Innateness of Language Acquisition

Chomsky and Lenneberg propose that language is innate and that there is a critical period that ends around puberty, where children are no longer able to learn the rules of language. It is true that there seems to be language functions in certain parts of the brain, which suggests that language may be innate. The fact that there is a critical period for language acquisition seems to support that everyone has the potential to learn a language. If a child lives the first part of their life without any other human contact, they will never be able to learn language like children who are spoken to and raised lovingly by their parents. With all the studies that suggest we have a part of the brain that is used for language, why is it that children who are not exposed to language will never learn it correctly? Genie, for example was a feral child who was locked up until she was thirteen and punished when she vocalized. She could speak about twenty words which seems strange to me, because if babies babble and eventually start speaking, one would think that Genie would also babble as a baby and eventually start to form some sort of language if there is a part of the brain for language acquisition. In some cultures, parents do not speak directly to their children and they still learn their native language without problems. How can this be if Genie was in the same situation and never learned to speak? This brings up the point that language is acquired through nature and nurture. It is obvious through this example that children need to hear and experience language if they are able to form it themselves. However, the rapidity at which children learn language shows that there must be some innateness in the task.

So if language is acquired by nature and nurture, how is it that deaf children can still learn language if they have never heard it spoken? American Sign Language (ASL) is a full language that has the components of a spoken language, so maybe the parts of the brain that help with acquisition can be applied to signs as well as words. But what about children who are hearing that have deaf parents? Do they learn language as well as children with hearing parents? One difference in having deaf parents is that the child must look at the parent and learn to interpret the signs. Deaf parents understand that a child’s visual perspective is important, and that the child must pay attention to understand. However, hearing parents may not fully understand that a deaf baby responds more to visual stimulus because they can’t hear.

An interesting phenomenon is the learning of a second language, after the critical period has already passed. If Genie was never able to correctly learn even a first language after she was rescued, how is it that adults can learn a second language? If a person is able to learn a first language, they already understand the structure and concept of language, so maybe they can apply their knowledge of language in general to the new one they are learning. An example of this is adults learning ASL. It is similar to learning a foreign language, because even in this case people will never be a fluent as they are in their native language. However, children who learn ASL are able to master the language, even when they learn from someone who does not sign properly. This is further evidence of the critical period, because if children are able to fill in the gaps that they are not taught, there must be some innateness language acquisition.