Ideally, language is an acquired attribute of human life that is used for communication (Finn, 2010). The acquisition process is partly innate and partly environmental oriented. This implies that a language is both a natural gift and also a nurtured aspect of life. Language acquisition is a procedural process which entails specific steps that a child must undergo (Knezek, 2012). However, there is a debate on drawing a clear distinction between language being a natural attribute and language as a nurtured aspect of life.
Language Acquisition as a Natural Attribute of Life
‘Navitism’ is the belief that language acquisition is an innate ability. This idea holds that only human beings have a language and that their brains are suited for the acquisition and use of language (Mahoney, 2012). Chomsky (1959), through his theory of ‘universal grammar’, argued that all languages of the world have a common principle (Knezek, 2012). Chomsky together with other proponents of navitism holds that universal grammar is so dynamic that it cannot be acquired through nurture.
Language Acquisition as an Innate Ability
There are certain factors which serve to suggest that language acquisition is an innate process. Given the fact that children are choosy and do not imitate everything they hear from adults (Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994), there seems to be a language-controlling model which is innate. Most of the things said by children are not imitated from adults, but rather come out naturally. In addition, children produce more combinations of sounds than the actual ones they hear from their environments. They also produce certain sentence structures that do not exist. For instance, a child would say ‘mummy want!’ instead of ‘I want mummy!’
However, from the behaviorism point of view, the idea that language acquisition is an innate process has often faced criticism (Finn, 2010). Language is not a completely genetic attribute of human lifecycle. Moreover, there are many languages from different ethnic societies which humans use to communicate. Any child, regardless of his or her ethnic background, can speak in any of these languages given the exposure at the appropriate time of life advancement (Finn, 2010). Therefore, with this in mind, it is logically improper to hold that language acquisition is purely natural.
Language Acquisition as a Nurtured Aspect of Life
This view is supported in a number of ways. To begin with, a child learns his/her first language through imitation from people around him or her. Secondly, language is mainly acquired from the community given the fact that the first language comes from the ethnic set up from which the child belongs (Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994). Moreover, a child can learn any kind of language from any environment given the exposure at the appropriate time.
In various aspects, however, empiricists describe certain characteristics which fail to justify the fact that language is acquired through nurture. The behaviorist’s theory has failed to account for the rate at which the first language is acquired, that is, how a child aged two months old and has not adopted any imitative characteristics begins moving his/her lips to suggest a stage in development of language. Similarly, if language is acquired from the environment then the theory cannot account for the process suggested above.
In conclusion therefore, it is evident that the acquisition of language is neither purely natural nor nurtured. Therefore, the process cuts across all the theories of navitism and empiricism. In this regard therefore, empirical data explaining how a child from a different community can adopt another community’s language at a particular period of his/her growth could help resolve this problem. This would either help refute the claim by empiricists that language is nurtured or enforce their proposition, and thus resolve this argument.
References
Bialystok, E. & Hakuta, K. (1994), In other words: the science and psychology of second
language acquisition. New York: Basic Books
Finn, O. (2010), Nature versus Nurture in Language Acquisition. Retrieved on October 17, 2012,
from http://brighthub.com/science/genetics/articles/82090.aspx
Knezek Malia. (2012), Nature vs. Nurture: The Miracle of Language. Duke University, retrieved
on October 17,
2012, from http://www.duke.edu/~pk10/language/psych.htm
Lanir L. (2011), First Language Acquisition Development Theories: Nature vs. Nurture.
Retrieved on October 17, 2012, from http://decodescience.com/first-language-acquisition-development-theories-nature -vs-nurture/7247
Mahoney N. (2012), Nicaraguan Sign Language: A Case for Innateness and Critical Age.
National Science Foundation,
retrieved on October 17, 2012, from
http://www.nsf.gov./news//specialreports/linguistics/learn.jsp
