Language acquisition and its role in communication

By: Nicolás Delgado

Final essay

Where does language come from? Is it innate? How do we acquire it? Through time these are
some questions that have come across several times and that cause some doubt whenever people
try to speak about communication. For some people it would be easy to define communication,
some random definitions found are: “it is the simple act of transferring information from one place
to another,” or “communication is sending and receiving information between two or more
people.” Would these definitions satisfy our need to learn about language and communication?
For some it might but in terms of writing this essay it would not. Communication involves more
than a definition; it goes beyond of just producing words. As setting a more profound example of
communication, Oviedo (2017) states that “communication is a negotiation of sense and meaning
in order to reach agreement.” For this reason, this essay will guide to understand more about the
use of communication as an instrument to generate meaning and sense.

Language acquisition has been analyzed from different viewpoints as a matter of fact, some
authors as Pinker (1994) and Osser (1970) have both analysed language acquisition in the early
stage of life (from birth to around 12 years, since is here when the language acquisition is
considered to be developed). While Pinker sets language as an instinct, emphasising the fact that
we cannot help it to invariably happen in a community, Osser presents a balanced discussion from
different points in which the termination is that language acquisition is a matter of biological and
psychological growth. To develop better the idea of the authors On the one hand Villamizar L and
Delgado N (2017) narrated earlier before that Pinker (1994), states that the real engine of a verbal
communication is the spoken language that we acquire as children referring that children learn
instinctively through the input of their parents. The author also describes how children can enrich
a grammatical complexity in speech (creole) parting from the exposition to a make-shift
population speaking jargon (pidgin). On the other hand, Osser (1970) offers other point of view
about language acquisition, like the Nativist perspective, which states that language development
is a function of the maturational process, saying that this capacity of learning a language is directly
related to the maturation of unique human anatomical and physiological characteristics
(Lenneberg, 1967). However, both approach to Chomsky’s Universal Grammar theory in which it
is uttered that languages have all a list of elements in common. Moreover Chomsky (1965) in his
ambition to explain language acquisition tells us about an acquisition device which refers to a set
of innate mechanism that enables the child to produce a grammar of the language in his mind,
which permits the child to analyse incoming linguistic data, and to produce small chunks of
utterances. This is what he calls “Universal Grammar”.

After reviewing the path of language acquisition and as Oviedo (2017) mentioned “knowing a
language is learning to signify and generate sense in that language” then it is a matter to analyse
some concepts of language communication. Chomsky introduces some concepts about “linguistic
competence” and “performance”. Chomsky refers to the first one as the knowledge of our native
language enabling us to distinguish between grammatical and ungrammatical sentences and to
understand utterances never produced before. Yet he argues that it is necessary to clarify that
both are different from each other and infers that performance is the actual individualistic use of
that knowledge in concrete situations. Bustamante (2004:6), argues “Para él (Chomsky) en cambio
la gramatica debe ser universal , un conjunto de reglas que explica las estructuras manifiestas de la
lengua en terminus de estructutas subyacentes universals. Chosmky reconoce el uso (actuación),
claro esta, pero entre la gramatica universal y el uso individual esta la competencia, que no
obstante, es individual”. This is important to take into account since other author has more
assumptions about language acquisition. De Saussure (1966) introduces a term called “linguistic
sign” in which unites the concept “signified” and the sound image “signifier.” He also mentions a
conception about language and presents notions of langue, langage and parole. He affirms that
"language (langue) is not to be confused with human speech (langage).” For instance the executive
side of speaking is called "parole." De Saussure proposes that language is not a function of the
speaker rather he states that the speaking act is individual. Up until now both authors present
information about language and in which have similarities as to recognize language as a vehicle for
satisfying ways of communication but also opposite themselves as to affirm that for De Saussure
language is social and speech act is individual; Chomsky on the other hand tells that grammar is
social and competence is individual. Nonetheless Hymes (1967) also introduces the term of
communicative competence. He argues that the competence is a cognitive structure and involves
the knowledge that every speaker has, for him competence deals with socio cultural factors,
because that competence is build up through social experiences, as to say “we are competent in
our mother tongue but somehow we are competent in different ways since the socio cultural
experiences are different in each speaker.” Furthermore Lyons (1995) complements his idea of
linguistic competence as the knowledge and the cognitive structures a speaker has in his mother
tongue. He agrees that the knowledge that speakers of a language have vary in level, due to the
experiences and context of the speakers. The assumptions of all authors about how a competence
in a language is innate up through different contexts and yet we are able to accomplish
communication within innate processes thus to produce meaning and sense. As I state that las
paragraph deals with what will be described later.

After briefly explain the acquisition and how communicative competence came up as a
epistemological object for some of the most representative authors of this matter, then I will like
to come across on how this competence can be arise even in some “rough” contexts. Labov (1970)
infers about nonstandard English in urban Negro children who “suffer” a “language deprivation”
(these kind of children cannot utter complete sentences and do not convey in logic.) due to the
fact they live in impoverished environment. In his text he wants to explain that deprivation is just a
myth since Negro children also acquire the language same as other children (as he mentions
middle-class children). He argues that the exposure of language that Negro children have is as
beneficious as those who live in better conditions (middle-class) thus is not acceptable to say that
they cannot perform properly. It is a matter of taking into account some observations that the
author points out. He mentions two features in language learning “Verbality” which consist in
giving full sentences and going straight to the point and “Verbosity” referring to using words in
place of thoughts and repeating and paddling the main argument (p.168). With this idea and as I
can be aware when producing input specially to children is better use the “Verbality” feature in
order to produce a better understanding. This idea goes with the hand about what Oviedo (2017)
and Searle (1976) infer about “The Acts of Communication”. Illocution whereas the effect you
want to cause in the other person, Locution which is uttering (producing speech) and Perlocution
the result of the illocution which entails to Felicitous act. These acts in a personal viewpoint
confirm what Labov expresses because it would be wrong to state that these “deprived” children
cannot reach a Felicitous act instead they do and as a matter of fact they have acquired a linguistic
competence.

To conclude, briefly it has been shown how language acquisition and its role in communication
have been stated from many different viewpoints and in which is said that as we grasp from our
social experiences we start to build our linguistic competence in order to perform in that language.
Is the way we perform correct? That is a question that each of us have to ask and analyze
according to the context we are in, for instance Berstein (in Labov’s 1970) mentions about
elaborated and restricted codes; referring that social classes perform differently, nevertheless this
cannot tell us whether our competence is limited or not. As long it concerns my viewpoint and
taking into account what was said during the entire class and lying on the different lectures , I can
affirm that we are all capable of performing properly (taking in consideration our context) and
there is no such thing as incompetence. As a final conception brought up is that language is innate
and as a result of this we will be capable to grasp any way of communication enabled in our
context thus to succeed in our performance and achieve those well expected felicitous acts.

REFERENCES

Bustamante Z, Guillermo. Las competencias Lingüistica,ideología y comunicativa.

Chomsky, Noam. (1965). Aspects of theory of Sintax. Cambirdge: MIT Press.

Chomsky, Noam. (1972). Language and mind. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

De Saussure, Ferdinand (1966). Course in in general linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill Paperbacks.

Hymes, D.H. (1972 [1971]). On Communicative Competence. In: J.B. Pride and J Holmes (eds).
Sociolinguistics. Selected Readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Labov, William (1970). The logic nonstandard English. En Williams, F. (ed). Language and poverty.
Chicago: Markham Publishing Company.

Lyons, Jhon (1995). Linguistics Semantics. Cambridge University Press.

Osser Harry (1970). Biological and social factors in language development. En Williams, F (ed).
Language and poverty. Perspectives on a theme. Chicago: Markham Publishing Company.
Ovideo, Tito (2017). Class of Language as Meaning and Sense Generation. Universidad Icesi.

Pinker, Steven (1994). The language instinct. How the mind creates language. New York: W.
Morrow and Co.

Searl, John (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. In language in Society, 5 (1).

Villamizar, Lina and Delgado Nicolás (2017). Reading report covering Pinker and Osser. Universidad
Icesi.