Response 1 Select a theory from one of the following categories to apply to the case study: behaviorist, linguistic (e.g., Chomsky), or interactionist.  Post an explanation of how your selected theory would explain the language development of the children in the case study and why.            One of the most important implications of any behavioral theories is the ability of it to be measured or observed.  With such difficulty in the mental process of this type of theory, focus can be placed on environmental factors that create a stimulus, along with specific behavior due to the stimulus i.e. the response.  Behaviorist emphasize performance over competence, and focus on learning because they regard language as a skill, a specific type of behavior (Gleason, 2017).            Children are ‘little cryptographers,” meaning they used their knowledge of language to decipher their mother tongue; noting that exposure develops the native tongue and linguistic parameters (Gleason, 2017).  This means the more the child is exposed to a certain language or behavior, the more likely it is of them to acquire such language or behavior.  This is why children are able to learn several languages so easily if exposed earlier in life as opposed to later.            In the article ‘A linguistic big bang,” children developed their own form of communication despite their disability and living or learning conditions.  This is deemed to be true as seen with the articles explanation of when the children arrived in Managua, they only had limited repertory of mimicas, however when the children were placed together they began to build on one another’s signs (Osborne, 1999).  Language is the product of a shadowy collusion between biological predisposition and social stimulus (Osborne, 1999).  Having known this, the environment was the stimulus and the ability to learn the sign language was the response.            Noting this article and behavioral theory can be compared to language in children with autism.  With application, shaping and modification techniques children with very limited speech skills have made drastic progress in learning to speak or use language (Gleason, 2017).  Not only children whom are deaf are able to communicate but also children with a wide variety of deficits or disabilities.  The behavioral theory supports language development simply by exposure to this environment and the adaptation and assimilation learned.  These are all known traits of the measurable/observation theory of behavior.  With increase exposure the children’s language developed and grew into a reportable form of communication.  What was not known, was created, viewed and repeated; equaling the perfect defining characteristics of the behaviorist theory. References: Gleason, J. B., & Ratner, N. B. (2017). The development of language (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.  Chapter 7, “Theoretical Approaches to Language Acquisition” (pp. 158–195). Osborne, L. (1999). A linguistic b ...

1. Response 1
Select a theory from one of the following categories to apply to
the case study: behaviorist, linguistic (e.g., Chomsky), or
interactionist. Post an explanation of how your selected theory
would explain the language development of the children in the
case study and why.
One of the most important implications of any
behavioral theories is the ability of it to be measured or
observed. With such difficulty in the mental process of this
type of theory, focus can be placed on environmental factors
that create a stimulus, along with specific behavior due to the
stimulus i.e. the response. Behaviorist emphasize performance
over competence, and focus on learning because they regard
language as a skill, a specific type of behavior (Gleason, 2017).
Children are ‘little cryptographers,” meaning they used
their knowledge of language to decipher their mother tongue;
noting that exposure develops the native tongue and linguistic
parameters (Gleason, 2017). This means the more the child is
exposed to a certain language or behavior, the more likely it is
of them to acquire such language or behavior. This is why
children are able to learn several languages so easily if exposed
earlier in life as opposed to later.
In the article ‘A linguistic big bang,” children developed
their own form of communication despite their disability and
living or learning conditions. This is deemed to be true as seen
with the articles explanation of when the children arrived in
Managua, they only had limited repertory of mimicas, however
when the children were placed together they began to build on
one another’s signs (Osborne, 1999). Language is the product

2. of a shadowy collusion between biological predisposition and
social stimulus (Osborne, 1999). Having known this, the
environment was the stimulus and the ability to learn the sign
language was the response.
Noting this article and behavioral theory can be
compared to language in children with autism. With
application, shaping and modification techniques children with
very limited speech skills have made drastic progress in
learning to speak or use language (Gleason, 2017). Not only
children whom are deaf are able to communicate but also
children with a wide variety of deficits or disabilities. The
behavioral theory supports language development simply by
exposure to this environment and the adaptation and
assimilation learned. These are all known traits of the
measurable/observation theory of behavior. With increase
exposure the children’s language developed and grew into a
reportable form of communication. What was not known, was
created, viewed and repeated; equaling the perfect defining
characteristics of the behaviorist theory.
References:
Gleason, J. B., & Ratner, N. B. (2017).
The development of language
(9th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Chapter 7, “Theoretical
Approaches to Language Acquisition” (pp. 158–195).
Osborne, L. (1999). A linguistic big bang.
New York Times Magazine
, 84–89
.
Response 2
The case study for this week’s discussion involved deaf children

3. in Nicaragua who developed their own language and way of
communication when the teachers’ efforts to communicate
effectively proved to be unsuccessful (Osborne, 1999).
Although I do believe that everyone is predisposed to the
tendency to communicate in some way the theory I’ve selected
that would explain the language development of the children in
the case study would be a behaviorist approach. Behaviorism
involves environmental stimuli, reinforcement, and response
which prompts a target language behavior that is observable
(Gleason & Ratner, 2017). An example of behaviorism in the
children of the case study was the notation of differences
between the younger children’s communication compared to the
older children signers. The article details the use of a sign for
the word “speak”, which was communicated differently from the
older children to the younger children. It was determined that
the younger children modified the hand gesture for the word and
did so in a way that communicated verb agreement (Osborne,
2017). The modification of language and manipulation of the
use of the language is the very essence of behaviorism. The
language in the younger children was clearly learned through
environmental stimuli. Another example that further explains
the use of behaviorism approach would be the linking of
concepts to verbal language and behavior. Researchers in the
article explained the encounter involving use of sign to gesture
the need for a sanitary napkin (Osborne, 1999). For me this put
the ideas of behaviorism approach into context in that the
concept of menstruation prompted the need to verbalize or in
this case gesture to communicate a need.
References
Gleason, J. B., & Ratner, N. B. (2017).
The development of language
(9th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Osborne, L. (1999). A linguistic big bang.

4. New York Times Magazine
, 84–89
.