Universal Grammar and Language Acquisition Device

Universidad de Santiago de Chile
Facultad de Humanidades
Departamento de Lingüística y Literatura
Teoría Gramatical I
June 2014
Universal Grammar
and Language
Acquisition Device.
Authors:
Geraldine Lara
Valeria Pérez
Director:
Horacio Miranda

Universal Grammar and Language Acquisition Device.
2
Table of contents.
1 Introduction..........................................................................................................3
2 Theoretical background......................................................................................4
2.1 Chomsky........................................................................................................4
2.2 Generative grammar......................................................................................4
2.3 Innate theory..................................................................................................6
3 Body......................................................................................................................7
3.1 Communication and Language......................................................................7
3.2 Universal Grammar (UG)...............................................................................8
3.3 Language Acquisition Device (LAD)............................................................12
3.4 Chomsky’s review of Skinner’s verbal behaviour........................................13
4 Summary...........................................................................................................15
5 Activities...........................................................................................................16
6 Conclusions.....................................................................................................18
7 References........................................................................................................19

3
1. Introduction.
This paper will delve into the issues of Universal Grammar (UG) and
Language Acquisition Device (LAD) presented by the great Noam Chomsky.
It is important to be able to understand every one of the points that are
developed in here. For this reason basic concepts are defined in order to clarify
what we are talking about.
The aim of this is to present data collected through intensive research, with
some examples and quotes from the same author of these theories and others. For
which purpose, the information is presented in a way that facilitates the
understanding for those who have never heard about these issues.
Also, activities for eventually developing in a classroom are attached at the
end of this paper.

4
2. Theoretical Background.
2.1 Noam Chomsky.
Avram Noam Chomsky had born on December 7, 1928. He is an American
linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, logician, political commentator and activist
who is commonly consider “Father of modern linguistics.” Besides his work in
linguistics, Chomsky is internationally recognized as one of the most critically
engaged public intellectuals alive today.
Chomsky is a prolific author whose principal linguistic works after Syntactic
Structures (1957) include Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (1964), The Sound
Pattern of English (with Morris Halle, 1968), Language and Mind (1972), Studies on
Semantics in Generative Grammar (1972), and Knowledge of Language (1986),
among others. (The Noam Chomsky Website)
Chomsky is also a very important linguist because he created a revolution.
As one linguist remarked: "The extraordinary and traumatic impact of the publication
of Syntactic Structures by Noam Chomsky in 1957 can hardly be appreciated by
one who did not live through this upheaval" (Maclay, 1971)
2.2 Generative linguistics.
It is a school within linguistics whose centre is the "Generative Grammar",
which in turn means that innumerable syntactic combinations can be generated by
means of a complex series of rules. This term is attributed to Noam Chomsky
(1957).

5
The term "Generative linguistics" is often applied to the version of Chomsky's
transformational grammar, in which Chomsky distinguishes two grammatical
sentence structures: a surface, linked to the phonetic aspect of these sentences;
and a deep structure that rules refers to deep linguistic competence of an individual
in a particular language. Those rules transform a sentence with a given grammatical
structure into a sentence with a different grammatical structure but the same
essential meaning.
For example: John saw Mary  Mary was seen by John.
The basic ideas of the models included in this school have their origin in the
"Standard Theory” (1957–1965) formulated by Noam Chomsky. The common core
of all generative models would be trying to design a formal device which allows
describing, analyzing and specifying the natural language sentences in a general
way.
Chomsky built on earlier work of Zellig Harris to formulate the generative
theory of language. This set of rules is called Universal Grammar, and for Chomsky
describing it is the primary objective of the discipline of linguistics. While formulated
as a way to explain how human beings acquire language and the biological
constraints on this acquisition.
Generative linguistics has two important brunches: Acquisition and Learning,
where the first is referred to a subconscious process which is implicit in a natural
environment (native speakers) and in the other hand, Learning is referred to a
conscious process which is explicit and given in a non natural environment (foreign
language).
This school is in contrast with the previous one (Structuralism) because the
first studies the human capacity to generate an potentially number of sentences with
a finite number of elements for subsequently doing the so called performance of the

6
language. In the other hand, Structuralism studies the form and function with total
exclusion of meanings of the language’s phrases.
(Searle, 1972)
2.3 Innate theory.
The general question asked in this theory is: How one can claim to know
something when one does not even know what knowledge is? The answer to this
question is Innateness. The claim is that one does not need to know what
knowledge is before gaining knowledge, but rather one has a wealth of knowledge
before ever gaining any experience.
Chomsky formulated something that accounting for the gap between
knowledge and experience, a new term that he called “Plato’s problem”. Plato was
the first one who thinks in how do knowledge and experience interact so he wrote a
dialogue (Meno) in which he theorizes about the relationship between these two
concepts and provides and explanation for how it is possible to know something that
one has never been taught. Plato believed that we posses innate ideas that precede
any knowledge that we gain through experience. Shortly, Chomsky refers to a point
in the Meno dialogue when Socrates is talking with an uneducated servant and
shows that this one knows the Pythagorean Theorem though he has never been
explicitly taught any geometry. How does the servant know without been taught?
Plato’s suggestion is that people have innate knowledge.

7
3. Body.
3.1 Communication and Language.
In order to somehow be able to explain and to fully understand the main
content of this paper (which will take place below) it is necessary to define basic
concepts that are involved: What is communication? What is language? How do
these two concepts relate to each other?
In an article titles “The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did
it evolve?” (2002) Chomsky and others present 3 hypotheses for how language
evolved and brought humans to the point where we have a UG:
1. States that the Faculty of Language in the Broad sense is strictly
homologous to animal communication. This means that homologous aspects of the
Faculty of Language exist in non-human animals.
2. States that the Faculty of Language in the Broad sense is a derived,
uniquely human adaptation for language. This hypothesis believes that individual
traits were subject to natural selection and came to be very specialized for humans.
3. States that only the Faculty of Language in the narrow sense is unique
to humans. It believes that while mechanisms of the faculty of language in the broad
sense are present in both humans and non-humans animals, that the computational
mechanism of recursion is recently evolved solely in humans.
The last one of this three is the hypothesis that most closely aligns to the
typical theory of UG championed by Chomsky.
In simple words: “Communication” is the meaningful exchange of information
between two or more participants (human and non-human) through sounds,

8
gestures, movements, etc., those things constituent isolated signals to transmit very
specific messages. On the other hand, “Language” is the human capacity for
acquiring and using complex systems of communication.
But now, have you ever wondered: Where does language come from? Are
we born with it or is a large learning process? How and when we really acquire
language? Is it a conscious or subconscious process?
3.2 Universal Grammar (UG).
The term Universal Grammar (commonly known as UG) is the name that
Noam Chomsky gives, as the very name implies, to those grammatical features that
are shared by all derivations of human language.
It says that the ability to learn grammar is manifested by itself without being
taught. Rather than this aspect of UG being specific to language, it is more
generally a part of human cognition because UG determines what abilities are
innate and what properties are shared by them.
UG proposes that if human beings are brought up under normal conditions
(this is not conditions of extreme sensory deprivation), they will always develop
language with a certain property X. And if X holds true, then Y occurs.
For example: A property X can be distinguishing nouns from verbs or
distinguish function words from content words. Also, in the second case, if a
language has a word for blue, it will have a word for green.

9
The idea of UG can be traced back to Roger Bacon’s observations (all
languages are built upon a common grammar even though it may undergo
accidental variations), the 13th century speculative grammarians (who postulated
universal rules underlying all grammars), the 17th century projects for philosophical
languages (in which the concept of a UG was at the core), the Scottish school of
universal grammarians from the 18th century (that created an article on “Grammar”
in the 1st edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica which contains an extensive
section titles “Of UG”), with Chomsky and Montague the idea rose to notability in the
1950s to 1970s but in contrast, during the early 20th century, language was usually
understood from a behaviourist perspective. (Wikipedia)
Also, Universal Grammar involves 3 factors:
1. GENETIC ENDOWMENT: Sets limits on the attainable languages, thereby
making language acquisition possible. (Universal grammar in the first theoretical
sense).
2. EXTERNAL DATA: Converted to the experience that selects one or another
language within a narrow range. (Linguistic data to which the child is exposed).
3. PRINCIPLES NOT SPECIFIC TO FL: FL is the faculty of language, whatever
properties of the brain cause it to learn language.
(Hariyanto, 2011)

10
Chomsky's theory proposes that the human brain contains a predefined
mechanism (UG) that is the basis for the acquisition of all languages. “In analogy,
the brain can be thought of as a kind of partially programmed machine ready to be
configured”. (Tronolone) So, Chomsky says that a person individual grammar is
developed from the interaction between the innate UG and the input from the
environment (primary linguistic data):
(McGilvary, 2005)
Chomsky has stayed “I think, yet the world thinks in me”. This is an evident
example of his theory: humans are natural beings and have undergone evolution
(UG) common to all humans. One way to approach this concept is posing a
hypothetical question: Why does a child learn the language the way it does?
If we come back to Plato’s problem: the problem of finding and explanation
for how a child acquires language though the child does not receive explicit
instruction and the input a child receives is limited, we will be able to identify a
limited environmental stimulus referred to a Poverty of stimulus. This means that
natural language grammar is unlearnable given the relatively limited data available
to children learning a language, and therefore that this knowledge is supplemented
with some sort of innate linguistic capacity. And also humans are born with a
specific representational adaptation for language that both funds and limits their
competence to acquire specific types of natural languages over the course of their
cognitive development and linguistic maturation.
The Poverty of stimulus arguments attempts to explain how native speakers
form a capacity to identify possible and impossible interpretations through ordinary
experience. Essentially, stimulus (from the environment necessary to develop an
individual’s grammar via UG) is not an entirely adequate way to explain the process
UG + input = Grammar.

11
of learning. Therefore, human beings must have some form of innate linguistic
capacity that provides additional knowledge to language learners.
For example: Consider that a child might hear this:
 Who do you think that Jack will kiss first?
 Who do you think that Jack will kiss first?
From this, the child might determine that the word “that” is optional and
analogize to the following sentence.
 Who so you think that will kiss Jill first?
 Who so you think that will kiss Jill first?
Clearly, the second example is not grammatically well-formed but How does
the child know, without being taught that the ungrammatical example is, in
fact, ungrammatical? From the Chomsky’s perspective the answer is that
some knowledge pre-exist as part of UG.
Speakers in a language know which expressions are acceptable in their own
language and which are unacceptable but How speakers come to know these
restrictions of their language since expressions that violate those restrictions are not
present in the input? Chomsky argued that this Poverty of stimulus means Skinner’s
behaviorism perspective is wrong because it cannot explain this. But, in the other
hand, UG offers a solution to this problem by making certain restrictions universal
characteristics of human languages.
A further support for the Chomsky’s UG theory is the presence of Creole
Languages not only because are formed and developed when different societies
come together and are forced to devise their system of communication to create a
new one, but also because Creole Languages makes use of a full grammar. In
simple words, the system acquire by the speakers of the new language (Creole) is a
subconscious mix of vocabulary which effectively create their own original
language.

12
3.3Language Acquisition Device (LAD).
Chomsky asserts that in the brain exists an innate device to acquire
languages. This is what he called “Language Acquisition Device”, which allows
people learning and using the language almost instinctively; and is essentially
identical in all speakers, which is the basis of communicative ability, and also in
itself is a brain mechanism present in all humans: this means that language is
acquired because humans are biologically programmed to do so, regardless of the
degree of difficulty of the language.
Chomsky says that children do not need any kind of learning to acquire
language, because it is obtained and developed based on each person scheduled
mechanism, which begins to develop immediately when exposed to the
environment. So, the exposure to the language used in your environment is the only
requirement needed to acquire language.
Besides the language acquisition device, Chomsky states that children born
with the basic structure of language internalized, which is something innate in all
humans (Universal Grammar).
For Example: A Child of Argentine parents who is born in China would have
the same capacities and facilities to acquire Chinese as a mother tongue as
any other child with Chinese parents, because the environment facilitates the
acquisition of this language. Also is important to say that not because his
parents are Argentine means that the child is pre-programmed to learn the
language of their parents (Spanish), in fact his brain is not programmed to
learn Spanish but any other language of the world. So, it is possible to say
that language is not a matter of inherited but rather an innate capacity in
every person.

13
As the same Chomsky said: “We are designed to walk... that we are taught to
walk is impossible. And pretty much the same is true of language. Nobody is taught
language. In fact, you can’t prevent the child from learning it”. (The Human
Language Serie 2, 1994)
3.4Chomsky’s review of Skinner’s Verbal Behaviour.
Burrhus Frederic Skinner published a book called “Verbal Behaviour” (1956)
in which he analyses the human behaviour, specifically covering language. Based
on it, he specifies that language is no more than a behaviour brought under the
same variables than any other controllers of an operating behaviour.
For him, verbal behaviours can be classified as mand, tact, echoic. Mand is a
verbal operant in which the response is reinforced by a characteristic consequence
and under the functional control of relevant conditions of deprivation or aversive
stimulation. (Jurnal Linguistik Terapan.) In other words, the person will repeat the
verbal behaviour.
For example: “take it”—if the command or demand is met by other person.
The book ''Verbal Behaviour'' is almost theoretically complete, involving little
experimental research in the work itself. In response to this book, Noam Chomsky
published an article called “A review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behaviour'' (1959).
Chomsky reviews were and are more popular and more known than the Skinner's
book, who never answered the criticisms of Chomsky. In this article Chomsky
wanted to prove that behaviourism was wrong in explaining the emergence,
acquisition and development of language. Behavioural strategy, therefore, was an
inadequate and a wrong way to understand everything about the human language.

14
The central part of this review says that the circumstances in which the
Skinner's experiments were realized could easily take the animals to achieve what
is wanted from them (in the laboratory), losing credibility because under normal
circumstances and, in contrast, daily life the answers could be totally different,
besides saying that Skinner used experiments as scientific evidence to explain the
language but the experiments were performed on animals and not on humans
beings who are those that possess language:
[Skinner]...utilizes the experimental results as evidence for the
scientific character of his system of behaviour and analogical guesses
(formulated in terms of a metaphoric extension of the technical vocabulary of
the laboratory) as evidence for its scope. This creates the illusion of a
rigorous scientific theory with a very broad scope although, in fact, the terms
used in the description of real-life and of laboratory behaviour may be mere
homonyms with at most a vague similarity of meaning. To substantiate this
evaluation, a critical account of his book must show that with a literal reading
(where the terms of the descriptive system have something like the technical
meanings given in Skinner's definition) the book covers almost no aspect of
linguistic behaviour, and that with a metaphoric reading, it is no more
scientific than the traditional approaches to this subject matter, and rarely as
clear and careful. (Chomsky N. , 1959)
Besides, Behaviourist perspective suggests that language learning could be
explained by a succession of trials, errors, and rewards for success like any other
kind of learning. That is to say children learn their mother tongue by simple
imitation, listening and repeating what adults said. (Tool Module: Chomsky’s
Universal Grammar, 2010)
For example: When a child says “apple” and the mother will smile and give
him some apple as a result, the child will find this outcome rewarding,
enhancing the child’s language development.

15
4. Summary.
To help the understanding of this research, we create a diagram and a brief
explanation, which summarizes all the information presented above.
 The aim of linguistic theory is to describe the initial state of this faculty and
how it changes with exposure to linguistic data. Chomsky (1981)
characterizes the initial state of the language faculty as a set of principles
and parameters.
 LAD consists in setting these open parameter values on the basis of
linguistic data available to a child.
 The initial state of the system is a UG.
 Grammar constitutes the knowledge of particular languages that result when
parametric values are fixed.
Noam
Chomsky
Generative
Linguistics
Learning
Tree
structure
diagrams
Deep
structure
Surface
structure
Acquisition
Innate
theory
UG
Poverty of
stimulus
Creole
Language
LAD
Plato's
problem
Skinner's
Verbal
Behaviourist≠

16
5. Activities.
1. Do as requested:
1.1 Fill in the gaps with the correct word.
A. Noam Chomsky is an ____________, ____________, ____________, etc.
B. Behaviourist theory was proposed by ____________.
C. Innate theory was proposed by ____________.
D. _____________ is the human capacity for communication.
E. Chomsky is the _____________ of modern linguistics.
F. _________________________ is the grammatical features that are shared
by all derivations of human language.
1.2. State if the following sentences are true (T) or false (F).
A. ( ) The Language acquisition device is innate in people, animals and plants.
B. ( ) Chomsky was agreeing with Skinner's theory.
C. ( ) Verbal Behaviour was published in 1956.
D. ( ) Universal grammar stipulates that it is necessary a stimulus and a
response, among others.
E. ( ) Chomsky distinguishes two grammatical sentence structures (surface
and deep structures).
F. ( ) Structuralism is the school to which Chomsky belongs.
American linguist – Skinner – Philosopher – Language – Chomsky –
Cognitive scientist – Father – Universal Grammar.

17
2. To really understand the difference between Skinner's model and
Chomsky's model, the following activities will be performed:
2.1 Repeat after the exponents: (Skinner: Repetition)
.
Amor (Love):
 Eu te amo. (I love you)
 Você me ama. (You love me)
 Nós amamos. (We love each other)
2.2 Make a phrase as the used in number 1, with the following words:
(Chomsky: Innate capacity)
Example: Eu te odeio.
 Odeio: (hate) .
I hate you  __________________________________________________
You hate me  _______________________________________________
We hate each other  __________________________________________
 Adoro (adore) .
I adore you ________________________________________________
You adore me ______________________________________________
We adore each other __________________________________________

18
6. Conclusions.
At the end of this paper it can be concluded that the theories of Noam
Chomsky are very useful in this days because they allow us to understand many
questions about how different languages are learned and how these interact
between themselves.
In our personal opinion, we believe that Chomsky is right when he talks about
the innate ability we all have to learn whatever language is in front of any of us but
we also consider necessary the intervention of the environment in order to achieve
an adequate language development.
For example: if we compare a person who knows English versus a person
who also knows English but it has never been implemented because this
person has not interacted with other person who speaks the same language,
eventually we will find different results considering the degree of the
language evolution that has taken place over the years.
For this reason, we also think that it is necessary to include a part of
Skinner's theory in terms of acquire and develop a language, because we believe
that is necessary to have someone who teach you how to speak and make
repetitions to be able to understand and learn, despite we have in our brains the
LAD. Furthermore we think that with a little of these two theories we can understand
this complex thing called language acquisition. To clarify this aim we create a
diagram:
Skinner
Behaviourist
Chomsky
Innate
capacity

19
7. References.
Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures.
Chomsky, N. (1994). The Human Language Serie 2.
Chomsky, N., D. Hauser, M., & S. Fitch, W. (2002). The faculty of language: what is
it, who has it, and how did it evolve? SCIENCE'S COMPASS .
Cruse, D. (n.d.). Chomsky and the Universal Grammar.
Hariyanto, S. (2011). SLA MAJOR THEORETICAL VIEWS: Putting the Jigsaw
Pieces Together.
Jurnal Linguistik Terapan. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://jlt-polinema.org/?tag=innatist
Maclay, H. (1971). Overview.
McGilvary, J. (2005). The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky.
Searle, J. R. (1972). Chomsky's Revolution in Linguistics.
The Noam Chomsky Website. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.chomsky.info/index.htm
Tool Module: Chomsky’s Universal Grammar. (2010). Retrieved from
http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/capsules/outil_rouge06.html
Tronolone, C. (n.d.). Quine: terms in translation.
Wikipedia, T. F. (n.d.). Universal Grammar. Retrieved from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_grammar#History
Wilson, A. (n.d.). Poverty of Stimulus and Ecological Laws. Retrieved from
http://psychsciencenotes.blogspot.com/2010/03/poverty-of-stimulus-and-
ecological-laws.html

Universal Grammar and Language Acquisition Device

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Universal Grammar and Language Acquisition Device

Similar to Universal Grammar and Language Acquisition Device (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Universal Grammar and Language Acquisition Device