Imitation & Reinforcement are the most important tools for CLA

Imitation & Reinforcement are the most important tools for CLA [30 marks]

The theory that imitation and reinforcement are important for the development of a child’s language is supported by Skinner, a social philosopher. Skinner’s theory very much revolves around a behaviourist ideology – language is acquired through an environmental influence and is not innate when we are born. So in order for a child to learn language, this must happen through operant conditioning, with guidance from their caregiver. Skinner proposed that positive and negative reinforcement were two features which enhanced a child’s language development the most. Positive reinforcement is when a certain behaviour is encouraged by providing a positive stimulus for the child, causing them to feel like they have been awarded – the action is more likely to be repeated. By referring to transcripts A and B, this could be Tom’s mother ‘echoing’ him when saying ‘it makes noises’. She is supporting him, which will then aid the development of his language to go further.  On the other hand, negative reinforcement is when a certain behaviour is more likely to be repeated in order to avoid an unpleasant stimulus. This could be remembering to say ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ to avoid being punished by the caregiver for not using manners in speech. Skinner’s theory of imitation and reinforcement is one which is supported with reference to the two provided texts, however, it is not necessarily relevant to all utterances included in the sources.

Despite the fact that imitation and reinforcement are crucial tools for CLA. It is debatable whether they are the most crucial. It is evident from texts A and B that other theories and ideologies may be better suited to the language transcribed. In text A, Tom, who is 2 years and 7 months old, is playing in the garden with his bike. Before even reading the utterances, we can tell that Tom is active in his role, not sat inside on the sofa. Bruner’s (1957) theory could underpin the reasoning for Tom’s speech throughout the conversation. Bruner’s ideology suggests that there are 3 innate modes of representation: The enactive stage (0-1 years), Iconic stage (1-6 years) and Symbolic stage (7+ years). It is evident that Tom has already completed the enactive stage, where he encodes action based information and is able to know what ‘sitting on the bike’ entails. Furthermore, the interrogative ‘is these drawing Cartoon Network cup of tea mum’ is an example of being in the Iconic stage. Even though Tom has overextended the proper noun ‘Cartoon Network’ from a term he is less familiar with and there is no grammatical agreement between ‘is these’, it can be said that Tom is grasping the concept and can encode visual based information. However, he is not yet at the Symbolic stage, where language and grammar are more sophisticatedly formed. From analysing the transcript, it is evident that Tom is developing through the 3 modes of representation, where his age of 2 years and 7 months can be referred directly to Bruner’s statement ‘knowing is a process, not a product.’

The Nature vs Nurture debate is one which has never really met a conclusion, even though many theorists have tried. The declarative ‘you’re not on dad’s bike (.) you’re on your bike’ uses personal pronouns directed at Tom and his father, explaining who the concrete noun ‘bike’ belongs to. This is an example of scaffolding, a concept in which Vygotsky (1978) came up with in his social interactionist theory. He suggests that children seek information actively from experienced adults or their caregiver, in order to acquire language. The Zone of Proximal Development is a bridge that needs to be crossed in order to learn what was not known before. So, Tom’s mother is helping him grasp that he is not sat on ‘dad’s bike’, but in fact, his own bike which has the same characteristics as his dad’s. He has overextended the term to something which is familiar to him, but needed the help from his mother so he could explain that he has possession over it. This scaffolding, reformulation and repair is what helps language acquisition, and eventually, Tom will be able to use these terms without the scaffolding from his mother. This can be further supported by Freund’s (1990) dollhouse study. This consisted of the comparison between a child being supported by their mother to place furniture in a dollhouse, and a child left to do it themselves. The observation resulted in the child who was provided with scaffolding from their mother performing better at placing the furniture – proving that nurture is a concept crucial for CLA. It could be said that Vygotsky’s theory supports Skinner’s learning ideology, as the response and guidance from the caregiver is extremely effective.

As much as the debate for Imitation and Reinforcement is strong, there will always be arguments to suggest otherwise. Both of Tom’s caregivers seem to give short responses in the transcript. Despite the fact that there are adjacency pairs and preferred responses throughout, it seems as if the parents are rather vague and provide simple syntax or even one word phrases at times. ‘You’, ‘my bike’, ‘really’ and ‘oops’ are some examples spoken from Tom’s mother and father. The case may be that these are deictic references – the reader will not understand unless they have the context of the conversation. Chomsky (1950) argued that there is a universal language innate in our brains. So, as a child, combining categories of speech (nouns, verbs etc) to create phrases is something we can do instinctively, without the help of our parents. The transcript firstly supports Chomsky’s theory because it is evident that Tom is using utterances of up to 4 words – including conjunctions such as ‘but’ in Text A, as well as personal pronouns such as ‘I killed it’ in Text B. Chomsky implies that by 2 years old, children should be able to acquire all of these language features, much like Tom can. Furthermore, the utterances from Tom’s parents and his elaborative responses suggest that he is developing well in his own mind, despite the rather restricted speech from his mother and father. This implies that imitation and reinforcement are not the most crucial for CLA, as there is evidence to suggest that Tom is able to develop language without full support from his parents at times.

To conclude, there are many arguments for and against whether CLA is most beneficial from imitation & reinforcement, or independent learning with innate instincts. Skinner’s research does hold some reliable evidence, supported by some aspects of the Transcript such as the positive reinforcement in Text A. Tom finds it hard to grasp the possessive pronouns of ‘dad’s bike’ along with the concrete noun ‘bike’. It takes many attempts of positive reinforcement and the echoing of ‘dad’s bike’ in order for Tom to finally say it correctly. This is real life proof that through the nurture of language and support from Tom’s mother and father, he uttered the accurate ‘-s’ inflection in ‘dad’s’, showing he was successful. Reinforcement seems to be the theory with the most background evidence, despite Chomsky’s ‘Universal Language’ argument.