Psychology: Nature vs. Nurture Essay
Language constitutes an essential characteristic of human beings and is regarded as a primary form of communication between individuals. The role of nature and nurture in language acquisition among young children has been a continuous debate in developmental sciences, education, and social sciences like sociology and psychology. This issue is not only conflicting but also complementary. It has laid a foundation for better understanding of how biological and environmental factors interact to influence language development in children (Yusa et al. 2011). Available research shows that there is no clear pattern of the causes and effects associated with human cognition and development. Studies indicate that human development is erratic due to environmental effects and differential in individual perceptions. This paper will discuss the different roles that nature and nurture play in child development with respect to language acquisition.
Nature
Language acquisition in children has been a constant topic of research with most empirical data revealing that children acquire language faster than older people (Yusa et al. 2011). Moreover, available literature shows that there are variations in child development more so in language acquisition. A critical characteristic of learning a language is that children take a relatively shorter duration to learn a new language and, at the same time, gain a better understanding of the language (Yusa et al. 2011). It is estimated that at the age of five, an average child is well versed with a vocabulary of approximately 6000 words and an excellent command of almost all elements of sound and syntax in their language (Bates et al. 2005). Given the fast rate at which children grasp new languages, some theories have concluded that the capacity of language acquisition among human species must have a firm foundation within the human brain that develops like an arm or the kidney. Some theories propose that people master language solely because they are highly social animals with great brains that can master a broad range of things (Bates et al. 2005). The debate whether language is innate or learned has been of great concern for many centuries with complex discussions focusing on the nature of children’s minds and how they are built. Some theories like nativism propose that knowledge is based on human nature. The nativists believe that language is innate as shown in ideas proposed by Plato and Kant and built upon by Chomsky (Bates et al. 2005). Chomsky has built on this concept by describing some of the common characteristics that underlie grammars of every language across the universe. According to Chomsky, language is innate, and the brain has a unique element for acquiring language alone (Bates et al. 2005). He suggests that the theory of universal grammar is an inbuilt feature of the human mind and that development of language is similar to the growth of any organ in the body. Besides, Chomsky accepts that children with different cultural backgrounds learn different languages. Consequently, he proposes that the rational principles that form the foundation for language acquisition are not taught (Bates et al. 2005). Additionally, research on biological influences on language acquisition among children has given undisputed evidence on the periodical development of three language acquisition categories like phonology, semantics, and syntax. Consequently, brain response to linguistics during former years are determinants of following language mastery. Various neuroimaging data from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fRMI) and event-related potentials (ERPs) show that different brain regions process semantics and syntax. This processing is evident in sign, spoken and written language respectively. Consequently, ERP data has demonstrated that cognitive development is critical in advanced language skills, improved auditory stimuli with a biased selection of stimuli. Additionally, imaging shows that in 13-month kid’s brain response to known words varies from unknown words and this aspect is distributed equally on both the left and right hemisphere of the brain. However, as children grow, this impact seems to be limited only to the left hemisphere a characteristic that is observable in adults with highly advanced language skills. Also, scientific research indicates that FOXP2 a short form for forkhead box protein P2 is subject to gene regulation that is responsible for the growth of brain and lungs (Dehaene-Lambertz et al. 2006). Consequently, an alteration of FOXP2 gene results in language dysfunction characterized by the inability to communicate clearly. Anthony Monaco and Simon Fisher first learned of the gene when they were observing the KE family from over three generations were affected by language malfunctions due to an alteration in FOXP2 (Dehaene-Lambertz et al. 2006). Supporters of the role of nature belief that the pattern of language acquisition is the same across all cultures and that the ages at which children acquire language are similar globally. Further, a study among deaf children illustrates that children develop a similar way of communication which is universal even in different environments (Dehaene-Lambertz et al. 2006). Jean Piaget used the valuable perspective to explain language acquisition in children. Piaget observed that children grow and develop through various stages learning in a sequence through the stages (Bates et al. 2005). He noted that children were continuous learners and utilized prior experience to form the meaning of their surroundings. According to Piaget, children’s knowledge comprised schemas upon which kids consulted to derive the significance of their current situations (Bates et al. 2005). Also, Piaget observed that there were four stages of cognitive development which children must navigate successfully before moving to the next phase. The formal operational stage in Piaget’s stages marks an advanced phase of memory skills among children (Bates et al. 2005). This phase is characterized by the repetition of words and categorizing items to make it simple for children to learn their language (Bates et al. 2005).
Nurture
However, according to empiricism proposition, knowledge is founded on experience through the surrounding and interaction of human species. This theory has been developed from the ancient times of Aristotle to behaviorists like B.F Skinner. According to Skinner, the opportunity to learn and experience means that human beings have no limit on what they can learn. Moreover, behaviorists claim the ability of a child to gain a new language is solely dependent on the kid’s exposure to language and his/her environment. Thus, genes play a critical role in language acquisition among children. For instance, a child born in China will grow up to speak in Chinese while one born in America will develop a speech in English with an American dialect. This difference in languages and dialects support the role of the environment in language acquisition. Furthermore, proponents of environmental influence on language acquisition among children observe that children have the capacity to comprehend their language several months after they are born (Yusa et al. 2011). Most researchers indicate that children can make meaning of their language prior their first birthday. According to empirical research, immediately after birth, young kids are subject to language and have a preference to listen to a pattern of words that form meaning rather than random sounds (Yusa et al. 2011). Also, it is approximated that healthy children can differentiate most phonemes in their first 12 months (Yusa et al. 2011). This characteristic is important for children to acquire the language within their surroundings. It is this ability among children that explains why Chinese children adopted by English parents take the language of their environment. Thus, it is this exposure to language that impacts on the children’s ability to grasp their mother tongue (Bates et al. 2005). Recent studies reveal that the period until adolescence is a critical time for children to acquire their first language. Studies conducted on deaf children born to healthy parents who have no knowledge of sign language or in cases of isolation reveal that there is a limit to the age of acquiring the first language. For instance, Genie, an isolated girl who was rescued from her deranged father at the age of 13 could not grasp language like other healthy children. The critical period of mother tongue acquisition had already passed resulting to dysfunctional development. Genie found it difficult to learn her mother tongue and as such, could not be compared with other children of her age. Research has also shown that a conscious and socially competent parent is more likely to encourage their kids to express themselves differently than a less educated parent (Bates et al. 2005). The socioeconomic status of a parent determines the structure of the language of a child, their speech and how they express themselves with other kids. Children are more likely to quickly grasp frequently used words by their parents and their siblings than the less used words. Thus, the frequency of words, distribution and speech content of the environment within which the kid is brought up influences their ability to acquire that language (Bates et al. 2005). However, members of the same family have been exceptional in their patterns of learning language due to the effects of nature. Additionally, researchers have found out that parents and older siblings influence language acquisition in young children. Adults tend to change their tone of speech, reduce the frequency of words and adopt a slow speech when talking to young children. The complexity of sentences and rate of speech increases as children advance in years and their level of development. Adults acknowledge the attentional deficit of children and, therefore, use repetitive words and ask simple questions to enhance the learning of language among young children. Likewise, infants show more interest and find it easier to grasp exaggerated language than different patterns that are not exaggerated. This method allows children to imitate adults and learn their language. Thus, the input of language is critical to the pattern of acquisition because children acquire what they hear and perceive. I believe that both nurture and nature play a significant role in language acquisition among children. Case studies on child isolation and twin studies show that nurture is critical in learning language in young kids. I also, support the idea that children have an innate ability to learn the rules of language acquisition, however, children should interact with other humans, get the required training to acquire a language. From the research I have done, it is significant that exercise, physical activity, intellectual engagement, problem-solving and experience help in shaping neural pathways. My thinking is supported by the interactionist approach which claims that language acquisition in children is an interaction of motor skills, cognitive development and social learning which pose as precursors of a specific language. However, my thinking may be flawed first because the interactionist perspective is an upcoming perspective that has not gained ground in the field of psychology. Secondly, research on the effects of nurture on the neurobiology of language acquisition is increasing at unprecedented rates only less has been printed. However, critics of nurture claim that the role of nurture in language acquisition is insufficient and that there is no evident to support this claim. Also, proponents of nature such as Noam Chomsky claim that all children are born with universal characteristics of development such as automatic muscles that progress from the head down. Additionally, scientific research shows that the brain of an average child in the first weeks of life has the ability to normalize and categorize phonemes which are the basis of speech and language acquisition. Brain regions, like the motor system, have the capacity to calculate specific representations that have the ability to discriminate against some terms leading to a grasp of the native language. As such, critics of nurture suggest that nature is solely responsible for the development of language acquisition among childen. However, this counterargument may be refuted by the fact twins brought up in different environments tend to acquire different native languages. This shows that even in genetically identical children, nurture can have a significant impact on language acquisition.
Conclusion
In conclusion, language acquisition among infants is triggered by exposure to language itself within the environment within which they exist. The frequency and quantity of language input that children receive influences the rate at which children learn the language. Thus, exposure to language provides the basis for communication initiation. Language acquisition among children, and indeed human beings, requires training, problem-solving and repetition which is the effect of environment. However, this method does not work independently to influence language acquisition among young children. The level of cognitive development in an infant and communication complexity is crucial in language development among young kids. Children tend to learn simpler structures language quite fast unlike complex structures of the tongue. Children will be in a better position to learn a language when there is an active interaction between genes, healthy brain development, and supportive environment (Yusa, et al. 2011). It is, thus, plausible to conclude that language acquisition among young children cannot be studied in isolation of nature and nurture. Both, nurture and nature interact freely to influence language acquisition in infants.
References
Bates, E., Tomasello, M., & Slobin, D. I. (2005). Beyond nature-nurture: Essays in honor of Elizabeth Bates. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Chapman, R. S. (2000). Children's Language Learning: An Interactionist Perspective. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(1), 33-54.
Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Hertz-Pannier, L., & Dubois, J. (2006). Nature and nurture in language acquisition: anatomical and functional brain-imaging studies in infants. Trends in Neurosciences, 29(7), 367-373.
Hoff, E., & Shatz, M. (2009). Blackwell Handbook of Language Development. Chicester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Kagan, J. (2010). The temperamental thread: How genes, culture, time and luck make us who we are. New York: Dana Press.
Yusa, N., Koizumi, M., Kim, J., Kimura, N., Uchida, S., Yokoyama, S., & Hagiwara, H. (2011). Second-language Instinct and Instruction Effects: Nature and Nurture in Second-language Acquisition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(10), 2716-2730.
