Linguistics #1 - Theories of L1 Acquisition

BACKGROUND

Linguistics is the study of how language works. This covers a large sphere of information that bridges the gap between language literacy (reading, writing, speaking) and the scientific field of psychology and cognition. When studying second language (L2) acquisition, it is important to reckon with the underlying principles and theories that govern how our brain process and acquire this new language. However, before dealing with that concept, it is imperative to spend some time at the ¨beginning¨ - our first language (L1), the mother tongue. This will help build a platform upon which our understanding of L2 acquisition.

How is it that we acquire our first language? In many ways, it feels like magic. Within the span of a few short years, a child goes from being unable to communicate, through babbling phases, basic speech, forming sentences, and, by the time they´re school-age, they are able to communicate in lengthy, intelligent conversation. How does this happen? There are several main theories that have been proposed, which we will take a look at. We will also consider these in the light of Scripture and what we know about the way that God designed and created mankind to see how these theories hold up. However, before we launch into that, the following video by the team at ¨Crash Course¨ provides a nice backdrop for our discussion on these L1 acquisition theories.

So...how do we break down the theories of L1 acquisition. We´re going to divide the theories into 3 main categories: behaviorist, nativist, and interactionist.

BEHAVIORIST THEORY

Behaviorist theory could be considered the beginning point for modern thought on L1 acquisition. This theory is grounded in the psychology work started by the Russian psychologist Ivan Pavlov who researched how he could get his dogs to drool at the sound of a bell by ¨conditioning¨ them properly. Basically, he started by giving them their food while ringing a bell. Eventually, he started just ringing the bell and did not present food. The dogs still drooled, even without the food. This was developed further by the leading man of behaviorism: BF Skinner.

When his theories of behaviorism, particularly operant conditioning (people´s behavior is able to be molded through providing positive/negative reinforcement or positive/negative punishment), were applied to language acquisition, it built on an idea by early English philosopher John Locke and his idea of the ¨ẗabula rasa¨ or ¨blank slate¨. BF Skinner postulated children´s brains are blank slates and they learn language through a system of reinforcement and punishment. They say ¨ma...ma¨ and they get hugs and kisses from mother, they are reinforced in the behavior. This process continues as they try new forms and is refined through the consistent reinforcement and punishment. One of the big debates of language acquisition is the nurture vs. nature. Behaviorism is entirely on the side of nurture. There is no natural aspect to L1 acquisition. It is all through how one is raised.

NATIVIST THEORY

Behaviorism quickly received criticism, none stronger than key linguist Noam Chomsky, the pioneer of nativist theory.

A couple of the key pieces of his theory are the language acquisition device (LAD) and universal grammar (UG). He argues that children are not tabulas rasas but, instead, are programmed for language learning. Chomsky believes that there are principles of language, all languages, that every child has in their brain. The hypothetical ¨black box¨ in their brain that innately knows how language work will kickstart itself at different phases and will proceed in learning language in the same way, regardless of the language that is ultimately being learned This theory falls squarely on the other side of the nurture vs. nature debate.

INTERACTIONIST THEORY

The interactionist theory is the third shift in the theory of L1 acquisition. This theory hypothesizes that children learn to speak due to their desire to communicate and therefore social interaction is a crucial component in language acquisition. Lev Vygotsky was a key figure in the development of this theory. He developed what has been termed as ¨social constructivism¨.

The key ideas that he presented and that have infused interactionist thought are the construction of new knowledge through social interaction with peers and growth in the zone of proximal development (ZPD) through scaffolding by a knowledgeable other. When a learner is the ZPD, that learner is being pushed just beyond the level that he is at, maximizing learning growth. The parent or teacher who is guiding this is the knowledgeable other. In regards to L1 acquisition, children are constantly be scaffolded by the adults around them who know more language than them. According to this theory, they also construct new knowledge by interacting with their peers.

SUMMARY

One thing that is always worth remembering is that these are all theories. None of them are perfect. L1 acquisition is a tough field to study since little children are the subjects of the studies. However, the fact that they are children and, in many regards, incapable of complete communication, it is impossible to ask them questions about how they´re experiencing learning like you´re able to with those learning a 2nd language. Each of the theories has flaws but there are elements to each one which fit with different aspects of what we observe to be true. I would like for you to consider the following questions in a well-though paragraph in the comments:

1. Think of at least 1 criticism of each L1 acquisition theory? What would be something you would agree with in each one?
2. Which theory, or combination of theories, do you feel best fits with L1 acquisition? Do any of these theories, or parts of these theories, fit into a Biblical understanding of how God created mankind and the ability to communicate?