A Critical Examination of the Beliefs about Learning a Foreign Language at Primary School

established during first language acquisition, survives into later life or whether
this capacity itself is subject to a critical period¹ (Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994: 79).

2.2.2 Chomsky's Theory of First Language Development

Lenneberg¹S theory on first language acquisition, his Critical Period Hypothesis
and Chomsky's theory of an innate language faculty distinct from other cognitive
abilities, a Language Acquisition Device (LAD) and Universal Grammar
allowing the child to acquire his first language largely effortlessly (Chomsky,
1965: 30-37) have had a profound influence on the belief that 'younger is better¹
for all language learning. Chomsky stated that his theory on first language
development might be of little relevance to second language learning and
teaching:

"I am frankly rather sceptical about the significance for the teaching of
languages of such insights and understanding as have been attained in
linguistics and psychology." (Chomsky, 1966, quoted in Hawkins, 1981: 179)

Nevertheless, his theory greatly influenced both the belief that 'younger is
Ьейеґ for second language learning as well as second language learning
theories and methodologies in general. The following pages briefly present the
origin of Chomsky's theory of first language development. The likely role and
influence of the environment and of social interactions on language
development is also briefly discussed. It will be argued that while both innate
factors and environmental variables would seem to be responsible, the
nature∕nurture debate is far from concluded and that, depending on which

66

<<   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   >>

More intriguing information