Language Learning
Introduction:
The study of language acquisition refers to the process through which children develop fluency in their native language. Few individuals inquired into the mechanisms of language acquisition in the 1950s.
It was considered that youngsters copied the people around them and that their speech got more accurate as they grew older. This seemingly straightforward procedure appeared to be shrouded in mystery. As a result, broad theories of language learning and use have been developed in psycholinguistics.
Behaviorists vs Mentalists:
Some linguists claim that learning is completely the result of experience and that our surroundings impact us all in the same manner. Others have proposed that everyone has an inbuilt language learning system that regulates language learning or acquisition in the same way for every one of us. These two schools of thought are known as 'empiricists' (Behaviorists) and 'rationalists' (mentalists).
Empiricists' (Behaviorists) view:
According to empiricists, all knowledge is obtained through experience. They believe that children are born with a blank slate. Learning a language is a process of imprinting linguistic habits on these slates. Language development is the product of stimulus-response activity.
Behaviorists and language learning:
Language learning is aided by imitation, repetition, memory, reward, and reinforcement. According to behaviorists, learning is governed by the situations in which it occurs, and as long as people are exposed to the same conditions, they will learn in the same manner.
The difference in learning:
Variations in learning are produced by differences in the learning experience, differences in the prior learning experience, differences in aptitudes, motivation, memory, and age. As a result, for them, there is no such thing as a theory of language acquisition, but rather the application of basic principles of learning to language.
language according to empiricists:
As a result, there is no difference in the way one learns a language and the way one learns to do anything else. Thus, language, according to empiricists, is the consequence of stimulus and reaction. As a result, a youngster should first learn to respond, and then that reaction should be reinforced in a number of ways.
Indeed, the intensity of learning is assessed by the number of times a response is produced and reinforced. A term that has been repeated thirty times is more likely to be remembered than one that has been said twenty times. As a result, the process of acquiring a language is essentially a mechanical process of habit building.
Empiricists and Reinforcement:
Reinforcement strengthens habits. Language is a conditioned behavior that can only be learned by encouraging the kid to act. Learning a language requires a lot of repetition. As a result, mechanical drills and exercises, as well as imitation and repetition, are required.
Rationalist's view about language acqusition::
Almost every time, the rationalists contradict the empiricists. Children learn a language not because they are exposed to a comparable conditioning process, but because they have an inborn ability that allows them to acquire a language as part of their regular maturational process.
This ability is available to everyone. The infant is born with an intrinsic language acquisition apparatus. He learns a language through being exposed to it in society and unintentionally generating certain assumptions about language, which he continues to change until he reaches the adult model, to which he is mostly exposed. As a result, the youngster continues to build an intrinsic grammar based on generic norms.
Empiricists vs rationalist:
- Language learning is both species-specific and species-uniform. The capacity to learn and comprehend a language is genetically inherited, but the language that children speak is culturally and environmentally imparted to them. Without tuition, children all across the globe learn their native language.
- Whereas one youngster is exposed to an English-speaking environment and comes to speak English fluently, the other is exposed to an Urdu-speaking population and begins to utilize Urdu fluently.
- Language can only be learned by humans. Thus, language learning seems to be distinct from the development of other talents such as swimming, dancing, or gymnastics.
- The acquisition of a native language is much less likely to be affected by mental retardation than the acquisition of other intellectual activities. Unless raised in linguistic isolation, every typical human kid learns one or more languages and learns the fundamentals of his language by the age of six.
- To learn a language, a kid must be exposed to individuals who speak that language.
- A language is not something we learn instinctively or from our parents. It's a product of our exposure to a certain linguistic group. It is a component of the larger complex of learned and shared behavior that anthropologists refer to as "culture."
- This does not imply that language is learned ready-made. Each youngster creates it from scratch by assembling bits and pieces of environmental raw material. The human youngster does take an active part in this process, straining, filtering, and recognizing what he is exposed to.
His impersonations are creative recreations rather than photographic copies. In the cradle, a kid is a linguist. He learns languages faster than adults. He finds the structure of his original language in order to utilize it; no one offers it to him ready-to-use.
Conclusion:
Both schools have made important statements, but none is flawless. The mentalists' overemphasis on rule-learning is excessive, while the behaviorists' complete rejection of meaning is unfair. By studying language acquisition theories, we may readily comprehend the points of view of both schools of thinking.
