Comprehensive Study Notes: Innateness and Learning (Paper 4: Language and the Self)
Welcome to the fascinating world of language theory! This chapter explores one of the oldest and most profound debates in linguistics and psychology: the “Nature vs. Nurture” argument applied to how humans acquire language. Essentially, are we born with the ability to speak, or do we learn it entirely from the environment?
Understanding these foundational theories is crucial for Paper 4, Section B, as you will need to apply them critically when analyzing texts about language, self, and identity.
1. The Core Debate: Nature vs. Nurture
The question of innateness versus learning asks whether language development is driven by internal biological mechanisms (Nature) or external social interaction (Nurture).
Key Terminology and Concepts
Nature (Biological Wiring): These theories suggest that the capacity for language is innate—something we are born with, hardwired into our brains.
- Innatism / Nativism: The belief that language is an inherent part of human genetic makeup. We are born with specific linguistic knowledge.
- Analogy: Think of a computer that comes pre-loaded with an operating system (like Windows or macOS). You just need to plug it in and turn it on to start using its core functions.
Nurture (Environmental Input): These theories suggest that language is entirely learned—acquired through experience, observation, and interaction with caregivers and the environment.
- Empiricism / Behaviourism: The belief that all knowledge, including language, comes from sensory experience and observable behaviour.
- Analogy: Think of a computer that comes as a completely empty shell. Every program (every word, every grammar rule) must be actively downloaded and installed through external input.
Quick Review Box: Don't worry if these terms seem similar! Just remember that Nativism = Nature (Born with it), and Behaviourism = Nurture (Learned via Environment).
2. The Learning Perspective: Behaviourism and Empiricism
The most famous champion of the purely learned approach is the behaviourist psychologist B.F. Skinner.
B.F. Skinner and Behaviourism (1957)
Skinner argued that language acquisition is simply a process of operant conditioning. Children learn to speak through a system of imitation, trial-and-error, and positive reinforcement.
Mechanism of Learning:
- Imitation: The child hears language from caregivers and attempts to copy it.
- Reinforcement: If the child successfully produces a recognizable sound or word (e.g., says "milk" when hungry), the caregiver rewards them (gives them milk, smiles, or praises them). This positive reinforcement encourages the repetition of that language behaviour.
- Correction / Punishment: If the child produces incorrect language, they might be ignored or corrected, leading them to abandon that linguistic behaviour.
How it Explains Language Acquisition (According to Behaviourists):
A child learns the word cat:
- Stimulus: The child sees the family cat.
- Response: The child makes a sound, maybe "ca".
- Reinforcement: The parent says, "Yes! That's a cat! Good job!"
- The child then links the sound "cat" to the animal via positive association.
The Main Limitation (Why Linguists Disagree):
Behaviourism struggles to explain several key phenomena:
- Creative Errors (Overgeneralisation): Children frequently say things they have never heard, like "I runned fast" or "Three foots." No one reinforced these incorrect forms, yet the child created them by applying a grammatical rule (adding -ed for past tense) incorrectly.
- Poverty of the Stimulus: The language children hear is often fragmented, incomplete, or filled with errors (pauses, overlaps, mispronunciations). Yet, they still develop grammatically complex language quickly.
- Speed of Acquisition: Children acquire language incredibly fast during the first few years, much faster than complex skills learned purely through reinforcement.
Key Takeaway: Behaviourism highlights the essential role of environmental input and interaction, but it fails to account for the speed and creativity of language development.
3. The Innate Perspective: Nativism and Chomsky
In response to Skinner, linguist Noam Chomsky proposed a radically different perspective in the late 1950s, arguing that language must be biologically pre-programmed.
Noam Chomsky and Innatism (Nativism)
Chomsky (1959) famously argued that humans are born with a specialized mental faculty dedicated entirely to language. This theory suggests that environment merely triggers this innate ability.
The Language Acquisition Device (LAD)
Chomsky proposed that the brain contains a hypothetical mechanism called the Language Acquisition Device (LAD).
- What is the LAD?: It is an innate biological endowment (a "black box" in the mind) that contains the fundamental rules common to all human languages.
- Universal Grammar (UG): The contents of the LAD are known as Universal Grammar. This is a set of core structural rules (like the need for subjects, verbs, and objects) that are universal across every language on Earth.
- How it Works: The environment (the language the child hears) simply sets the "switches" or "parameters" of the UG. For example, the LAD knows that word order matters, but the input (English) tells the child that the order is Subject-Verb-Object (SVO), rather than Subject-Object-Verb (SOV) like Japanese.
Evidence Supporting Nativism:
- Critical Period Hypothesis: There is a sensitive time window (generally before puberty) during which language must be acquired naturally. If a child is not exposed to language before this period, they struggle severely or fail to ever achieve full fluency (e.g., studies of 'feral' children). This suggests a biological timetable.
- Species Specificity: Only humans, not animals, possess this complex linguistic ability, pointing toward a unique evolutionary biological trait.
- Orderly Stages: All children, regardless of culture or language spoken, pass through the same predictable stages of acquisition (babbling, holophrastic, telegraphic) at roughly the same pace.
Did you know? Chomsky's argument relies heavily on the idea that if language were purely learned (like riding a bike), children would make many more structural errors and would take much longer to grasp complex syntax. Since they don't, the knowledge must be pre-programmed.
Key Takeaway: Nativism emphasizes that the blueprint for language structure (UG) is genetically inherited, explaining the speed and uniformity of acquisition across the globe.
4. Synthesis: Where Does the Field Stand Now?
Today, most modern theories (often called Interactionist or Constructionist) suggest that language acquisition is not an "either/or" question, but rather a "both/and" scenario.
The relationship between innateness and learning is seen as cooperative:
The Middle Ground
- Nature Provides the Potential: Biological factors (innatism) give humans the unique cognitive capacity—the potential to learn grammar, vocabulary, and syntax far beyond what any animal can achieve.
- Nurture Activates and Shapes: The environment (empiricism) provides the necessary data. Without input, the innate machinery remains dormant. The specific words, accents, and pragmatic rules (how to use language socially) must be learned through interaction.
What this means for your exam:
When analyzing texts on 'Language and the self' (Paper 4, Section B), you should always discuss how an individual’s language use (their idiolect, accent, and style) is a reflection of both their universal human capacity (innateness) and their specific social history (learning).
For instance, the ability to form a sentence is innate, but choosing to use slang or professional jargon is learned behaviour influenced by their speech community.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Mistake 1: Confusing acquisition vs. learning.
Acquisition often refers to the unconscious, innate process that happens naturally in childhood. Learning often refers to the conscious study of rules (like learning a second language in school). In this chapter, we use 'learning' broadly to cover environmental input.
Mistake 2: Thinking Chomsky rejects the environment.
Chomsky never argued that children don't need input. He argued that the input is insufficient to explain the outcome, meaning there must be something more (the LAD) already in place.
Summary of Key Theorists and Concepts (For Revision)
Behaviourism (Learning/Nurture)
Theorist: B.F. Skinner
Central Idea: Language is learned through imitation and reinforcement (operant conditioning).
Focus: Observable behaviour and external stimuli.
Innatism/Nativism (Innateness/Nature)
Theorist: Noam Chomsky
Central Idea: Humans possess an innate Language Acquisition Device (LAD) pre-loaded with Universal Grammar (UG).
Focus: Biological mechanism and rapid, creative development.