Nature of language acquisition and language acquisition DEFINITION

Nature of language acquisition and language acquisition DEFINITION

Did you know that in fact humans from birth has been endowed by God with what is referred to as the language talent? You might ask, what is the evidence? In relative terms, is rather easy to show that humans are innately programmed to acquire language. The part that is difficult to find exactly what actual talent or innate (innate) that. 

There is an interesting story in relation to the nature of the language. You are interested to know? Well, the plot as follows. More than two thousand years ago, the Egyptian king, Psammetichus, has a theory that if a child is separated from the environment of human language, the first word he has to say is a word that comes from being the oldest in the world. He hopes it is the oldest creature Egyptians. Psammetichus ordered to bring two Egyptian children who had just been born into exile. When the boy's then say bekos, anxiety Psammetichus materialize because the word was Phrygian word meaning 'bread'.He finally concluded that the language of the ancient Phrygian more than the Egyptian language (Aitchison, 1984). 

There is no one who admits that Psammetichus theory. Now, especially since there is the fact that when the child was separated completely from human speech then the boy was not going to be able to speak. The story about the famous French boy, Victor of Aveyron, who was found naked eating the roots of trees in the forest Caune in 1797, did not speak the language or languages ​​other Phrygian. He just growling like an animal. Another story about such a creature, for example, Mowgli in India who kept wolves, and the film is also quite popular Lucan, who since childhood also allegedly maintained by wolves. 

Despite speculation about Psammetichus negligible, Noam Chomsky ideas about a topic or innate talent must be seriously considered. He stated that the language acquisition in children so that it becomes a reality, a child should be equipped by nature with rich internal structure. However, what exactly is meant by Chomsky with talent or innate (innate) it? 

1. Chomsky's notion of language Talent 

Actual Chomsky never definitively explained his ideas about innate talent or that language.He was only marginally explain the idea. Specific ideas and interesting although he said the idea was not yet complete. 

Chomsky's ideas start with the basic assumption that children who acquire a language is not just learning a random accumulation of speech, but to learn a set of rules that underlie the principles of pattern formation speech. A person who obtained knowledge of the language, he basically internalized rule system associated with the sound and meaning in a special way. That its rules that allows one capable of producing a number of new utterances that can not be predicted in advance and not a long speech repeated. As discussed in the previous chapter, the hallmark of which is the language of creativity.When recalled, someone does not just repeat the same utterance. He will continue to create new tuturannya, for example, the child swallowed a bird or four pups, Butterfly was eating an elephant. Where does it come from that rule? How does a child find the rules?Within certain limits, the children had to make their own principle is the construction of a set of utterances that are heard from the surrounding. Chomsky suggests that within certain limits, the children are in the same situation with a linguist who are dealing with an unfamiliar language. Both are surrounded by a chaotic sounds that are not clear and should they choose. 

Let us see how the language that linguists deal with situations that are not familiar. He might start by finding a sequence of simple sounds that refer to a single object such as a tree, nose, hair, and so on. However, in terms of syntax, that sort of thing is not interesting.Learn some vocabulary lists is an easy and simple task. Genie case, for example, suggests that vocabulary development is quite rapid, although he learned after the critical period ends. However, it is difficult for him to master the rules of grammar. For a linguist working with an exotic language, an interesting stage is when when analyzing sentence patterns from the data collected. Linguist would make hypotheses about the principles underlying the sentence patterns discovery. 

A child, according to Chomsky, can create and internalize grammar in certain ways. He will look for regularity speech that was heard in the vicinity. The presumption, first of all possible simple. The second hypothesis proposes may be more complex, and the third will be more broadly. Gradual formation of mental grammar it is becoming increasingly sophisticated. Gradually diinternalisasikannya rules that will cover all utterances that may exist in the language. 

If the view of language acquisition hypothesis test is true, the child should be endowed with the hypothesis that device makers gained since birth. Devices that allow a small child to be a scientist who formed the hypothesis that more and more complex. 

There is a difference between a linguist who worked with a language that is unfamiliar to the children who acquire language for the first time. A linguist is helpful in setting such a thing. He can say to native speakers, such as whether the phrase, "Does daddy-longlegs legless" have meaning? Whether a particular sentence grammatical or ambiguous, and so on. However, a child who obtained first language will not be able to do such a thing.Something amazing still occur in children, the child still obtain a complete grammar. No one linguist who wrote perfect grammar in any language. It shows that the device maker's internal hypothesis is not sufficient to explain first language acquisition. Children must have a bit more information for setting it up. It was not related to the information about a particular language because the child just as easily acquire any language. A Chinese baby who was brought to England would be just as easy acquiring English as English children themselves when brought to China and the Chinese gained. There's something behind it all, which is referred to as the universality of language (language universals).Children learn language so quickly and so easily because the child knows what it's like language framework. They know what is possible and what is not possible in a language.Chomsky also mentions the existence of a universal grammar to refer to biological boon to humans. 

Actually, it is a universal language talent? Is it actually a hidden phenomenon? According to Chomsky, the universality of the language consists of two types, namely substantive and formal. Substantive universality of language represents a fundamental block, while the formal universality with respect to the shape grammar. The following analogy will clarify the two concepts. If hypothetically the Eskimos are born with innate talent to build an igloo, they have two types of knowledge. On the one hand, he knew ahead of time that the substance of the igloos made of ice and snow, as well as vultures who know exactly that the nest is made of twigs and instead of glass or brick. On the other hand, knowledge about building igloos default it will include the information that igloos are round, not rectangular or cone, or something else. 

Back on substantive universality of human language, a child may know instinctively that might sound device found in the speech. He will automatically reject sneezing, applause, noise footprints as noise that may occur in the language, but he accepts that the / b /, / o /, / g /, / U /, and so it was as the sound of the language. He will reject the order of the sound / pgpgpgpg / as a sequence of sounds which may be, but he will accept the possibility of sounding like a floating, debris, wind, putib, and so on. 

Formal universals proposed by Chomsky regarding the shape grammar, including the way in which the different parts relate to one another. According to Chomsky, the child knows first grammar diinternalisasikannya how it is organized. There should be a set of phonological rules and a set of semantic rules, which are related to a set of syntactic rules.

Rule Semantics, Syntax rules and phonological rules 

Furthermore, children will instinctively realize that no operation dependency structure includes two types of knowledge, namely pemahamanan hierarchical structure, with the sense that some words can fill the same box. 

Cows eat grass 

The fat cow grass sedangmakan 

Both existing knowledge is awareness of the function of each slot as an entity that can be moved. 

Grass was / is being eaten / by fat cow 

Chomsky assumes that every sentence has an inner structure (deep structure) and surface structure (surface structure). The two-level structure connected by rules known as transfonnasi. Chomsky argued that children would know the inner structure, surface structure and transformation, about the building blocks of language, such as the set of languages ​​that may sound. Second, is the information about how the grammar components relate to one another, as well as the limitations of the rule. Chomsky assumes that children automatically know that it includes a two-level language syntax, the structure of the surface and inner structure are connected by the transformation. 

Chomsky (1965) states that the existence of such a talent useful to explain the secret of the child's first language acquisition in a short time. In fact, the rules of the language so much. According to Chomsky, language talent is located in the black box called LAD (Language Acquisition Device) or any language pemerolahan. McNeill (1966) describe the LAD is comprised of four talents languages, namely (1) the ability to distinguish speech sounds with other sounds in the environment, (2) the ability to organize events into the language of diverse variations, (3) knowledge of the existence of a particular language system and other systems are possible that are not possible, (4) the ability to continue to evaluate language development systems that make up the system are possible, in the most simple language of the data obtained. 

Philosophical arguments developed McNeill (1968) it was really appropriate and immediate target. He was noted for his theory of stimulus-response was so limited, then the problem of language acquisition is far from reaching. Proposition LAD actually leads to the vulnerable aspects of language acquisition. Aspects of meaning, abstractness and creativity can be explained even if only implicitly. 

Maybe we will deny it because the LAD was an invention that can not be observed, which only looks at the phenomenon of language acquisition. In this case kaurn nativist no better than the behaviorist to solve the mystery of language acquisition. However, McNeill has made an important contribution to further research as an abstract system of language, the universality of language, theory of meaning, and the nature of human knowledge. This is the beginning of a positive direction that produces a lot of possibilities that are not known by the behaviourists. 

2. Biological Evidence of Language Talent 

Is there a relationship between biological markers in human language with talent? To answer that question, we can examine changes in body shape or structure changes that might be used to detect the language talent. Organs that we will examine is the mouth, vocal cords, lungs, and brain. 

a) mouth, lungs, and brain 

When we look at the roles that are used in the speech, it seems the device is similar to the process of human adaptation to devices that birds fly. The appliance man was less correlated with devices that are used in making the nest bird. Mouth and lungs can be viewed as a partial adaptation of the body to produce language. 

For example, human teeth somewhat different when compared with animal teeth. The shape, height, structure, meeting the upper and lower teeth fit, and so typical in humans and no animals. Obviously human teeth is not just for eating. Teeth proved to be a point of articulation for some language sounds like / a /, / d /, / s /, / f /. 

Human lips have well developed muscles and showed great flexibility at all compared to other primates lips. Human mouth is relatively small, and can be opened and closed quickly. It facilitates pronunciation sounds like / p /, / b / which requires the closing of the lips, which is then followed by the release of the mouth when opened. 

Human tongue was thick, muscular, and easy to move. This is different to the tongue monkeys, for example, long and thin. The advantage gained by the tongue thickness is related to the size of the oral cavity is varied, thus allowing the tongue it produces a diverse vocals. 

Another difference concerns regarding humans with apes larynx is composed of the voice box or vocal cords. Surprisingly, the structure of the vocal cords in humans it is simpler when compared with other primate vocal cords. However, such vocal cords actually an advantage for humans. Air can pass freely through the nose and then the mouth without experiencing significant barriers. Biologically, simplicity and leanness (streamlining) is indicative and specialization for a particular purpose. 

Now we can check our lungs. Although there is no specificity in the structure of the human lung, but the human respiratory apparently adapted to produce speech. During the talk, the rhythm of breathing lungs run normally without causing disruption to the speaker. Although the man was talking for hours, that sort of thing would not be bad for his lungs. The little boy who learned to play the flute requires teachers to give instructions on proper breathing techniques in order to produce a good flute toot. But, no one ever gave teachings to the child to take a deep breath when the child acquire language. It is difficult to determine which came first, the adaptation of breathing or speaking. 

It is clear that there is a clue in the mouth, larynx, and lungs that humans naturally speak.Now we see our brain. The extent to which our brains were programmed for language?And he said, not so clear. The human brain looks very different from the brains of animals.He was more severe with the coated surface of the cortex, the outer layer that covers the brain. The size of the brain itself is not so important. Elephants and whales have a brain size that is larger than the human brain, but they do not speak. Elephants and whales body too big. It seems it has been argued that in this case the critical ratio of brain to body precisely. The higher the ratio the more clever brain and the body of the creature, and in turn may be a prerequisite for language. The ratio of the adult human brain-body is two percent, while in chimpanzees less than one percent. The idea of ​​the ratio of the brain that the body can be misleading because the actual in many cases can not be used as a guideline to determine the creature speak or not. Consider the following picture.

	brain (kg)	Weight (kg)	Comparisons
Manusia, age 13 1/2	1,35	45	1:3T---
Manusia kerdil, age 12	0,4	13,5	1:34
Simpanse age 3	0,4	13,5	1:34

Figure 3.1 Ratio of Brain and Body Source: Lenneberg, 1967 

From the picture it appears that the actual differences in the human brain with animals are qualitative and not quantitative. On the surface, a chimpanzee and human brains have in common. As in a number of animals, the human brain is divided into a lower part, the base of the brain, and the higher part, the cerebrum. The base of the brain keeps the body alive by controlling breathing, heart rate, and so on. The higher parts, the cerebrum, is not essential for life. The goal seems to be able to adjust to the environment. In this section it seems that language is organized. 

The cerebrum is divided into two parts, namely the cerebral hemispheres, which are connected with other parts of the brain with a set of bridges. The left hemisphere is used to control parts of the body and the hemisphere to the right of the right hand is used to control parts of the body to the left. 

Sometimes it is stated that the two hemispheres in animals that serve the same, but in humans the two hemispheres are very different functions. People who paralyzed the right side of his body parts are often associated with the disappearance tuturannya, whereas patients who are paralyzed part of his body to the left, usually can speak normally. This suggests that part of the brain controls the left side of the body is not only right, but also controls the ability to speak. 

Actually, it suffered brain lateralization, the localization of language function in one hemisphere of the brain. Lateralization was a biological characteristic for humans in general. Such a phenomenon does not occur in animals. At birth, the difference in right and left hemisphere function was very little difference. However, from the age of two years and over one hemisphere more dominant function. The process lasted until the adolesen.There is also a saying that the process lasted only until the age of five years. This issue is a very important issue for linguists because lateralization can be attributed to the critical period of language acquisition. 

We can distinguish brain regions involved in speech articulation significantly. The area known as the 'area of ​​primary somatic motors' control voluntary body movements. The area was located on the upper front part of the brain. Control of parts of the body arranged upside down, control the foot and calf at the top, while controlling the face and mouth is on the bottom. 

However, parts of the brain involved in speech articulation seems to be different from that for planning and understanding. Where is the understanding part? There are two areas of the brain known as Broca's area is located in front of and above the left ear and Wernicke's area is located at around and below the left ear. Damage to Wernicke's area often damaging parts of speech comprehension and production boggle damage Broca's speech area, said less clear articulation, pronunciation sounds of language is not good, the sentence is not grammatically and not fluent, but the patient is still able to produce meaningful speech. The disease is referred to as Broca's aphasia. Aphasia is a loss of some or all of the ability to use spoken language because of illness, disability or injury to the brain. There are two types of aphasia, the anterior aphasia or Broca's aphasia, expressive aphasia, aphasia tanlancar talk, ie aphasia that occurs due to damage to the front part of the brain tissue, and is characterized by speech that is difficult and halting the sufferer. The second is Wernicke's aphasia or posterior aphasia, receptive aphasia, fluent aphasia, ie aphasia that occurs because of damage to tissue at the back of the brain and is characterized by the inability of the patient to understand sentences and sentences fluently produce meaningless. 

It can be concluded that the lungs, teeth, lips, and vocal cords evolved in a certain way to facilitate speech. More importantly, the human brain seems dipraprogram for language. -Localization of language lateralization in one hemisphere of the brain-is a natural phenomenon and occurs between the age of two years until age adolesen. 

Krashen (1981) explicitly distinguishes language acquisition and language learning.Language acquisition is a process that subsadar. Acquiring the language is usually not aware of the fact that they acquire language. They are only aware of the need to use the language for communication. The results also subsadar kemampuanan language.Language skills are generally not aware of the rules of language are acquired. However, they can sense whether the forms are correct or incorrect use. Kemampuanan language can also be referred to as implicit learning, informal learning, learning naturally. 

The term learning is used to refer to conscious knowledge of a second language, knowing the rules, be aware that language. Therefore, language learners can discuss it. The term learning here can be likened to know the formal language, learning express, learning scientifically. 

Some linguists assume that children acquire language, and the adults can only learn the language. However, according to Krashen (1981) adults were able to acquire a language in addition to learning the language. In the hypothesis of the acqusition learning distinction (difference learning and kemampuanan), Krashen explains that adults can also gain language. Ability to acquire language is not erased during puberty. That does not mean that adults will be able to master the language as native speakers. It also does not mean that the adults will not have the language acqusition device (LAD) (device kemampuanan language) used the same as children. But, will prove that for adults kemampuanan it is a very difficult process. Many researchers agree that the nature of cognitive and linguistic processes in kemampuanan second language to children alike with strategies used in kemampuanan first language. 

The most encouraging results in kemampuanan language research is finding that the developmental sequence kemampuanan grammatical structures can be predicted first.Brown (1973) reported that children who acquire English as a first language tend to acquire certain grammatical morpheme or word task and the others followed later. Form of 'ing' and the plural marker 's' is the first controlled morpheme, while the shape of 's' as a marker and a third person '-s' as a genitive marker newly acquired six months or one year later. 

It should be emphasized that the implications of the natural order hypothesis does not necessarily mean that our syllabus is based on the order found in the study. 

According to Krashen in addition to the natural order. Kemampuanan monitor function in the language is very important. The monitor is what kemampuanan develop language and critical role in the smooth kemampuanan second language. Learning has only one function, namely as a monitor or editor. Learning to play an important role in changing the shape of our post-speech generated by our linguistic system. Such an event is happening before and after the speech we produce, whether oral or written. 

Monitoring of this kind, suggests that the role of formal rules and the role of conscious learning is confined to the second language performance. People who are currently using a second language can use the rule that if three conditions are met. Terms that are necessary and sufficient. That is, the learner may not utilize completely rule it despite the three conditions was met. The third requirement is the time, form, and rules. Speakers should have enough time, should be focused on the form, thinking on the correct form, and should know the rules. 

Based on the use of the monitor speakers can dipilahkan into three groups, namely: 

(1) A speaker who uses the monitor berlebiban. 

Speakers of this type of monitoring is always held at any time, to check the results consistent with the knowledge tuturannya very unaware about the rules of the second language. As a result, this type of speakers will speak hesitantly, often stopping in the middle of the conversation, concerned with rectification, and can not speak it fluently. The main cause of excessive monitoring speakers hold it is a second language factor exposure history, and personality factors speakers. 

In the history of exposure to a second language, speakers who hold excessive monitoring it relies completely on teaching grammar. He did not get enough opportunity to acquire a second language. There is no choice but to hang himself in the study. In personality, speakers of this kind are usually less believe in his own ability to acquire a second language. She only feels safe when referring to the monitor so sure really. 

(2) Speakers are very rarely use the monitor. 

Such speakers do not have the courage to use the monitor. Mean, he was not actually learning. if ever, he tends not to use the knowledge sadamya, although conditions permit.Such a person can not be affected by the rectification of errors and can only be corrected errors with feeling. 

(3) A speaker who uses a monitor optimally. 

The speakers will use optimally monitor, which uses the monitor when needed and when not disrupt communications. In a conversation, for example, speakers of this type will not be using the monitor if it is perceived to interfere with communication. Such speakers can use the competencies they have learned as a supplement to the kemampuanannya competence. 

If the allegations of the monitor that's right, then that language will be kemampuanan very important part or central, while learning the language was a peripheral part. Therefore, what is important is to promote kemampuanan language and not learn the language. The question of how we acquire language becomes very complicated. How do we move from one level to another level kemampuanan else? How do we move from level i, which represents the level of our current capabilities, to level i +1 or the next level? Hypothesis emerged input (input) which states that a necessary condition for moving from level i to level i +1. The acquiring must understand the input that contains i +1. Understand means the ability to focus on the meaning and not the form. We gain only when we understand language that contains structure that is slightly above our current capabilities. 

Differences kemampuanan first language and second language centered on the question of whether there is a crisis 'critical period' for language kemampuanan. Such questions involve discussion about neurological development (Brown, 1980). Is the maturation of brain cells that would lead to an increase in the ability to acquire language? Some experts pointed to lateralization of the brain as an important key to answering that question. There is research evidence that suggests that the human brain when it began to mature, certain functions entrusted to the left hemisphere and the other functions assigned to the hemisphere. the right hemisphere. Intellectual functions, logic, and analytic, seems largely be the responsibility of the left hemisphere, while the right brain hemisphere to control the burden of social and emotional needs. The function of language, it seems, largely controlled by the left hemisphere. (Brown, 1981; Aitchison, 1984). 

The important question is whether language lateralization was also experiencing? If yes, when it happens and how it can affect kemampuanan language? Lermeberg (1967) says that lateralization was a slow process that began about a two year old and ended on masamasa around puberty. In this period the child will be easy to acquire language, whereas language is kemampuanan after a very hard effort. This period is often referred to as the critical period, ie a period biologically programmed to end the kemampuanan language. If childhood began to acquire the language was very clear, which is about the age of two years, the critical period is often not so straightforward appearance. 

We know that the language the child will not be obtained if the time is not yet come. No one is teaching the little baby to talk, though clearly it is known that the baby was normal vocal cords. From the age of five to six months of a baby's babble and could only mutter a sound that is required in the speech. Obviously the baby was waiting for the right moment, when it began its biological trigger programmed. It seems that the biological trigger that is associated with brain growth. Brain newborns on average weighs about 300 grams. The brain continues to grow and at the age of two years had reached a weight of 1000 grams.At the moment it seems to trigger biologically programmed to acquire language. 

Not easy to say when past the language kemampuanan berakhir.Akan However, many expressed a hint of this critical period. Lenneberg (1967) says that it is complete lateralization around puberty. While other researchers assert that it occurs at an earlier age. Krashen (1970) suggested that the development of lateralization was already extinct at the age of five years. Krashen's opinion is not too contradictory to research kemampuanan first language if it is considered the first fluency was reached at the age of five years. Krashen's findings do not match with the opinion Scovel (1969) which states that lateralization is related to one's ability to be able to acquire a second language fluently as native speakers. That is because children acquire a second language after the age of five years are still able to speak fluently as native speakers. 

After adolesen future, humans must acquire language through hard struggle. That is because the human brain loses plasticity for learning the language at that age. Evidence is often given is the case of children who are isolated from society. Isabelle and Genie cases discussed in the previous chapter is convincing evidence of the existence of the critical period.

Figure 3.1 Ratio of Brain and Body Source: Lenneberg, 1967