language acquistion

spookz

Banned
Banned
Last edited:
welcome to cognitive psychology spookz.

how do we learn a language? are there innate mechanisms built in to facilitate learning or do we merely learn from experience

i'm not especially into this area. but as far as i know the innatist(Steven Pinker) are losing. those who think that language is hardwired into the brain. It's not that people think that nothing is hardwired. but, as always the discusion is on HOW MUCH is hardwired.

I do know that language learning is very dependent on experience. this doesn't mean that there isn't some sort of innate module of sorts that does this. evidence that suggest this include the fact that there is a "language center" in the brain, and that learning language is a VERY difficult problem and children do it pretty well.

I want to bring of the example of those Brazillian kids who spontaneously made up there own language. I'm not familiar with all the details but the fact that children who are otherwise deprived of any sort of language could and would create their own says something.


it possible that we have evolved adaptive neural structures in order to facilitate language acquisition? it seems implausible that mere learning could account for the wealth of linguistic complexity involved in learning a language.

yeah probably. I think that most psycholinguist would agree with this more or less. The idea that there is a universal grammar(Noam Chomsky) that all poeple have was very infulential a while ago. I think it now has lost some favor, but still has some influence.
 
If my memory serves me right i believe the ability to learn language is innate and a human being only has a certain amount of time to learn it before that ability goes lost forever. In the time we do have to learn a primary languge it comes effortless to us. That's why learning a new language is so tough for a adult but a child growing up in a multicultural area can learn 2 or 3 languages easily without even realizing it and employ them in speech easily as a adult. As in the sad case of Genie she has lost her time window forever to learn a language for practical use. I know that the language aquiring area is located in the frontal lobe of the brain and it is called the Weinnick's area or something like that....whereas Broca's area is the language composition part of the brain. They are located somewhere right above you the side of your left eye i believe. It amazing that you can only learn a language for a certain amount of time or else you're screwed.:D
 
Actually there is alot of evidence for a language/grammar module that evolve in the human brain. Studies of “Wild” children have shown that if you do not learn language at a early age you will never have a grasp of grammar and sentence structure: You will still be able to place words/symbols to a specific thing but you will not be able to put words together. Humans it seem are designed to learn language, it a very successful social device, with it we have been able to trade knowledge and ideas and conquer and destroy everything in our greedy hairless monkey hand grasp! Enough about how we are just talking animals.
 
"For millions of years mankind lived just like the animals.
Then something happened which unleashed the power
of our imagination. We learned to talk" -Pink Floyd


WellCookedFetus: (off topic) question for you, what does
the word bobbina mean?
 
WellCookedFetus,

So, you don't know what the word means either? Strange, for
some reason I thought that you would. Ah well, no biggy I was
just curious. Thanks for the reply, much appreciated. :)
 
I can't find it in any dictionary so no I have no clue, what the heck is it!?!?
 
I don't know! You used the word, that's why I asked you.
You called me that on this thread and I always wondered
what it meant. Like I said - I was just curious. :)
 
Oh now I remember I was just making fun of your sexuality, you see according to my theory if you claim your a girl your just a very perverted guy. :D
 
Oh ok, I see where you are coming from now. It still doesn't
explain why you used that word - especially when you don't
know what it means.

Anyway, I think your theory is flawed. If you take a look at
my picture in the picture thread you will see why I say that.

:D We now return you to the original topic ....
 
This is one of the many reasons I think it would be great if you could do scientific experiments with human lives.
Think about it, if you made a habitat and put a group of infants in it you could see how they develop with no outside influence. See how the real human species actually behaves. I think the difference between "wild" and "domestic"(us) humans would be staggering.
They could be machine fed or something until they grow up a bit and can look for food that the scientists place around the habitat.
It would be so interesting. What politics would come up? Would they form a pecking order? How would they eventually communicate? SO MANY QUESTIONS!
With no parents or other people explaining how to act and think to them I can only imagine what they would end up like.
Who can honestly say this wouldn't be fascinating?
But NOOOOOO:mad: the stupid bible has ingrained the crazy idea that "this would be wrong" into most of society and so tests like these will never take place, grrrrrr :mad:
 
Yes it seems the only people to develop grammer in a language have in fact been children during their play years. But are you sure adults lose the ability? Have there been tests done? I think it's simply cutural restraints and responsibilities that if an adult could release they would be able to learn from scatch.
Another thing - from what I've personally seen females seem to have more of a knack at learning a 2nd language.
 
It a reference of Bob as in your name being Bob or male... but since you claim to be female I called you bobina as in bob is pretend to be a girl, what a sicko.

There are a lots of studies of Wild children when rare circumstance provide one. these child grow up (if they don't die tragically at first) to be mentally deficient and live in a nursing home tell the day they die.

In 1970, a wild child was found in California. Genie, now 24, has stirred up new questions about language and intelligence.”

Only a few cases are recorded of human beings who have grown up without any real contact with other humans. So rare is the phenom_enon that when a 12-year-old “wild boy” was found in the forest of Aveyron in 18th-century France, the government ordered him brought to Paris to be examined by doctors in an institution for deaf-mutes. There he came under the care of the physician Jean Itard, who also acted as the boy’s tutor. Itard left detailed records of his experience, which was later dramatized in the 1970 movie The Wild Child. Although the boy was not deaf, and despite Itard’s work, the child never learned to speak.

In 1970, a wild child was found in California: a girl of 13 who had been isolated in a small room and had not been spoken to by her parents since infancy. “Genie,” as she was later dubbed to protect her privacy by the psycholinguists who tested her, could not stand erect. At the time, she was unable to speak: she could only whimper.

The case came to light when Genie’s 50-year-old mother ran away from her 70-year-old husband after a violent quarrel and took the child along. The mother was partially blind and applied for public assistance. The social worker in the welfare office took one look at Genie and called her supervisor, who called the police. Genie was sent to the Los Angeles Children’s Hospital for tests. Charges of willful abuse were filed against both her parents, according to the Los Angeles Times. On the day he was due to appear in court, however, Genie’s father shot himself to death. He left a note in which he wrote. “The world will never understand.”

The discovery of Genie aroused intense curiosity among psycholo_gists, linguists, neurologists, and others who study brain develop_ment. They were eager to know what Genie’s mental level was at the time she was found and whether she would be capable of developing her faculties. “It’s a terribly important case,” says Harlan Lane, a psycholinguist at Northeastern University who wrote The Wild Boy ofAveyron. “Since our morality doesn’t allow us to conduct depriva_tion experiments with human beings, these unfortunate people are all we have to go on.”

More at:
http://kccesl.tripod.com/genie.html
 
Last edited:
This is one of the many reasons I think it would be great if you could do scientific experiments with human lives.

lol. I hear ya DrLou. i could do so many great experiments if i didn't have to adhere to any sort of ethics. it is a bummer sometimes.

But are you sure adults lose the ability?

The thought is that there is a critical period of sorts afterwards and your ability to learn another language goes down. it doesn't go away just down. The best way to put is that if you were to move to a new contry and become imeressed in the language. if you were to do this between the ages of 0-5(just for example) then you would be capable of being fluent to the point of being completly indistinguishable from a native speaker. if you moved after those ages then no matter what you did someone who is trained to tell the difference between native speakers and nonnative speakers will be able to pick you out. it's not that you didn't learn the language, just not quite as well as a native speaker. and i don't think the difference is alot. depending on how old you were and how imerssed in the language you are.
 
Back
Top