Editing Language acquisition (section)

==History==
Some early observation-based ideas about language acquisition were proposed by [[Plato]], who felt that word-meaning mapping in some form was innate. Additionally, [[Sanskrit grammarians]] debated for over twelve centuries whether humans' ability to recognize the meaning of words was god-given (possibly innate) or passed down by previous generations and learned from already established conventions: a child learning the word for ''cow'' by listening to trusted speakers talking about cows.<ref>{{cite book |author=Matilal, Bimal Krishna |title=The word and the world: India's contribution to the study of language |url=https://archive.org/details/wordworldindiasc0000mati |url-access=registration |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford [Oxfordshire] |year=1990 |isbn=978-0-19-562515-8 |oclc=24041690 }}{{page needed|date=December 2024}}</ref>

Philosophers in ancient societies were interested in how humans acquired the ability to understand and produce language well before [[empirical methods]] for testing those theories were developed, but for the most part they seemed to regard language acquisition as a subset of man's ability to acquire knowledge and learn concepts.<ref name="Innateness and Language">{{cite book|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/innateness-language/#ChoCasAgaSki|title=Innateness and Language|publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|year=2017}}</ref>

Empiricists, like [[Thomas Hobbes]] and [[John Locke]], argued that knowledge (and, for Locke, language) emerge ultimately from abstracted sense impressions. These arguments lean towards the "nurture" side of the argument: that language is acquired through sensory experience, which led to [[Rudolf Carnap]]'s Aufbau, an attempt to learn all knowledge from sense datum, using the notion of "remembered as similar" to bind them into clusters, which would eventually map into language.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/82/2/understanding-human-language-an-in-depth-exploration-of-the-human-facility-for-language|title=Understanding Human Language: An In-Depth Exploration of the Human Facility for Language|author=Kendra A. Palmer|publisher=StudentPulse.com|year=2009|access-date=22 August 2012}}</ref>

Proponents of [[behaviorism]] argued that language may be learned through a form of [[operant conditioning]]. In [[B. F. Skinner]]'s ''[[Verbal Behavior]]'' (1957), he suggested that the successful use of a sign, such as a word or [[lexical unit]], given a certain stimulus, [[reinforcement|reinforces]] its "momentary" or contextual probability. Since operant conditioning is contingent on reinforcement by rewards, a child would learn that a specific combination of sounds means a specific thing through repeated successful associations made between the two. A "successful" use of a sign would be one in which the child is understood (for example, a child saying "up" when they want to be picked up) and rewarded with the desired response from another person, thereby reinforcing the child's understanding of the meaning of that word and making it more likely that they will use that word in a similar situation in the future. Some [[empiricism|empiricist]] theories of language acquisition include the [[statistical learning in language acquisition|statistical learning theory]]. Charles F. Hockett of language acquisition, [[relational frame theory]], [[functionalist linguistics]], [[social interactionist theory]], and usage-based language acquisition.

Skinner's behaviorist idea was strongly attacked by [[Noam Chomsky]] in a review article in 1959, calling it "largely mythology" and a "serious delusion."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Chomsky |first1=Noam |title=Review of Verbal behavior |journal=Language |date=1959 |volume=35 |issue=1 |pages=26–58 |doi=10.2307/411334 |jstor=411334 }}</ref> Arguments against Skinner's idea of language acquisition through operant conditioning include the fact that children often ignore language corrections from adults. Instead, children typically follow a pattern of using an irregular form of a word correctly, making errors later on, and eventually returning to the proper use of the word. For example, a child may correctly learn the word "gave" (past tense of "give"), and later on use the word "gived". Eventually, the child will typically go back to using the correct word, "gave". Chomsky claimed the pattern is difficult to attribute to Skinner's idea of operant conditioning as the primary way that children acquire language. Chomsky argued that if language were solely acquired through behavioral conditioning, children would not likely learn the proper use of a word and suddenly use the word incorrectly.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Harley|first1=Trevor A.|title=Talking the Talk: Language, Psychology and Science|date=2010|publisher=Psychology Press|location=New York, NY|isbn=978-1-84169-339-2|pages=68–71}}</ref> Chomsky believed that Skinner failed to account for the central role of syntactic knowledge in language competence. Chomsky also rejected the term "learning", which Skinner used to claim that children "learn" language through operant conditioning.<ref>{{cite book |author=Harris, Margaret |title=Language Experience and Early Language Development: From Input to Uptake |publisher=Psychology Press |location=UK |year=1992 |isbn=978-0863772382 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/languageexperien0000harr }}</ref> Instead, Chomsky argued for a mathematical approach to language acquisition, based on a study of [[Syntactic Structures|syntax]].