2024年3月17日发(作者：小游戏免费秒玩)

My View on the Theories of First Language Acquisition

First language acquisition is the term most commonly used to describe the

process whereby children become speakers of their native language. In terms of

the three theories mentioned in the textbook, I believe that each of them may help

to explain a different aspect of children’s language development.

The behaviorist view is that language learning is the result of imitation,

practice, feedback on success, and habit formation. According to this view, the

quality and quantity of the language which the child hears, as well as the

consistency of the reinforcement offered by others in the environment, should

have an effect on the child’s success in the language learning. When my niece

was 8 months old, she could say ‘ba ba, ma ma’ if we asked her to say. And we

always asked her to say that. Gradually, when she saw her father and mother or the

photos of them, she would say ‘ba ba,ma ma’. When my sister-in-law made

some milk for the baby she always said ‘ 妈妈给你倒点奶粉。( ma ma gei ni dao

dian nai fen, which means Mom makes some milk for you.) ’ Therefore my niece

always said ‘ 倒 dao ’ when she was hungry. She only imitated the verb of the

sentence. When she took my father’s book I told her ‘ 这是你爷爷的书。( zhe shi

ni ye ye de shu , which means this is your grandpa’s book.’ She said ‘ 爷爷书

（ye ye shu, which means grandpa book.’ She omitted some of the words but I

could also understand her. We always talk with her and she can say more than

those at the same age as her can.

Therefore, if a baby is given enough inputs and encouraged to speak, he or

she will gradually form the ‘habit’ of some of language use. Nevertheless,

imitation and practice alone can’t explain some of the forms created by the

children, the normal language development of children who rarely imitate and

practice, or the more complex grammatical structures of the language.

The second theory is the innatism. The innatist holds the view that language

acquisition is different from the learning of other things; we’re born with a kind

of faculty which is unique to language acquisition. According to Chomsky,

children’s minds are not blank slates to be filled merely by imitating language

they hear in the environment. Instead he claims that children are born with a

special ability to discover for themselves the underlying rules of a language system.

In fact the language the child is exposed to in the environment is full of confusing

information and does not provide all the information which the child needs. For

example, we say to my niece ‘你拍拍手(ni pai pai shou, which means you clap

hands). When she play with a doll she will put its hands together and then separate

them saying ‘娃娃拍拍手。(wa wa pai pai shou, which means the doll claps hands.)

She can put the subject and the verb in the right order. We never tell her ‘the doll

claps hands.’ So this complex structure is not acquired by imitate and practice.

Here is some of the evidence which have been used to support Chomsky’s

innatist position: 1. Children all over the world go through the same stages in

language acquisition. 2. Children can learn any language equally well as long as

they are in the right linguistic environment. 3. Virtually all children successfully

learn their native language at a time in life when they would not be expected to

learn anything else so complicated.

The interaction position includes two versions: 1. Language develops as a

result of the complex interplay between the child and the environment in which

the child develops. 2. Children are born with a potentiality for organizing

experiences and comprehending symbols. This potentiality can’t be brought into

full operation unless it interacts with the environment. e.g. child-directed speech.

The hearing child of the deaf parents, Jim, can only contact with a television. His

parents can’t talk with him. His expressive abilities don’t begin to improve until

he begins conversational sessions with an adult on a one-to-one basis. The fact

that he fails to acquire language normally at first suggests that the problem lay in

the environment, not the child. Now, my niece is 3 years old, when she watches the

TV, she always asks us what it says. She can’t understand entirely. After we repeat

or paraphrase, she will know clearly. Therefore, children who are exposed to

language in the absence of one-to-one interaction do not develop language

normally.

In conclusion, each of the theories may help to explain a different aspect of

children’s language development. And the nature of language acquisition is still

an open question. Behaviorism explains the acquisition of simple grammar.

Innatism seems plausible in explaining the acquisition of complex grammar. And

interactionism explains how children learn to use language.