The Question of Language Acquisition (Lenneberg vs. Chomsky)

Essay by LindaBanhHigh School, 11th gradeA+, February 2006

download word file, 3 pages 3.3

Downloaded 161 times

Lenneberg formed the Critical Period Hypothesis theory which contends that language is innate but has to be attained before the age of puberty or else the ability to learn language ebbs (as a result of the lateralization of the brain). 1 At present, the Critical Period Hypothesis theory is widely accepted by numerous linguists. Evidence has been presented that there is a limited time when the brain is malleable (in terms of language). Studies such as, linguistically isolated children (a.k.a. feral children) support Lenneberg's theory of the critical period because they are unable to fully acquire language. 2 Moreover, there is a non-uniform success rate in adults who try to attain a second language yet children can obtain a new language a lot more quickly and sufficiently than adults. 3 It is thought by many that a critical period for acquisition of a language does exist.

The most common contrasting viewpoint against the Critical Period Hypothesis is the theory presented by Noam Chomsky. Chomsky hypothesized that people are born with a set of rules known as 'Universal Grammar'; thus people can acquire language at any point within their lifetime as long as they are placed in an adequate learning environment.4 Although many linguists concur with Chomsky's views about Universal Grammar; the movie, "Nell" can be interpreted in such a way that Chomsky's theory is erroneous. In the movie, the character Nell learned a language within her critical period made up of the distorted English from her mother (who had a speech defect as the result of a series of strokes) and words remembered from a private language spoken with her twin.5 However, when she was being taught English in her late 20's, Nell showed little progress in using the English language and continued to speak in her...