Language AcquisitionLanguage Acquisition

Innate Programming in ChildrenInnate Programming in ChildrenChildren seem to know:Children seem to know:

how language look-like; how language look-like; substantial amount of substantial amount of innate knowledgeinnate knowledge

language is rule-governedlanguage is rule-governed; a finite number of ; a finite number of principles govern the enormous number of utterancesprinciples govern the enormous number of utterances

languages are hierarchically structuredlanguages are hierarchically structured; the ; the knowledge that several words can go in the same structural knowledge that several words can go in the same structural slotslot

language makes use of operations which are language makes use of operations which are structure dependentstructure dependent; that each slot functions as a unit in a ; that each slot functions as a unit in a sentence which can be moved aroundsentence which can be moved around

Chomsky’s Content ApproachChomsky’s Content Approach

Child’s brain naturally Child’s brain naturally contains a considerable amount contains a considerable amount of of specific information about languagespecific information about languageChildren come to language learning with certain Children come to language learning with certain expectations; they know in advance the possible routes expectations; they know in advance the possible routes which language can takewhich language can takeLearners are pre-wired with knowledge of universal Learners are pre-wired with knowledge of universal grammargrammarThis knowledge is not ready waiting the moment child is This knowledge is not ready waiting the moment child is born but takes time to matureborn but takes time to matureWhen time is right the innate knowledge requires little When time is right the innate knowledge requires little exposure to language for the knowledge to emergeexposure to language for the knowledge to emergePre-wired knowledge is specific to language and is Pre-wired knowledge is specific to language and is independent of general intelligenceindependent of general intelligence

Process ApproachProcess Approach Children have inbuilt puzzle-solving equipment which Children have inbuilt puzzle-solving equipment which enables them to process the linguistic data they come enables them to process the linguistic data they come acrossacrossInstead of possessing advance information, children Instead of possessing advance information, children are born with some sort of process mechanism to are born with some sort of process mechanism to analyze the sort of structures that characterize human analyze the sort of structures that characterize human languagelanguageNot innate knowledge but processing information and Not innate knowledge but processing information and forming internal structures; when these capacities are forming internal structures; when these capacities are applied to the speech the child hears he succeeds in applied to the speech the child hears he succeeds in constructing a grammar of his native languageconstructing a grammar of his native language

Are children wired with knowledge of UG or with Are children wired with knowledge of UG or with

Puzzle solving equipment?Puzzle solving equipment?

Linguistic knowledge

Grammar

Puzzle-solvingequipment

Grammar

The two approaches are sometimes The two approaches are sometimes undistinguishable but there is a crucial differenceundistinguishable but there is a crucial difference

In both approaches the child may be end up with In both approaches the child may be end up with same set of language universals and they are same set of language universals and they are the result of inbuilt analytic procedures but not the result of inbuilt analytic procedures but not there are at the beginningthere are at the beginning

Process Approach comes in two versions; Process Approach comes in two versions;

the intelligentthe intelligent version-the child makes use of version-the child makes use of the cognitive abilities as he would to cope with the cognitive abilities as he would to cope with everything else he comes across in the worldeverything else he comes across in the world

The linguistic The linguistic version- child’s processing version- child’s processing mechanisms are geared specifically for langugemechanisms are geared specifically for languge

Content, intelligent process or linguistic Content, intelligent process or linguistic process? The possibilitiesprocess? The possibilities

Evidence for content approach:Evidence for content approach: Children are aware of universal constraints; they never utter a Children are aware of universal constraints; they never utter a

sentence impossible one for human languagessentence impossible one for human languagesDo children always obey universal constraints?Do children always obey universal constraints?Ex:Ex: Which dress has Charlie asked John to buy and some Which dress has Charlie asked John to buy and some orangesoranges

Which doll Anna knows who has stolenWhich doll Anna knows who has stolenIt means we are quite unlikely to find similar sentences in It means we are quite unlikely to find similar sentences in children languagechildren language

Various studies suggest that children are not pre-wired with Various studies suggest that children are not pre-wired with absolute information about language universals from the absolute information about language universals from the beginningbeginning

The universal constraints are acquired graduallyThe universal constraints are acquired gradually

Young children often do not pay attention to the syntax, and Young children often do not pay attention to the syntax, and either answer at random, or utilize a ‘probable world either answer at random, or utilize a ‘probable world strategy’ that is interpret sentences by arranging the words strategy’ that is interpret sentences by arranging the words to give the most plausible meaningto give the most plausible meaningWhereasWhereas

Chomsky insisted on one structurally possible Chomsky insisted on one structurally possible interpretation of the utterances and that any other interpretation of the utterances and that any other interpretation would go against universal constraintsinterpretation would go against universal constraints

ButBut The most plausible conclusion is that children do not have The most plausible conclusion is that children do not have

any firm, fixed beliefs about language as they acquire it; any firm, fixed beliefs about language as they acquire it; they do not seem to know what they look for, or what to they do not seem to know what they look for, or what to avoid- though some of this knowledge clearly develops over avoid- though some of this knowledge clearly develops over the course of timethe course of time

Chomsky’s switch-setting theoryChomsky’s switch-setting theoryUG is partly like a switchboard with its switches in neutral UG is partly like a switchboard with its switches in neutral position; children know in advance about the possible routes position; children know in advance about the possible routes but they have to find out which particular option has been but they have to find out which particular option has been selected by the language they are learningselected by the language they are learningOnce they discover this, they flick each switch and the Once they discover this, they flick each switch and the system functionssystem functionsChomsky focuses on children’s omissions for evidenceChomsky focuses on children’s omissions for evidenceUse of incomplete utterancesUse of incomplete utterancesThe brief type of utterance often alternates with longer onesThe brief type of utterance often alternates with longer onesLeaving out the subject pronouns (I, he etc.) and auxiliary Leaving out the subject pronouns (I, he etc.) and auxiliary verbs (am, is etc.)verbs (am, is etc.)Because: they have temporarily set a switch wrongBecause: they have temporarily set a switch wrong

they have wrongly assume that English is a pro-they have wrongly assume that English is a pro-drop language drop language Gradually children reach a point in maturation when they Gradually children reach a point in maturation when they notice the presence of such itemsnotice the presence of such items

Problems raise by Chomskyean proposal:Problems raise by Chomskyean proposal:

Children leave out numerous other things other than pronouns and auxiliaries- a Children leave out numerous other things other than pronouns and auxiliaries- a good theory would link all the omissions togethergood theory would link all the omissions together

Setting or re-setting a switch should have ‘proliferating consequences’ Setting or re-setting a switch should have ‘proliferating consequences’ according to Chomsky such as in the case of re-switching of the pronouns according to Chomsky such as in the case of re-switching of the pronouns and auxiliaries- but, in fact, the auxiliaries creep in one by one over several and auxiliaries- but, in fact, the auxiliaries creep in one by one over several monthsmonths

Moreover, there are several possible explanations for children’s early omissions: Moreover, there are several possible explanations for children’s early omissions: leaving out unstressed items, at early stage they cope with only full ‘lexical’ leaving out unstressed items, at early stage they cope with only full ‘lexical’ items not with little grammatical itemsitems not with little grammatical items

Chomsky’s Head position-SwitchChomsky’s Head position-SwitchChildren might know in advance that language structures have a head (key Children might know in advance that language structures have a head (key

word), and that languages tend to put the modifiers (words relating to the word), and that languages tend to put the modifiers (words relating to the head) constantly either before or after it.head) constantly either before or after it.

ButButChildren are consistent in their treatment of heads and modifiers may be Children are consistent in their treatment of heads and modifiers may be because they are sensitive to the order of the words they hear so there is no because they are sensitive to the order of the words they hear so there is no need to assume that a child has a ‘set parameter’need to assume that a child has a ‘set parameter’

Furthermore, if a switch had been set, we would expect Furthermore, if a switch had been set, we would expect children to iron out various inconsistencies. They should children to iron out various inconsistencies. They should say:say:

Ex: ‘Ago two weeks’ instead of ‘Two weeks age’Ex: ‘Ago two weeks’ instead of ‘Two weeks age’

Where the modifier occurs (exceptionally) after the words it Where the modifier occurs (exceptionally) after the words it modifies. modifies.

But children show no real signs of behaving like thisBut children show no real signs of behaving like this

Biggest weakness of switch-setting theory:Biggest weakness of switch-setting theory:

No one can agree how many switches there are or how No one can agree how many switches there are or how exactly they are set for language acquisition is just too exactly they are set for language acquisition is just too messy a process to be explained by the flick of a switchmessy a process to be explained by the flick of a switch

Conclusions about Content ApproachConclusions about Content Approach

Does not seem to be borne out by evidenceDoes not seem to be borne out by evidence

Children do not appear to have firm advance Children do not appear to have firm advance expectations about languageexpectations about language

Children do not necessarily steer clear of sentences Children do not necessarily steer clear of sentences which are prohibited by language universalswhich are prohibited by language universals

Children do not acquire chunks of language by flicking a Children do not acquire chunks of language by flicking a switchswitch

Chomskyean ‘universals’ may still exist but triggered by Chomskyean ‘universals’ may still exist but triggered by simple data, requiring very little effort on child’s part and simple data, requiring very little effort on child’s part and develop graduallydevelop gradually

Process approach is better than Content?Process approach is better than Content?

Offers various non-linguistic factors critical for guiding the child Offers various non-linguistic factors critical for guiding the child forward through the thickets of languageforward through the thickets of languageThe most important are:The most important are: Children’s needsChildren’s needs; at two-word stage children all over the world ; at two-word stage children all over the world seem to talk about similar things, concerned primarily with the seem to talk about similar things, concerned primarily with the external world- both with finding out about it and with getting what external world- both with finding out about it and with getting what they wantthey want

General mental developmentGeneral mental development Parental speechParental speech

ButBut these factors address only ‘what propels children onwards’ and these factors address only ‘what propels children onwards’ and not ‘why there are certain broad outline similarities in the way not ‘why there are certain broad outline similarities in the way children acquire language’children acquire language’Undoubtedly, children talk about everyday needs but it cannot Undoubtedly, children talk about everyday needs but it cannot account for similarities in the development of language structureaccount for similarities in the development of language structureNo explanation why we find parallel structural developments in No explanation why we find parallel structural developments in different childrendifferent childrenNo justification why children proceed to further stages of language No justification why children proceed to further stages of language development when their own primitive structures have the desired development when their own primitive structures have the desired effecteffect

Secondly, if a child uses language creatively and have a firm Secondly, if a child uses language creatively and have a firm grip of linguistic structure but dislikes interacting with others grip of linguistic structure but dislikes interacting with others so much that never speaks to his parents directly, he provides so much that never speaks to his parents directly, he provides evidence against the view that children are social beings who evidence against the view that children are social beings who cater for their needs through communicationcater for their needs through communicationCognitive development: commonly held notion that language Cognitive development: commonly held notion that language acquisition is both dependent on it and caused by itacquisition is both dependent on it and caused by itThe development of comparative constructions occurs at a The development of comparative constructions occurs at a time when a child start recognizing the thingstime when a child start recognizing the thingsBut, the simultaneous development of different abilities does But, the simultaneous development of different abilities does not prove that one is dependent on the other for in a normal not prove that one is dependent on the other for in a normal child many aspects of growth take place at around the same child many aspects of growth take place at around the same timetimeIn many children general cognitive development is unrelated In many children general cognitive development is unrelated to their grasp of language structureto their grasp of language structureMan studies suggest that cognitive development can not Man studies suggest that cognitive development can not provide the definite key to acquisition of language structure- provide the definite key to acquisition of language structure- even though it is clearly important for meaningful even though it is clearly important for meaningful communicationcommunication

I got itI got itMy disabilityMy disabilityNot never to walk from itNot never to walk from itIt shares my space, breathes the same airIt shares my space, breathes the same airI can not have the day offI can not have the day off

I lost the MeI lost the MeI got under everythingI got under everythingThat was not poemsThat was not poems ( by Kate)( by Kate)

Language can not only be spared, but even enriched, Language can not only be spared, but even enriched, when other cognitive abilities are impairedwhen other cognitive abilities are impaired

Statistically there is a link between items produced frequently by Statistically there is a link between items produced frequently by parents, and those acquired early by the childparents, and those acquired early by the childFine-tuning hypothesis (Cross 1977): parents gradually increase the Fine-tuning hypothesis (Cross 1977): parents gradually increase the complexity of their speech as the child becomes ready for each new complexity of their speech as the child becomes ready for each new stagestageParents subconsciously attune their output to their child’s needsParents subconsciously attune their output to their child’s needsOther than children’s innate ability, mothers posses an inner language Other than children’s innate ability, mothers posses an inner language teaching deviceteaching deviceButButNo doubt, parents attune to their child’s interests but not language No doubt, parents attune to their child’s interests but not language structurestructureNo step by step programmingNo step by step programmingMotherese is not a syntax-teaching language children are selective due Motherese is not a syntax-teaching language children are selective due to their inbuilt filterto their inbuilt filterParental speech is more coherentParental speech is more coherent““language can not really be taught. One can only offer the thread along language can not really be taught. One can only offer the thread along which language develops on its own (Humboldt, cited in Slobin 1975)which language develops on its own (Humboldt, cited in Slobin 1975)

A linguistic process?A linguistic process?

Bootstrapping approach: like computer giving some Bootstrapping approach: like computer giving some preliminary commands which then allow to cope with more preliminary commands which then allow to cope with more detailed programmesdetailed programmesLinguistic bootstrapping might work as followsLinguistic bootstrapping might work as follows

children learn words which correlate well with actors, actions children learn words which correlate well with actors, actions and objects building these up in various semantic and objects building these up in various semantic relationshipsrelationships

Ex: Kitty Drink Ex: Kitty Drink Drink MilkDrink MilkThen they switch over to syntaxThen they switch over to syntaxThey start discovering that there is not necessarily a direct They start discovering that there is not necessarily a direct

correlation between types of word and the worldcorrelation between types of word and the worldSome have a naming-insight which triggers a surge forward in Some have a naming-insight which triggers a surge forward in

vocabulary and some may acquire a syntactic-insight which vocabulary and some may acquire a syntactic-insight which triggers an innate processing devicetriggers an innate processing device

ButBut Language does not correlate sufficiently with the Language does not correlate sufficiently with the

world around so children can not persist in using world around so children can not persist in using meaning to guide themmeaning to guide them

By classifying verbs as actions children can make By classifying verbs as actions children can make strange over-generalizationsstrange over-generalizations

Ex: She is noisingEx: She is noising She is busyingShe is busyingChildren can fail to recognize words such as love, Children can fail to recognize words such as love,

hate, got as verbs for they do not involve an action, hate, got as verbs for they do not involve an action, but they do not seem to have such problembut they do not seem to have such problem

Properties of LanguageProperties of Language

Language, the most flexible and versatile system of Language, the most flexible and versatile system of communication, human or non-humancommunication, human or non-human

Natural languages are codes and may be compared with Natural languages are codes and may be compared with other codes in all sort of waysother codes in all sort of ways

The problem to decide what properties of the codes or The problem to decide what properties of the codes or communication systems in which they operate is significantcommunication systems in which they operate is significant

Properties are a way to compare languages and analyze Properties are a way to compare languages and analyze what properties are either insignificant or of less importancewhat properties are either insignificant or of less importance

It is important to compares codes in terms of the degree to It is important to compares codes in terms of the degree to which a certain property is present than in terms simply of which a certain property is present than in terms simply of whether the property is present or notwhether the property is present or not

Looking BackwardLooking Backward

Noam Chomsky's linguistic research in the late 1950s Noam Chomsky's linguistic research in the late 1950s and 1960s was one of the first to use the work in formal and 1960s was one of the first to use the work in formal theories of computation to illuminate some of the theories of computation to illuminate some of the properties of the human mind properties of the human mind

The emphasis was on the learning of 'verbal materials' - The emphasis was on the learning of 'verbal materials' - nonsense syllables, randomly constructed lists of words, nonsense syllables, randomly constructed lists of words, and the likeand the like

From the behaviorist point of view, to the extent that a From the behaviorist point of view, to the extent that a theory might be required; the ideal theory was one that theory might be required; the ideal theory was one that predicted 'observed behavior‘predicted 'observed behavior‘Chomsky argued that the number of sentences in any Chomsky argued that the number of sentences in any natural language is, in principle, infinite natural language is, in principle, infinite In 1956 article (Chomsky, N. Three models for the In 1956 article (Chomsky, N. Three models for the description of language. description of language. IREIRE Transactions on Information Transactions on Information TheoryTheory, 1956, , 1956, IT-2IT-2(3), 113-124.) defined a new game (3), 113-124.) defined a new game

In this game, a theory is not asked to predict specific In this game, a theory is not asked to predict specific behaviors in a specific context. Rather the theory is behaviors in a specific context. Rather the theory is asked to 'generate all syntactically correct strings of asked to 'generate all syntactically correct strings of words (and only) the syntactically correct strings of words (and only) the syntactically correct strings of words of some languagewords of some language

' That is, the theory should capture the essential ' That is, the theory should capture the essential properties of all language behavior. properties of all language behavior.

This eventually led psychologists to shift there This eventually led psychologists to shift there attention from the memorization of linguistically related attention from the memorization of linguistically related materials to questions about the kind of capacities that materials to questions about the kind of capacities that the human mind must possess in order to use the human mind must possess in order to use languagelanguage

The properties of natural language became more The properties of natural language became more important than some specific linguistic utterance important than some specific linguistic utterance

There are four significant properties that have There are four significant properties that have frequently been singled out for mention:frequently been singled out for mention:

ArbitrarinessArbitrariness

DualityDuality

DiscretenessDiscreteness

ProductivityProductivity

However, in a broader sense, language However, in a broader sense, language universals, grammar, cultural transmission, and universals, grammar, cultural transmission, and displacement also stand for the common displacement also stand for the common properties of languageproperties of language

ArbitrarinessArbitrarinessAnother property of language is that the symbols used are Another property of language is that the symbols used are arbitraryarbitrary. Any . Any concept or grammatical rule can be mapped onto a symbolconcept or grammatical rule can be mapped onto a symbol

Directly related to the link between form and meaning, the signal and the Directly related to the link between form and meaning, the signal and the messagemessage

By arbitrariness Saussure (200) means that there is no internal connexion between the signifier and the signified

It implies simply that the signifier is unmotivated: that is to say arbitrary in relation to its signified, with which it has no natural connexion in reality

For Ex Compare the animal pictured to either the word "cat” or to its pronunciation kæt

There are sporadic instances in all languages of what is traditionally referred There are sporadic instances in all languages of what is traditionally referred to as onomatopoeia- the non arbitrary connection between the meaning and to as onomatopoeia- the non arbitrary connection between the meaning and the formthe form

Most languages make use of sound, but the combinations of sounds used do not Most languages make use of sound, but the combinations of sounds used do not have any have any inherentinherent meaning - they are merely an agreed-upon convention to meaning - they are merely an agreed-upon convention to represent a certain thing by users of that language. represent a certain thing by users of that language.

For instanceFor instancethere is nothing about the Spanish word there is nothing about the Spanish word nadanada itself that forces Spanish speakers to itself that forces Spanish speakers to use it to mean "nothing". Another set of sounds - for example, English use it to mean "nothing". Another set of sounds - for example, English nothingnothing - could - could equally be used to represent the same concept. Nevertheless, all Spanish speakers equally be used to represent the same concept. Nevertheless, all Spanish speakers have memorized that meaning for that sound pattern. But for Croatian, have memorized that meaning for that sound pattern. But for Croatian, Serbian/Kosovan or Bosnian speakers, Serbian/Kosovan or Bosnian speakers, nadanada means "hope“ means "hope“

For Saussure, the traditional use of the word symbol to designate the linguistic sign is awkward, for it is characteristic of symbols that they are never entirely arbitrary. They show at least a vestige of natural connection between the signifier and its signified. For instance, the scale could hardly be replaced by a chariot.

Most languages make use of sound, but the combinations of sounds used do not Most languages make use of sound, but the combinations of sounds used do not have any have any inherentinherent meaning - they are merely an agreed-upon convention to meaning - they are merely an agreed-upon convention to represent a certain thing by users of that language. represent a certain thing by users of that language.

For instanceFor instancethere is nothing about the there is nothing about the SpanishSpanish word word nadanada itself that forces Spanish speakers to itself that forces Spanish speakers to use it to mean "nothing". Another set of sounds - for example, English use it to mean "nothing". Another set of sounds - for example, English nothingnothing - could - could equally be used to represent the same concept. Nevertheless, all Spanish speakers equally be used to represent the same concept. Nevertheless, all Spanish speakers have memorized that meaning for that sound pattern. But for Croatian, have memorized that meaning for that sound pattern. But for Croatian, Serbian/Kosovan or Bosnian speakers, Serbian/Kosovan or Bosnian speakers, nadanada means "hope“ means "hope“

though in though in principleprinciple the symbols are arbitrary, this does not mean that a the symbols are arbitrary, this does not mean that a language cannot have symbols that are iconic of what they stand for. language cannot have symbols that are iconic of what they stand for. Words such as "meow" sound similar to what they represent like Words such as "meow" sound similar to what they represent like Onomatopoeic wordsOnomatopoeic wordsbut they do not necessarily have to do so in order to be understood but they do not necessarily have to do so in order to be understood

Many languages use different onomatopoeias as the agreed convention Many languages use different onomatopoeias as the agreed convention to represent the sounds a cat makes. to represent the sounds a cat makes.

But vast majority of words are non-onomatopoeic: the connection But vast majority of words are non-onomatopoeic: the connection between their form and meaning is arbitrary; given the form it is between their form and meaning is arbitrary; given the form it is impossible to predict the meaning, and given the meaning its impossible impossible to predict the meaning, and given the meaning its impossible to predict the formto predict the form

but they do not necessarily have to do so in order to be understood. Many but they do not necessarily have to do so in order to be understood. Many languages use different onomatopoeias as the agreed convention to languages use different onomatopoeias as the agreed convention to represent the sounds a cat makes. Arbitrariness increases the flexibility represent the sounds a cat makes. Arbitrariness increases the flexibility and versatility of communication systemand versatility of communication system

The extension of vocabulary is not constrained by matching form and The extension of vocabulary is not constrained by matching form and meaningmeaning

A considerable burden upon memory in the language-acquisition processA considerable burden upon memory in the language-acquisition process

Arbitrariness makes the signals more difficult to interpret for one who does not know Arbitrariness makes the signals more difficult to interpret for one who does not know the systemthe system

In Chomskyean hypothesis that a good deal of principles including operation of the In Chomskyean hypothesis that a good deal of principles including operation of the structure-dependency in UG is also arbitrarystructure-dependency in UG is also arbitrary

For Chomsky, human beings are genetically endowed with a knowledge of allegedly For Chomsky, human beings are genetically endowed with a knowledge of allegedly arbitrary general principles which determine the general structure of all languagesarbitrary general principles which determine the general structure of all languages

Absolute and Relative ArbitrarinessAbsolute and Relative Arbitrariness

The fundamental principle of the arbitrary nature of the linguistic sign does not prevent us from distinguishing in any language between what is intrinsically arbitrary---that is, unmotivated---and what is only relatively arbitrary. Not all signs are absolutely arbitrary. In some cases, there are factors which allow us to recognize different degrees of arbitrariness, although never to discard the notion entirely. The sign may be motivated to a certain extent.

the whole system of language is based on the irrational principle of the the whole system of language is based on the irrational principle of the arbitrariness of signarbitrariness of sign Diverse languages always include elements of both types; radically Diverse languages always include elements of both types; radically arbitrary and relatively motivatedarbitrary and relatively motivatedBut in proportions that vary greatly and this characteristic help to classify But in proportions that vary greatly and this characteristic help to classify themthemThere is no language in which nothing is motivatedThere is no language in which nothing is motivated

In any case motivation is never absoluteIn any case motivation is never absolute

Compound words and derivational forms are not absolutely arbitrary. They are relatively arbitraryThere is a certain connection between their sounds and meanings. With a particular language, signs may be partially

motivated in a different way. For example (Saussure, 2001: 130), nineteen is not absolutely arbitrary, but relatively arbitrary For Saussure, the process of combining nine and teen, to create new motivated signs is fundamentally similar to the way in which we combine words to form phrases. The meaning of the new phrase is related to the combined meanings of individual words.

all languages have as their basic elements arbitrary signs first, and then they have various processes for combining these signs. In spite of the various processes of combining new signs, the essential nature of language and its elementary constituents are never altered

Arbitrariness is absolute, and motivation is relative

There are two reasons for the claim:One is that the elements of a motivated sign themselves are arbitraryThe other reason is that the value of the term as a whole is never equal to the sum of the values of its parts

For Saussure (ibid), “relative motivation implies: (i) the analysis of the term in question, and hence a syntagmatic relation (ii) appeal to one or more other terms, and hence an associative relation”,

Languages always exhibit features of both kinds---intrinsically arbitrary and relatively motivated--- but in varying proportions.

Not only are the elements of a motivated sign themselves unmotivated, Not only are the elements of a motivated sign themselves unmotivated, but the value of the whole term is never equal to the sum of the value of but the value of the whole term is never equal to the sum of the value of partsparts

Pain+ful is not equal to pain fulPain+ful is not equal to pain fulThe unit is a product, a combination of two interdependent elements that The unit is a product, a combination of two interdependent elements that are simply lumped togetherare simply lumped togetherThey acquire value only through their reciprocal action in a higher unit They acquire value only through their reciprocal action in a higher unit pain fulpain fulThe whole has value only through its parts, and the parts have value by The whole has value only through its parts, and the parts have value by virtue of their place in the wholevirtue of their place in the wholeThat is why syntagmatic relation of the part to the whole is just as That is why syntagmatic relation of the part to the whole is just as important as the relation of the parts to each otherimportant as the relation of the parts to each otherRelative motivation implies:Relative motivation implies:

analysis of a given term, hence a syntagmatic relationanalysis of a given term, hence a syntagmatic relation the summoning of one or more other terms; an associative relationthe summoning of one or more other terms; an associative relation

Absolute arbitrariness and relative arbitrariness are an important characteristic of all languages

According to which, two types of language can be classified in the world (ibid: 131-132). One is lexico-logical languages, in which, absence of motivation reaches a maximum. Chinese is claimed by him to be the typical lexico-logical language

The other is grammatical languages, in which, absence of motivation falls into a minimum

Proto-Indo-European and Sanskrit are prototypical examples for him.

DualityDualityThe property of having two levels of structureThe property of having two levels of structureDistinct sounds – consonant and vowel Distinct sounds – consonant and vowel

Organized in multiple ways to produce infinite meaning Organized in multiple ways to produce infinite meaning combinations combinations Never one sound = one meaning throughout a Never one sound = one meaning throughout a languagelanguage The units of the primary level are composed of elements of The units of the primary level are composed of elements of the secondary level and each of the two levels has its own the secondary level and each of the two levels has its own principles of organizationprinciples of organizationThe smaller, lower level elements are meaningless whereas The smaller, lower level elements are meaningless whereas larger higher-level units have a distinct identifiable meaninglarger higher-level units have a distinct identifiable meaningAll communication systems have such primary units but All communication systems have such primary units but these units are not necessarily made up of elementsthese units are not necessarily made up of elementsAdvantage:Advantage:

a large number of different units can be formed out of a a large number of different units can be formed out of a small number of elementssmall number of elements

DiscretenessDiscreteness

is opposed to continuity or continuous variationis opposed to continuity or continuous variationProperty of secondary elementsProperty of secondary elementsSounds used to produce Sounds used to produce languagelanguage are distinct from one are distinct from one another (in our minds) another (in our minds) Contrast voiced bilabial Contrast voiced bilabial bb with voiceless bilabial with voiceless bilabial pp Not logically dependent upon arbitrariness, it interacts Not logically dependent upon arbitrariness, it interacts with it to increase the flexibility and efficiency of the with it to increase the flexibility and efficiency of the systemsystemReduces the possibility of misunderstanding in poor Reduces the possibility of misunderstanding in poor conditions of signal-transmissionconditions of signal-transmissionIn animal communication systems non-discreteness is In animal communication systems non-discreteness is associated with non-arbitrarinessassociated with non-arbitrariness

ProductivityProductivity

Makes possible the construction and interpretation of Makes possible the construction and interpretation of new signals and allows speakers to use linguistic signs new signals and allows speakers to use linguistic signs in new combinations to generate wholly new thoughts.in new combinations to generate wholly new thoughts. Allows to say that which has never been said, as in “I Allows to say that which has never been said, as in “I want to marry you even though you’re a giraffe,” and be want to marry you even though you’re a giraffe,” and be understood. understood. All language systems enable their users to construct and All language systems enable their users to construct and understand indefinitely many utterances that they have understand indefinitely many utterances that they have never heard or read beforenever heard or read beforeLanguage is not learned solely by imitation and Language is not learned solely by imitation and memorizationmemorizationIt manifests through grammatical structuresIt manifests through grammatical structuresInterconnected with other properties in various waysInterconnected with other properties in various ways

Language UniversalsLanguage Universals

A A linguistic universallinguistic universal is a statement that is true for all is a statement that is true for all natural languagesnatural languages For example, For example, All languages have All languages have nounsnouns and and verbsverbs,, or or All All spoken languages have spoken languages have consonantsconsonants and and vowelsvowels Research in this area of Research in this area of linguisticslinguistics is closely tied to is closely tied to linguistic typologylinguistic typology, and intends to reveal information about , and intends to reveal information about how the how the human brainhuman brain processes processes languagelanguage The field was largely pioneered by the linguist The field was largely pioneered by the linguist Joseph GreenbergJoseph Greenberg, who from a set of some thirty languages , who from a set of some thirty languages derived a set of basic universals, mostly dealing with derived a set of basic universals, mostly dealing with syntaxsyntaxLinguistic universals in syntax are sometimes held up as Linguistic universals in syntax are sometimes held up as evidence for evidence for universal grammaruniversal grammar though though epistemologicalepistemological arguments are more commonarguments are more common linguistic universals tend to be properties of language which linguistic universals tend to be properties of language which aid communication aid communication

Language UniversalsLanguage Universals

absolute implicationalabsolute implicational

Absolute universals apply to every known language and are Absolute universals apply to every known language and are quite few in number; an example would be quite few in number; an example would be All languages All languages have have pronounspronouns

An implicational universal applies to languages which have An implicational universal applies to languages which have a particular feature that is always accompanied by another a particular feature that is always accompanied by another feature, such as feature, such as If a language has If a language has trial grammatical numbertrial grammatical number, , it also has it also has dual grammatical numberdual grammatical number,, while non-implicational while non-implicational universals just state the existence (or non-existence) of one universals just state the existence (or non-existence) of one particular featureparticular feature

Also in contrast to absolute universals are Also in contrast to absolute universals are tendenciestendencies, statements , statements that may not be true for all languages, but nevertheless are far too that may not be true for all languages, but nevertheless are far too common to be the result of chancecommon to be the result of chance They also have implicational and non-implicational forms They also have implicational and non-implicational forms EX: The vast majority of languages have EX: The vast majority of languages have nasal consonantsnasal consonants

However, most tendencies, like their universal counterparts, are However, most tendencies, like their universal counterparts, are implicational implicational

For example, For example, With overwhelmingly greater than chance frequency, With overwhelmingly greater than chance frequency, languages with normal languages with normal SOVSOV order are order are postpositionalpostpositional Strictly speaking, a tendency is not a kind of universal, but Strictly speaking, a tendency is not a kind of universal, but exceptions to most statements called universals can be foundexceptions to most statements called universals can be found

For example, For example, LatinLatin is an SOV language with is an SOV language with prepositionsprepositions. Often it . Often it turns out that these exceptional languages are undergoing a shift turns out that these exceptional languages are undergoing a shift from one type of language to another. In the case of Latin, its from one type of language to another. In the case of Latin, its descendant descendant Romance languagesRomance languages switched to switched to SVOSVO, which is a much , which is a much more common order among prepositional languages more common order among prepositional languages

Language UniversalsLanguage Universals

Unidirectional bidirectional

• In a bidirectional universal two features each imply the existence of each other

• For example, languages with postpositions usually have SOV order, and likewise SOV languages usually have postpositions

• The implication works both ways, and thus the universal is bidirectional

• In a unidirectional universal the implication only works one wayIn a unidirectional universal the implication only works one way• Languages which place Languages which place relative clausesrelative clauses before the noun they modify before the noun they modify

again usually have SOV order, so prenominal relative clauses imply again usually have SOV order, so prenominal relative clauses imply SOVSOV

• On the other hand, worldwide SOV languages show little preference for On the other hand, worldwide SOV languages show little preference for prenominal relative clauses, and thus SOV implies little about the order prenominal relative clauses, and thus SOV implies little about the order of relative clausesof relative clauses

• As the implication only works one way, the proposed universal is a As the implication only works one way, the proposed universal is a unidirectional one unidirectional one

GrammarGrammar

All languages must define the structural relationships All languages must define the structural relationships between these symbols in a system of between these symbols in a system of grammargrammar

Rules of grammar are what distinguish language from Rules of grammar are what distinguish language from other forms of communicationother forms of communication

They allow a finite set of symbols to be manipulated to They allow a finite set of symbols to be manipulated to create a potentially infinite number of grammatical create a potentially infinite number of grammatical utterancesutterances

Cultural transmissionCultural transmission

LanguageLanguage is learned (in a certain age is learned (in a certain age window) because we have an innate window) because we have an innate predisposition (not an instinct) to learn itpredisposition (not an instinct) to learn it

Minor traits of Human Language Minor traits of Human Language 

Uses voice-auditory channel (for most speakers) Uses voice-auditory channel (for most speakers)

Reciprocity – speakers can both produce and Reciprocity – speakers can both produce and receive receive languagelanguage

Specialization – Specialization – languagelanguage symbols not used for symbols not used for much else than much else than languagelanguage

Rapid fade – must be nearby to hear Rapid fade – must be nearby to hear

Non-directionality – cannot easily direct speech Non-directionality – cannot easily direct speech to one listener only to one listener only