Noam Chomsky Nativist Theory Of Language

In the latter half of the 20th century, Noam Chomsky popularized the nativist theory of language acquisition, which holds that language is an innate ability. Children's natural ability to organize the rules of language, according to this theory, is how they learn their mother tongue, but they can only fully utilize this ability with the help of other people. However, this does not necessitate any formal instruction for the child.

Chomsky implies that children are born with "Universal Grammar," a set of rules about language, by asserting that language is an innate faculty. As indicated by him, the "Widespread Punctuation" is the establishment whereupon all human dialects are based on. Chomsky asserts that, if a linguist from Mars manages to reach Earth, he would come to the conclusion based on the evidence that there is only one language, with a few different varieties. He provides numerous proofs for this. He cites the ease with which children acquire their mother tongue as one of the most important reasons. Chomsky asserts that children cannot learn mathematics or bicycle riding the same way they learned languages (stages of language acquisition). This is conceivable due to;

• Very little correctly formed language is taught to children. People frequently interrupt themselves, change their minds, and so forth when they speak, making stuttering errors. However, children still manage to grasp the language well.
• They don't just copy the language they hear around them. They use the language's rules to make sentences they've never heard before from anyone or anywhere.

Listening to his parents on the phone, a baby unconsciously begins to recognize the language they are using. "Setting the parameters" refers to the process by which he will ensure that his grammar is correct. The youngster instinctively realizes a few words act like action words and others like things. This is information that is given to him rather than something that his parents or those around him teach him directly. It almost seems as though the child is given several hypotheses at birth, which he then matches with what is going on around him. Chomsky refers to this initial set of learning tools as a "Language Acquisition Device."

Assuming you take a gander at kids, you would understand that in any event, when they make wrong sentences, the sentence is still all put together. For instance, no youngster will say "Roll mummy", rather the kid will say "Mummy, roll". The reason for this is that a child already knows the fundamental rules of syntax when they start joining two words. And he applies them correctly even when the child makes incorrect sentences.

Children also learn a lot of sentences and phrases, and rather than repeating what they hear, they make their own grammar out of the rules they hear and use it to make new sentences they've never heard before.

Throughout the years old two to seven, when kids start to dominate a language, they constantly change their language until it matches that of the grown-up speaker populace. As a result, the learning of a child's first language begins between the ages of two and seven. According to the Nativist theory, language is nothing more than feedback to the environment—like walking, which is an innate human ability that is stimulated by a level of development. This means that a child will learn a language perfectly as long as he or she hears it at this crucial age (between the ages of two and seven).

The Nativist theory is hotly debated. The fact that children will not be able to learn such complete speech patterns in a natural human environment, where complete sentences are the exception, is an argument against this view. Researchers have also recently discovered that parents react differently to correct and grammatically incorrect statements made by their children. This influences the child's behavior and challenges the idea that language comes naturally.