Learning to Read and Write

The Role of Language Acquisition and Aesthetic Development: A Resourcebook

Ellen J. Brooks

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351216449
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Originally published in 1986. This is an excellent resourcebook for the holistic teaching of language and the arts. The book works its way through theories of language acquisition and literacy before specifically discussing the role of the arts in literacy education and the integration approach. Each chapter has an extensive annotated bibliography detailing the resources available. The final listing includes both resources for teachers but also the children. Bridging the gap between theory and practice, this sociopsycholinguistic account will be of great use to anyone seeking a better understanding of teaching and learning reading and writing.

CHAPTER 1

Language Acquisition: Building the Foundation for Reading

The relationship between learning to talk and learning to read has received more than the lion’s share of attention in educational and psychological research. Clearly, reading is a language-based skill, but the implications of language development for learning to read go beyond the more immediate connections; they are deeply rooted in parallels between the actual processes involved in acquiring the two skills.

In order to understand the complex issues that are intertwined in the process of learning to read, we will examine language development as a necessary precursor. This chapter will discuss the major aspects of language development, insofar as they are related to reading and literacy in general. Throughout this discussion the importance of the communicative context of language learning will be stressed, as recent research has shown that language use and literacy are firmly grounded in one’s speech community and culture (Blount, #4; Bruner, #10).

We will begin with a background discussion of general aspects of language development, including the definition of language, how language is learned, and the sequence and pattern of acquisition. The focus will then shift toward the central question of this chapter: What can we learn about reading acquisition and reading instruction by studying language acquisition? In discussing the link between learning to talk and learning to read, the following major issues will be addressed: a comparison of oral and written language, a comparison of the two learning processes, those language abilities that are most directly related to reading, and implications of language acquisition methodologies for reading research.

Background

What is language? The terms “language,” “speech,” and “communication” are sometimes used interchangeably, but are they really the same? Certainly, there is some overlap, but clear distinctions can and should be made.

The early crying sounds that the infant makes serve to communicate a message of need, and this occurs long before formal language is acquired. Communication encompasses language, but we are not limited to language as our only means of communicating. Eye contact, a smile, and even the way we dress communicate a message, all without language. Communication involves purposeful behavior where there is a message exchanged between the sender and the receiver.

Language serves the function of communication, and several major properties of language can be defined. First, it is a systematic, rule-governed symbol system. Language is a social code in that particular members of a speech community agree upon the rules. Finally, language provides the speaker with a limited number of rules that are capable of generating an infinite number of novel sentences. This is referred to as the generative capacity of language (Chomsky, 1957).¹ According to these properties, language includes not only the spoken word, but sign language as well.

Bloom and Lahey (#2) discuss three major aspects of language: content, form, and use. Content refers to the meaning aspect of language, or the semantic component. The content of language can be further subdivided into objects, actions, and relations. While specific topics may vary, overall content is more universal.

Form refers to the acoustic or phonetic configurations of utterances (sound) or the configuration of movement exhibited in signs, and it is used to connect sounds and signs with meaning. Phonology (sound), morphology (word formation), and syntax (word order used to form phrases and sentences) constitute the three main aspects of form (Bloom and Lahey, #2).

Use is the final component of language (Bloom and Lahey, #2). It can be described in terms of the function or goal of language as in Halliday’s (1973) seven categories of function,² or use can be considered in terms of the effect of context upon the interaction (sending and receiving of messages). In a limited number of situations, routines for language use exist. For example, answering the telephone or greeting a friend on the street are situations where the rules for language use already exist. In the majority of our communicative encounters, we must establish our own rules, and we do so based upon the given context. The language behavior of an individual attending a party with a close circle of friends is likely to be quite different from the language behavior exhibited by that person when he is attending a business cocktail party and meeting new clients for the first time. In language acquisition, children must learn the syntactic and semantic rules of language, as well as how to use language in context.

Finally, speech refers to the sound system which is made up of phonemes. Speech can be used to deliver verbal language, but this is not always the case. The young infant babbling in the crib most certainly exhibits speech, but this is not necessarily purposeful communication. Nor is it language because the speech sounds do not serve a symbolic function or represent a shared code.

How Language Is Learned: Theories of Acquisition

The process by which a child acquires language is, at the very least, remarkable. From all the varied input, the child learns a vast number of words as well as extensive rules about the grammaticality of sentence structure, all in an astonishingly short period of time. To add to this amazing feat of learning, the child also comes to grasp the contextual usage of language in his specific speech community with considerable ease.

How do we account for this great amount of learning that is consolidated in such a short period of time? This is one of the central questions of language development research, and the literature represents different points of view.

This issue is embedded within the nativist vs. behaviorist controversy. The behaviorist perspective, most often associated with B.F. Skinner (1957), views the child entering the world as a blank slate.³ Language acquisition is attributed to the child’s learning through interaction with the environment, through the processes of reinforcement, feedback, and modeling. The nativist point of view, heralded by Noam Chomsky (1957), argues that language learning is far too rapid, and thus cannot be explained solely on the basis of a stimulus-response model. Rather, this great feat of learning occurs because the individual has some innate predisposition to learn language. Let us examine these perspectives in more detail.

Skinner’s view of language learning is an empirical perspective that is grounded in the principles of learning theory. The focus is on verbal behavior, which is believed to be shaped by differential reinforcement. Skinner (1957) defines verbal behavior as “behavior reinforced through the mediating of other persons’ needs,” (p. 2) and this behavior “emphasizes the individual speaker and whether recognized by the user or not, specifies behavior shaped and maintained by mediated consequences.” (p. 2). Thus, verbal behavior is explained by a stimulus-response model:

antecedent(elicitor)->behavior->consequence(reinforcer)
(speaker)	(listener)

Once a verbal behavior is reinforced, it becomes a conditioned behavior with a high probability of future occurrence under similar antecedent conditions. Thus, learning leads to a repertory of responses that were previously reinforced.

Chomsky’s nativist approach to language acquisition is based on the idea that the child has an innate structure to acquire language or linguistic competence. This assumption is supported by biological theory’s claim that there is a critical period when the child is most susceptible to language learning (Lenneberg,1967).⁴ This period is characterized by a sequential order of development with rapid changes in behavior that can operate independently of specific rewards and reinforcement. This susceptibility declines with age.

More recent research has challenged Lenneberg’s notion of a critical period. Menyuk’s (1977) investigation of this hypothesis indicates that a variety of factors influence the individual’s learning of specific aspects of language, including the nature or presence of an abnormality, general processing abilities, and the specific linguistic structure.⁵ Thus, age is only one aspect of learning potential, rather than the sole explanation. In spite of this, language learning is age-related, and in comparison with other learned behaviors (e.g., reading), the age of onset and sequence of acquisition are subject to a relatively minimal degree of individual variation. Thus, Lenneberg’s theory need not be discarded, but merely modified.

Chomsky takes the biological viewpoint and proceeds to look at language in terms of special properties. He is noted for his transformational or generative view of language: the unique capacity to create an infinite number of sentences from a finite set of rules.

Chomsky’s theory of language acquisition is explicated through his hypothesis that a Language Acquisition Device (LAD) is located in the brain. That such a device actually exists in the brain is questionable at best, but it does provide a hypothetical construct to describe these internalized rules that enable the child to create and understand sentences.

Although Chomsky’s theory has been subject to much criticism, in contrast to Skinner’s learning theory explanation, there is much evidence in favor of the nativist position. Most obvious is the great amount of learning that occurs in such a short period of time. George Miller’s (1956) work on the limits of information processing makes it clear that if we were to accept the learning theory position, it would take a lifetime or more to learn a language.⁶

Language behavior is much too complex to be merely a result of selective reinforcement. The early studies on the role of imitation in language learning support the view that imitation cannot account for the initial acquisition of the sentence pattern or for the child’s ability to constantly create and comprehend novel sentences. If imitation and reinforcement are responsible for language learning, how do we account for the child’s ability to induce the correct generalizations and reject the wrong ones? Moreover, the child’s errors are often systematic, based on over-generalization of a structure to an irregular form.

Also in support of the nativist view, the onset of language acquisition is relatively uniform, and this onset is more rapid than other cognitive skills. Similarly, there is great regularity in the sequence of development, and deliberate instruction is not required (although recent work on the communicative context of language acquisition indicates that effects of parent-child interactions, although not considered deliberate teaching, do contribute to certain aspects of language growth).

Language is also species-specific, and in spite of the vast differences amo...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Forword
• Introduction
• Chapter 1: Language Acquisition: Building the Foundation for Reading
• Chapter 2: Aesthetic Development and the Role of the Arts in Education
• Chapter 3: Learning to Read and Write
• Chapter 4: The Integrated Curriculum
• Author Index
• Subject Index