Another Look at Language Acquisition

I reviewed this article:

Speech Perception and Language Acquisition in the First Year of Life

Annual Review of Psychology

Vol. 61: 191-218 (Volume publication date January 2010)

First published online as a Review in Advance on September 28, 2009

DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100408

Judit Gervain1 and Jacques Mehler2

1Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada

2Neuroscience Sector, Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati, Trieste 31014, Italy; email: mehler@sissa.it

The purpose of this article was to weld differing theories of infant language acquisition as complimentary pieces of the whole.  

First they stated the following, “One of the most fundamental and at the same time most surprising perceptual abilities of newborns is that they are able to discriminate most sound contrasts used in the world's languages. In other words, they are born as “citizens of the world,” ready to learn any natural language.”

Next cited, were works with song birds where it was determined that “song culture” is the result of an extended developmental process, a ‘multigenerational’ phenotype partly genetically encoded in a founding population and partly in environmental variables.”

In addition studies on infants exposed to statistical information, phonotactics, allophonic clues and prosody were cited. From these they concluded, “Taken together, these studies indicate that statistical segmentation alone is not sufficient to solve the task of extracting word forms from continuous speech. Other clues, taking into account the morphophonological properties of individual languages, are needed to complement statistical computations.”

Also stated in this paper, “One of the most important findings of this increasing body of research is that the newborn and infant brain shows a functional organization for language processing that is similar to that of the adult brain. ”This organization appears to be at least partly under genetic control and develops even without experience with language (e.g., in congenitally deaf individuals).

Their conclusion: “We have reviewed evidence suggesting that nativist and empiricist proposals are incomplete if they fail to include innate dispositions and learning in a broader, integrative, biologically anchored language acquisition theory. In addition, we have shown that a third type of mechanism, perceptual and memory constraints, needs to be evoked to provide a full account of early acquisition.”

My response: The design for human language acquisition is remarkable.  The organization for the categorization and relationship of information is laid within the foundation of the mind.  Building blocks of language are perceived by the learner and repeated in the environment for memorization, patterns are identifiable within language allowing for sequencing of words to relay information, plasticity within the brain is encountered as means of adaptation to the environment and needs of the learner, and multiple and complex relationships are easily formed for Increased complexity of expression, self sufficiency and enjoyment.  These remind me of  the components of good instructional design as described within Learning Theories and Instruction (2009).  Language is a marvelous gift to man allowing him to appreciate, expand his knowledge, share and join into relationships.