Abstract
In just a few years, children achieve a stable state of linguistic competence, making them effectively adults with respect to: understanding novel sentences, discerning relations of paraphrase and entailment, acceptability judgments, etc. One familiar account of the language acquisition process treats it as an induction problem of the sort that arises in any domain where the knowledge achieved is logically underdetermined by experience. This view highlights the ‘cues’ that are available in the input to children, as well as childrens skills in extracting relevant information and forming generalizations on the basis of the data they receive. Nativists, on the other hand, contend that language-learners project beyond their experience in ways that the input does not even suggest. Instead of viewing language acqusition as a special case of theory induction, nativists posit a Universal Grammar, with innately specified linguistic principles of grammar formation. The ‘nature versus nurture’ debate continues, as various “poverty of stimulus” arguments are challenged or supported by developments in linguistic theory and by findings from psycholinguistic investigations of child language. In light of some recent challenges to nativism, we rehearse old poverty-of stimulus arguments, and supplement them by drawing on more recent work in linguistic theory and studies of child language.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Bates, E. and J. Elman: 1996, ‘Learning Rediscovered’, Science 274, 1849–1850.
Bogan, J. and J. Woodward: 1988, ‘Saving the Phenomena’, Philosophical Review 97(3), 3–25.
Bohannon, J. N. and L. Stanowicz: 1988, ‘The Issue of Negative Evidence: Adult Responses to Childrens Language Errors’, Developmental Psychology 24, 684–689.
Bowerman, M. F.: 1998, ‘The “No Negative Evidence” Problem: How do Children Avoid Constructing Overly General Grammar?’, in J. A. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining Language Universals, Blackwell, Oxford.
Brown, R. and C. Hanlon: 1970, ‘Derivational Complexity and Order of Acquisition in Child Speech’, in J. Hayes (ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language, Wiley, New York.
Cazden, C. B.: 1972, Child Language and Education, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Chomsky, N.: 1965, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Chomsky, N.: 1971, Problems of Knowledge and Freedom, Pantheon Books, New York.
Chomsky, N.: 1975, Reflections on Language, Pantheon Books, New York.
Chomsky, N.: 1981, Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.
Chomsky, N.: 1986, Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use, Praeger, New York.
Chomsky, N.: 1995, The Minimalist Program, TheMIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Chung, S.: 1994, ‘Wh-Agreement and “Referentiality” in Chamorro’, Linguistic Inquiry 25, 1–45.
Clark, E.: 1987, ‘The Principle of Contrast’, in B. MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Crain, S.: 1991, ‘Language Acquisition in the Absence of Experience’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14, 597–650.
Crain, S. and C. McKee: 1985, ‘The Acquisition of Structural Restrictions on Anaphora’, in S. Berman, J. Choe, and J. McDonough (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th North Eastern Linguistics Society, GLSA, Amherst, MA.
Crain, S. and M. Nakayama: 1987, ‘Structure Dependence in Grammar Formation’, Language 63, 522–543. Reprinted in C. Otero (ed.), Noam Chomsky: Critical Assessments, Routledge: London.
Crain, S. and D. Lillo-Martin: 1999, Introduction to Linguistic Theory and Natural Language Acquisition, Blackwell, Oxford.
Crain, S. and R. Thornton: 1998, Investigations in Universal Grammar: A Guide to Experiments in the Acquisition of Syntax and Semantics, The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
Cowie, F.: 1999, What’s Within: Nativism Reconsidered, Oxford University Press, New York.
Demetras, M. J. and K. N. Post: 1985, Negative Feedback in Mother-Child Dialogues, Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, Toronto.
Elman, J. L., E. Bates, M. H. Johnson, A. Karmiloff-Smith, D. Parisi, and K. Plunkett: 1996, Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development, The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
Ferguson, C. A.: 1977, ‘Baby Talk as a Simplified Register’, in C. E. Snow and C. A. Ferguson (eds.), Talking to Children: Language Input and Acquisition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Fodor, J. D. and S. Crain: 1987, ‘Simplicity and Generality of Rules in Language Acquisition’, in B. MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 35–63.
Foss, D. and D. Hakes: 1978, Psycholinguistics, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliff, NJ.
Goldin-Meadow, S. and C. Mylander: 1990, ‘Beyond the Input Given: The Child’s Role in the Acquisition of Language’, Language 66(2), 323–355.
Goodman, N.: 1965, Fact, Fiction and Forecast, Bobbs Merrill, New York.
Halle, M.: 1990, ‘Phonology’, in D. Osherson and H. Lasnik (eds.), An Invitation to Cognitive Science, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Higginbotham, J.: 1983, ‘Logical Form, Binding, and Nominals’, Linguistic Inquiry 14, 679–708.
Higginbotham, J.: 1986, ‘Linguistic Theory and Davidson’s Program in Semantics’, in E. Lepore (ed.), Truth and Interpretation, Blackwell, Oxford.
Hirsh-Pasek, K., R. Treiman, and M. Scheneiderman: 1984, ‘Brown and Hanlon Revisited: Mothers’ Sensitivity to Ungrammatical Forms’, Journal of Child Language 11, 81–88.
Horning, J. J.: 1969, A Study of Grammatical Inference, Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Stanford A.I. Project Tech. Report No. CS 139.
Hornstein, N. and D. Lightfoot: 1981, ‘Introduction’, in N. Hornstein and D. Lightfoot (eds.), Explanation in Linguistics: The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, Longman, London, pp. 9–31.
Hume, D.: 1739, A Treatise of Human Nature, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Jaeggli, O.: 1980, ‘Remarks on to Contraction’, Linguistic Inquiry 11, 239–245.
Lasnik, H.: 1976, ‘Remarks on Coreference’, Linguistic Analysis 2, 1–22. Reprinted in Howard Lasnik: 1989, Essays on Anaphora, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Lasnik, H. and S. Crain: 1985, ‘On the Acquisition of Pronominal Reference’, Lingua 65, 135–154.
Levelt, W. J. M.: 1975a, Formal Grammars in Linguistics and Psycholinguistics, Mouton, The Hague.
Levelt, W. J. M.: 1975b, ‘What Became of the LAD?’, Peter de Ridder Publications in Cognition, Vol. I, Peter de Ridder Press, Lisse, Holland.
Lightfoot, D. W.: 1991, How to Set Parameters: Arguments from Language Change, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
MacWhinney, B. and E. Bates: 1989, The Cross-Linguistic Study of Sentence Processing, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Marcus, G. F.: 1993. ‘Negative Evidence in Language Acquisition’, Cognition 46, 53–85.
Mind and Language: 1998, Vol. 13, Blackwell Publishers Ltd., Oxford.
Marcus, G. F.: 1998, ‘Rethinking Eliminative Connectionism’, Cognitive Psychology 37, 243–282.
Morgan, J. L. and L. L. Travis: 1989, ‘Limits on Negative Information in Language Input’, Journal of Child Language 16, 531–552.
Nelson, K. G., G. Carskaddon, and J. D. Bonvillian: 1973, ‘Syntax Acquisition: Impact of Environmental Variation in Adult Verbal Interaction with the Child’, Child Development 44, 497–504.
Newport, E. L., H. Gleitman, and L. R. Gleitman: 1977, ‘Mother, I’d Rather do it Myself: Some Effects and Non-Effects of Maternal Speech Style’, in C. Snow and C. Ferguson (eds.), Talking to Children: Language Input and Acquisition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Pinker, S.: 1984. Language Learnability and Language Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Pinker, S.: 1990, ‘Language Acquisition’, in D. N. Osherson and H. Lasnik (eds.), An Invitation to Cognitive Science, Vol. 1, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 107–133.
Plunkett, K. and I. L. Elman: 1997, Exercises in Rethinking Innateness: A Handbook for Connectionist Simulations, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Pullum, G. K.: 1996, ‘Learnability, Hyperlearning, and the Poverty of the Stimulus’, in J. Johnson, M. L. Juge, and J. L. Moxley (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting: General Session and Parasession on the Role of Learnability in Grammatical Theory, Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, pp. 498–513.
Putnam, H.: 1971, ‘The “Innateness Hypothesis” and Explanatory Models in Linguistics’, in J. Searle (ed.), The Philosophy of Language, Oxford University Press, London, pp. 1300–1339.
Quine, W. V. O.: 1953, ‘Two Dogmas of Empiricism’, in From a Logical Point of View, 2nd edition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Read, C. and P. Schreiber: 1982, ‘Why Short Subjects are Harder to Find than Long Ones’, In E. Wanner and L. Gleitman (eds.), Language Acquisition: The State of the Art, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 78–101.
Rey, G.: 1998, ‘A Naturalistic A Priori’, Philosophical Studies 92, 25–43.
Rizzi, L.: 1990, Relativized Minimality, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Rumelhart, D. E. and J. L. McClelland: 1986, ‘On Learning the Past Tenses of English Verbs’, in J. L. McClelland, D. E. Rumelhart, and the PDP Research Group (eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Vol. 2, Psychological and Biological Models, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Sachs, J. S.: 1967, ‘Recognition Memory for Syntactic and Semantic Aspects of Connected Discourse’, Perception & Psychophysics 2, 437–442.
Sachs, J., R. Brown, and R. A. Salerno: 1976, ‘Adults’ Speech to Children’, in W. von Raffler-Engel and Y. Lebrun (eds.), Baby Talk and Infant Speech, Swetz & Zeitlinger, Lisse, the Netherlands.
Saffran, J., R. Aslin, and E. Newport: 1996, ‘Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants’, Science 274, 1926.
Selkirk, L.: 1972. The Phrase Phonology of English and French, Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
Slobin, D.: 1972, ‘Children and Language: They Learn the Same Way All Around the World’, Psychology Today 6, 71–82.
Smith, N.: 1996. Structural Eccentricities, Vol. 2, Glot International, pp. 7–8.
Smith, N., and I.-M. Tsimpli: 1995, The Mind of a Savant, Blackwell, London.
Snow, C. E.: 1972, ‘Mothers’ Speech to Children Learning Language’, Child Development 43, 549–565.
Snow, C. E.: 1977, ‘Mother’s Speech Research: From Input to Interaction’, in C. E. Snow and C. A. Ferguson (eds.), Talking to Children: Language Input and Acquisition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Synder, W. and S. Rothstein: 1992, ‘A Note on Contraction, Case and Complementizers’, The Linguistic Review 9, 251–266.
Thornton, R.: 1990, Adventures in Long-Distance Moving: The Acquisition of Complex Wh-Questions, Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Thornton, R.: 1996, ‘Elicited Production’, in D. McDaniel, C. McKee, and H. S. Cairns (eds.), Methods for Assessing Children’s Syntax, TheMIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Thornton, R. and S. Crain: 1998, ‘Successful Cyclic Movement’, in T. Hoekstra and B. Schwartz (eds.), Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Wanner, E.: 1974, On Remembering, Forgetting, and Understanding Sentences, Mouton, The Hague.
Wexler, K.: 1979, Untitled Presentation at theWorkshop on Learnability, 4-8 June, Laguna Beach, California.
Wilson, B. and A. M. Peters: 1984, What are you Cookin’ on a Hot?: A Blind Child’s “Violation” of Universal Constraints, Paper presented at the 9th Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Crain, S., Pietroski, P. Nature, Nurture And Universal Grammar. Linguistics and Philosophy 24, 139–186 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005694100138
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005694100138