How Steven Pinker and Noam Chomsky Redefine Language Development

Introduction: Insights into Language Acquisition

Steven Pinker’s groundbreaking Insights into Language Acquisition argues that language is hardwired in the human brain, making it a universal trait of our species. While children inherit the capacity for language, their specific language develops uniquely. This distinction emerges from a combination of biology, cognitive development, and caregiver interaction. Pinker’s theory aligns with Noam Chomsky’s view of language as a rule-governed function, embedded in the brain’s capacity for syntax.

Together, their work expands our understanding of childrens’ language acquisition beyond socio-linguistics into the realm of logical structures and physiological foundations. Pinker’s insight suggests that language acquisition begins as the child using single-word utterances appears to be experimenting with universal grammar that is hardwired in the brain to construct where nouns and verbs are placed in the language.

On this view, Pinker suggests that those single-word utterances are either words that are generally nouns or verbs. So words like ‘ball’ appear early in the process whereas words like ‘go’ are forming at around the same time. Here the noun words and verb words are stand-alone pieces of the lexicon. In the next phase of acquisition the nouns and verbs are used in two-word utterances but not necessarily in the correct order as the child is developing a competence over the rules of grammar or syntax in the language being constructed.

How the Brain Hardwires Language: Insights into Language Acquisition

Human physiology plays a vital role in language acquisition. Pinker argues that children do not merely imitate their parents but actively construct linguistic systems. For instance, a toddler exposed to grammatically incorrect speech from caregivers can still form correct sentence structures. This phenomenon demonstrates the brain’s innate grammatical framework.

The language acquisition device (LAD), a concept Chomsky introduced, further supports this theory. LAD enables children to process and internalize syntax effortlessly. An example lies in how children handle irregular verbs. English-speaking children often say “goed” instead of “went,” as in “I goed,” thus reflecting an innate application of grammatical rules rather than simple mimicry.

Additionally, Pinker emphasizes the critical period hypothesis. If children do not acquire language during early development, their ability to learn it diminishes. Cases like Genie, a child deprived of linguistic input, reveal how the absence of early exposure limits language proficiency. This underscores the brain’s biological preparedness for language and the time-sensitive nature of its acquisition.

The Unique Language of Every Child: Insights into Language Acquisition

In Insights into Language Acquisition, I argue that Childrens’ linguistic outcomes differ significantly from their parents’, despite shared environments. Pinker explains this phenomenon through the interplay between universal grammar and individual creativity. For instance, siblings raised in the same household often develop unique idiolects, influenced by personal experiences and social interactions more than mere exposure to language. in the home.

Bilingual children provide a compelling example of this uniqueness. A child exposed to English and Spanish often blends syntax and vocabulary in novel ways, creating Spanglish. This creativity highlights how language is not merely transferred but actively constructed by each individual. The same is true for exposure to English and French, German, Hindi, Arabic, or Hebrew to name just a few candidates for bilingualism.

Chomsky’s rule-governed approach clarifies this process. Syntax serves as the foundation, but vocabulary and idiomatic expressions evolve from personal input. For example, a child learning French may use “moi go” instead of “je vais,” reflecting the brain’s ability to adapt and merge linguistic rules across languages.

Logical Foundations Beyond Socio-Linguistics: Insights into Language Acquisition

Taking language out of the socio-linguistic frame allows us to explore its logical and physiological underpinnings. Chomsky’s universal grammar theory posits that all human languages share core principles, such as the distinction between subjects and predicates. Pinker builds on this idea by explaining how the brain operationalizes these rules during early development. Included in the mix are modifiers such as adjectives and adverbs, and also inclusive of preposition use as well.

Chomsky’s point of Universal Grammar revolves around the question of the order of Subject, Action, and Object (subject, verb, object often represented by SOV.) It is this set of three elements of a sentence that linguists look at as to how they are organized in any given language. SVO, SOV, VSO, VOS, OVS, and OSV are the standard outline of potential organization.

It must be noted here that there are languages that are flexible in the placement of these three characteristics of a sentence depending on context. This means that a basic sentence has seven potential forms of organization depending on language. At the stage of initial acquisition of language, the ordering of SVO is the main work being done in the toddler’s mind in Pinker’s view. We have not considered gender, temporal, or modifiers which come later in the construction of language.

So a practical example is in order. Take the English Sentence; The boy went to the store (SVO) but translated it into German and you get, The boy to the store went (SOV). Recall that in the earliest single-word utterance stage, the concern of the child is to figure out which words represent things and actions or nouns and verbs or subjects and actions. To whom or what the action is aimed at (the object) happens later after the SV is acquired for the language being constructed.

Consider sentence construction in Mandarin, which lacks verb conjugations found in English. Mandarin-speaking children still grasp temporal references, revealing universal cognitive strategies for encoding time. This supports Pinker’s claim that the human brain possesses a language-specific architecture capable of adapting to diverse linguistic environments.

Neuroscience also validates these theories. Studies using fMRI scans reveal activity in Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas during language tasks. These regions, specialized for syntax and comprehension, confirm that language acquisition is deeply embedded in human biology.

Final Thoughts: Insights into Language Acquisition

Given the brevity of the above argument, it is important to be aware that all of this is dependent on the Chomskyan Language Acquisition Device. (LAD) The LAD exists as a descriptive idea that cannot be placed in the brain with any specificity. It may have something to do with Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas as the child experiments with early words. It is, however not clear as of now just what or how the LAD works. We only know that there must be something like it for the process of language acquisition to take place.

Sources Cited

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press.

Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language. HarperCollins.

Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. Wiley.

Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard University Press.

Suggestions for Further Reading

Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use.

Pinker, S. (2007). The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature.

Tomasello, M. (1999). The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition.

Deacon, T. (1997). The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain.

Everett, D. (2009). Don’t Sleep, There Are Snakes.

Lieberman, P. (2000). Human Language and Our Reptilian Brain.

Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution.

Saussure, F. de. (2011). Course in General Linguistics.

Bloom, P. (2000). How Children Learn the Meanings of Words.

DISCLAIMER: The images on this page, and across the whole blog are created using AI imaging and are intended to illustrate the argument in the post. They are NOT representing real people or events directly, rather the images enhance the argument and nothing more. We do not intend any offense, nor do we wish to single out individuals in any way by the images themselves.

Posts You May Like

Language and its Rules: Spoken Language as a Beautiful Passion