Language Acquisition: Nature vs. Nurture

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Main Body
Conclusion
Sources

Introduction

There has been a great deal of debate over time as to whether language is acquired or inherent to the infant. One fact is certain though, and that is the fact that children mimic their elders’ learning daily, new ways of dealing with obstacles they face. Observation is a key role in what they later perceive the world to be. This is one reason, for example why children growing up in abusive environments sometimes begin the same process in their own homes as adults, with their own families.

Nature and nurture, split into its two parts refer to what is instinctive and what is ‘nurtured’ (taught). Cognition (mental processes) refers predominantly to the following non-behavioral processes: memory, perception, attention, language, and the making of decisions/solving of problems.

Main Body

Perhaps the best-known theorist in terms of cognitive thought processes is Noam Chomsky. Chomsky believes that language is a central process, where ideas are turned into tangible form via the language process. While wanting to ‘speak’ is a natural instinct to a child in order to express his/her wants and needs, how that language is formed is a ‘nurtured’ response. Where Chomsky believes language is inherent and natural, the possibility of having to learn a language is entirely a new debate.

Malia Knezek uses the following example to describe genetic inclusion into language acquisition: “Why do some children build towers with blocks, cry when they scrape their knees, and shout, “Choo-choo mine!” when a sibling takes away their favorite toy train? Why are some children able to perform entire piano concertos or master complex mathematical concepts, while others cannot even learn to communicate in the normal way?”(Knezek, 1997).

The question raised is, therefore: if language were dependent on how a child is taught, then surely the majority of children would be on the same linguistic level across the spectrum. Indeed, this example shows that in fact, there are more levels to the learning of language than meets the eye. Given that the initial response of an infant at birth is to scream, this is documented as being the first instinctive method of expression and gaining attention. However, whether are not the skills needed to communicate on a deeper level are learned or not, can be put down to genetic predisposition and intelligence as revealed in Sternberg’s Triarchic Approach.

Why a mother speaks to a child in what is termed ‘motherese’ may have more to do with a natural response too, than with something a mother is taught to do at ante-natal classes. “Infants begin babbling not too long after birth, and the sounds produced during this period contain the basic sounds they hear spoken around them as well as phenomes not present in their native tongue. This is strong evidence for an innate language faculty.”(ibid.) If this is to be understood correctly then there are two aspects at work in the language acquisition process:

Language is inherent to some degree (nature) and
While language is inherent, the basic phonetic and lexical structure is learned (nurture).

Argumentatively, if language were completely natural there would be no need for a mother to communicate in the so-called ‘motherese’ as a child would be able to develop their own lexicon complete with syntax and grammar. The various forms of intelligence as proposed by Sternberg answer the question as to why some children are extremely accomplished in their vocabulary and syntax while others are more accomplished at building intricate Lego castles.

Conclusion

It suffices to say that in fact, language cannot be completely natural or completely nurture. If nature were the correct assumption then deaf children would still be able to speak efficiently, but this is not so, the deaf child battles to create meaningful phonetic sounds. If nurture were the only way to learn the language, then newborn infants would not know that to scream gets them some measure of attention. For instance, autistic children, the inherent need to communicate normally is not there, and neither does any amount of ‘teaching’ appear to give them that need to talk. This example is an extreme one but serves to identify a key point: no amount of nature or nurture is present in these individuals’ language acquisition. There has to be a middle road by which a child acquires speech ability and it boils down to both aspects of nature and of nurture.

Sources

Knezek, M. 1997. “Nature vs. Nurture: The Miracle of Language”. Web.

“Noam Chomsky”. 1997. History of Cognitive Psychology. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

Language Acquisition: Nature vs. Nurture

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)