Chomsky’s Innatism

Behaviourist position (Skinner, 1950s)Main behaviourist claim: all learning,

including language learning, is the product of habit formation.

We learn through imitation and repetition.Emphasis on the importance of the

observable in any theory claiming to be scientific (empirical view).

Since only behaviour is observable, we must study learning by observing behaviour patterns.

Behaviourist position

We learn through:Imitation + reinforcement (praise or success in

communication) = habit formation.According to this view Stimulus-Response-

Reinforcement IS the learning mechanism.Language is considered ‘verbal behaviour’.Children practise and repeat what they hear,

and in this way learn their L1.

Who is Chomsky?You’ve probably heard of him alreadyNoam Chomsky, 1928-present, American

Professor in Linguistics at MIT(more famous outside our field as a political

commentator)Chomsky is a syntacticianHis work on syntax led him to believe

language is innateChomsky is a theorist, not an

experimenterBut others have applied his theories

What is Chomsky’s theory?An innatist theory“Nature” over “Nurture”

According to Chomsky, crucial parts of the human language ability are built into the brain – part of our biology, programmed into our genes

Chomsky V Skinner

Remember Skinner?Late 1950s: environment-only theories

of language acquisition in the ascendantChomsky (1959) reviewed Skinner’s

book Verbal BehaviourChomsky found flaws in Skinner’s

mechanismChomsky argued that environment-only

mechanisms couldn’t possibly account for language acquisition

Evidence for Chomskyan innatism (and against environment-only

mechanisms)

How so?

The brain: missing evidence?Neuroscience could be convincing……but our knowledge of the brain is not that

advanced.We cannot see the proposed language

structuresEven if we could, we could not establish

that these structures were innate

CreativityLanguage is CREATIVE

We can produce and understand an infinite range of novel grammatical sentences

Children do not imitate a fixed repertoire of sentences

Chomsky: creativity is not explicable if language is learnt just from the environment

Degeneracy of the dataThe child’s language data is degenerateUngrammatical utterances are frequent

and are not marked out as “wrong”Therefore it is impossible to deduce the

grammar of a language, if your only input data is utterances from the environment

Poverty of the stimulusChomskyan syntax: more complex than

people had previously thought syntax to be!

The grammar of a sentence can’t be deduced from its surface formThe schoolchildren were difficult to teachThe schoolchildren were eager to learn

So environmental language data is insufficient: grammar can’t be learned from it

Misleading feedbackAdults correct children for truth, not

grammaticality… so the feedback data children receive

does not actually tell them how well they are doing

Misleading feedback makes it even harder for children to learn grammar

Evidence from CreolesPidgin: simple language that arise in

contact situationsCreole: a fully complex language

descended from a pidginThe grammar of a Creole is created by

children as they learn itThis is evidence that this grammar comes

from some innate source

Universal features of languageLanguages vary greatly, but have some

common featuresExample: nouns and verbsExample: structure dependency

Grammatical rules rely on the structure of the sentence, not the surface order of the words

Structure dependencyMr Smith was a good manWas Mr Smith a good man?

Mr Smith was a good manMan good a was Smith Mr?

Joe was a good manA Joe was good man?

Universals explainedUniversals unexpected if language is learnt

from the environment alone

Universals due to innate languageOr due to something else?

Universal functions of languageUniversal forms of cognition

The theory: innate language knowledgeIf children don’t/can’t learn the rules of

grammar from the language around them in their environment…

… then these rules must have been in-born

This explains all the difficulties we found with environment-only acquisition theories

Key points of Chomskyan Theory

The Essentials

InnatismWhat is innate?Chomsky: the essential core of grammar is

innateA generative grammar that can produce an

infinite range of novel sentencesThe innate system for language learning

Language Acquisition Device (LAD)Universal Grammar (UG)“bioprogram”“language organ”“language instinct”

Inside the Chomskyan brain

Autonomy

Is language autonomous?Chomsky thinks that language is

autonomous in the mindThis means that language (i.e. UG) is a

separate system in the brain’s architectureIt is connected to, but does not interact

extensively with, other sorts of thought

(The diagram)

MaturationChomsky’s theory is a maturationist theoryLanguage acquisition runs to an innate

biological timetableUG matures in the brain and is slowly released

in predetermined stages as the child growsThis linguistic maturation is analogous to the

sexual maturation we go through at puberty…… and is just as involuntary!

Only the younger ones were at the right stage of maturation

Language is species-specificUG and the language system only occur in

the human brainTherefore, no other animals can acquire a

human languageBut is this solely due to their lesser

intelligence?Can chimps learn language? We’ll look at

this next term!

Evolution??How did UG get there in the first place?There is much disagreement on this

Chomsky: not by natural selection!Chomsky, Bickerton: a single lucky language

mutation (a “Hopeful Monster”)Pinker: by normal natural selection

Universal Grammar

But what exactly is Universal Grammar?What knowledge does it contain?How does it function in the process of

language acquisition?

… we’ll try to find out next time