Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics.pdf

A-Z 629language acquisitionUmbrella term for (a) the natural acquisition of one’s first language, (b) the naturalacquisition of a second or multiple languages, (c) second language acquisition in aformal learning environment, and (d) the relearning of one’s first language in therapy (language disorder). It is the basic concept of language which, in the approaches to (a)–(d), determines the individual hypotheses as to which linguistic skills are acquired, underwhat conditions, in which way, when the process begins, and how long it lasts. Researchin this area has been strongly influenced by current linguistic, psycholinguistic, andsociological theories.From 1950 to 1980 research brought forth four main hypotheses regarding firstlanguage acquisition: (i) the behavioristic hypothesis ( behaviorism, empiricism)propounded by Skinner (1957), which traces language-learning processes back toexperience, imitation, and selective conditioning; (ii) the nativistic hypothesis (nativism), arising from Chomsky’s criticism of Skinner (see Chomsky 1959, 1975) andaccording to which language acquisition is considered to be a more or less autonomousprocess of maturation based on an inborn mechanism of language acquisition. Thishypothesis places emphasis on the development of linguistic competence (competence vs performance) ( also transformational grammar); (iii) the cognitionhypothesis, which takes into account the relationship between the developing cognitiveand intellectual abilities (see Rice and Kemper 1984, also Bowerman 1989); and (iv) thesocial constitution hypothesis, which gives priority to the importance of the child’ssocialization and interaction (Miller 1980). In this hypothesis, the child’s desire forexperience and communication with others provides the principal impetus for thedevelopment of linguistic abilities.In the 1980s, research in language acquisition turned more strongly towards theacquisition of grammar. This is evidenced by the following two positions. The first,which was clearly influenced by more recent linguistic theories (e.g. Government andBinding theory and Lexical-Functional Grammar), can be seen as a furtherdevelopment of the nativistic hypothesis. It holds that there are specific inherent abilitiesand specific acquisition mechanisms, and discusses to what extent child grammars at anygiven time are true grammars in terms of a universal grammar (see Pinker 1984; Hyams1986; Felix 1987; for an over-view see Weissenborn and Schriefers 1987). The secondposition, which was strongly influenced by functional language models (functionalgrammar, discourse analysis), generally ascribes an important role to input and viewslanguage acquisition, among other things, as embedded in general cognitive processes.This position encompasses learning processes (see (i), and its further development,connectionism), cognitive abilities (see (iii)), as well as socialization and interactiveexperiences (see (iv)) (e.g. Maratsos and Chalkley 1980; Slobin 1985; McWhinney1987). Issues currently under debate also between both positions are, for example, theacquisition of regular and irregular verb morphology (e.g. Rumelhart and McClelland1986; Marcus et al 1992; Plunkett and Marchman 1993). An essential test for allapproaches are cross-linguistic studies (see Slobin 1985–93; Hyams 1986; McWhinneyand Bates 1989), and possible explanations offered by individual learning styles orlearning strategies (see Nelson 1981; Peters 1983). Here it is a matter of styles, such as