2.2.3.1
Behaviourist accounts |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Early behaviourist accounts (see Ellis, R, 1994: 81) acknowledged that first language learning did not involve conscious intention or understanding of language form. They assumed that children developed their first language through endless repetition of language they heard around them. Adults would then provide feedback and reinforcement to ensure that they produced language correctly. But research on first language acquisition showed that children don't just automatize a repertoire of learned phrases. They also manage to induce some kind of internal grammar on their own, and as any parent will know, they often don't pay attention to adults' feedback, whether explicit as in the first dialogue below or more implicit as in the second.
In fact, it seems that adults rarely correct children's grammar, even if they do correct socially inappropriate language use (eg 'Say please') and inappropriate vocabulary use (eg 'That's not a microphone - that's a necklace'). Children seem to build up their internal grammar through implicit induction, by subconsciously working out the patterns of the grammar on their own. But is this an entirely plausible explanation, given the complexity of human grammars? In section 2.2.1, we sketched out the challenge facing second language learners. The challenge facing children is similar, if not greater given their less sophisticated cognitive powers. Just to remind yourself of that challenge, Reflective task 14 offers you an opportunity to try your hand at induction of some language patterns. Reflective task 14
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||