implies) two words. It begins around age two and
tends to focus on nouns, verbs, adjectives, and even adverbs while articles such as a or the
are omitted. Overall, the critical period is characterized by a relatively slow learning growth
which leads to an exponential growth around 18-24 months of age. Despite the amount of
research put into language developments, so much of it is still heavily limited.
A major limitation of conducting research in this area is the unethical nature of tinkering
with a humans essential time of growth which can ultimately impair them for the rest of his or
her life. Scientists cannot conduct an experiment to test the nature vs. nurture controversy
because of the unethical nature of such an experiment. That is why it is called the Forbidden
Experiment. Instead, researchers must rely on rare but naturally occurring case studies to extract
data. However, even then it is difficult to decide if the children are in fact affected by their
isolated circumstances or by a mental disorder they were born with. It is still uncertain if Victor
of Aveyrons conditions or Ediks conditions were due to his childhood in the wild or because he
was mentally retarded. Psycholinguistic experiments have thus been conducted on animals
instead to circumvent many of the unethical aspects of conducting one on humans. They have
done many experiments on primates such as Washoe the chimp and Koko the gorilla by teaching
them sign language. Alex the parrot has also been taught a human language in which he was
tested on. However, despite all that they could do, these animals could not utilize languages as
effectively and abstractly as humans. They were often still limited to the Two-Word Stages of
language development.
Today, however, many new developments have been made. An interesting connection
has been made by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania. They have reported that there is
a connection between a childs language development and his or her parents wealth. This is
because researchers at Penn have discovered that the more a parent talks to his or her child, the
more vocabulary the child will learn. These children with wealthier upbringings will have a
bigger vocabulary by the time they start school. They have discovered that while wealthier
parents tend to speak more to their children than poorer parents, it is the quality of the manner in
which they speak to their children which enhances vocabulary growth. Such a phenomenon
highlights an explicit case of the importance of nurture in ones language development. There is
no doubt that this discovery in language acquisition fully supports the nature vs. nurture
argument in favor of nurture.
Ultimately, researchers and psychologists have come a long way in the field of
psycholinguistics. From the Greek philosophers to modern day researchers, they have all
contributed to the common process to understand the very nature of language developments.
Many ideas have been proven while many more have been denied. Regardless, they still have a
long way to go, more opportunities to explore, and more information to obtain.















References
ASL sign langauge and Washoe. (2012, December 13). YouTube. Retrieved November 14, 2013,
from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtCs5crgB8A
Genie (secret of the wild child). (2012, August 29). YouTube. Retrieved November 14, 2013,
from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmdycJQi4QA
Lerner, E. (2013, July 18). Penn study finds quality trumps quantity in language acquisition.
Penn: University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved November 14, 2013, from
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/current/2013-07-18/latest-news/penn-study-finds-
quality-trumps-quantity-language-
Pines, M. (n.d.). MAYA PINES. The Civilizing of Genie. Retrieved November 14, 2013, from
http://kccesl.tripod.com/genie.html
University. (n.d.). Broca's area, Wernicke's area, and other language-processing areas in the
brain. The brain from top to bottom. Retrieved November 14, 2013, from
http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/d/d_10/d_1
Wikipedia. (2013, November 13). Critical period. Wikipedia. Retrieved November 14, 2013,
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period
Wild child the story of feral children HD. (2013, June 30). YouTube. Retrieved November 14,
2013, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h-GhHCBo7I