Rationalism vs. Empiricism re Language Acquisition

[Cristina D. Dye]

Hi Christina,

An interesting discussion is found in the following book:

CHILD LANGUAGE: ACQUISITION AND GROWTH. Barbara Lust. New York: 
Cambridge University Press, 2006.

best regards,

--
Cristina D. Dye, Ph.D.
Department of Neuroscience
Georgetown University
Washington, DC 20057
tel.(202)-687-5661
fax (202)-687-6914





>
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 6:58 AM, Christina Behme 
> <christina.behme at dal.ca <mailto:christina.behme at dal.ca>> wrote:
>
>
>     Good day,
>
>     as part of my dissertation I deal with the question if empiricist
>     or rationalist
>     theories of language acquisition are more plausible. In the
>     literature I
>     consulted I found little agreement about what a 'rationalist' (also
>     ?nativist?) or 'empiricist' is. Further, it was claimed that language
>     acquisition researchers do not always agree on whether a
>     particular statement
>     is ?rationalist? or ?empiricist?. I was wondering if you could be so
>     kind and take a moment of your time to help me finding out whether
>     or not
>     researchers who currently work in the field of language
>     acquisition do indeed
>     disagree on this issue. I have selected a few quotes and ask you
>     if you could
>     for each decide if it's from a rationalist or from an empiricist.
>     This is not a
>     'test', I merely want to find out if there is indeed wide ranging
>     disagreement.
>     Thus, any answer you give is a correct answer (this also includes:
>     'neither' or
>     'I can't decide' or....). Second, could you please also indicate
>     for each quote
>     if you agree or disagree with it 'in principle'. If you disagree,
>     can you
>     please briefly state why you disagree.
>
>     If you want to respond please do not post your answer to the list
>     but send it
>     directly to me: christina.behme at dal.ca
>     <mailto:christina.behme at dal.ca>. You can also contact me at this
>     address
>     if you
>     have any questions.
>
>     Thank you very much for your help
>     Christina Behme.
>
>     Here are the quotes:
>
>     1. "...knowledge which can be acquired without any process of
>     reasoning, such
>     as languages... and in general any subject which rests on
>     experience alone"
>
>     2. "... when we learn a language, we connect the letters or the
>     pronunciation
>     of certain words, which are material things, with their meaning,
>     which are
>     thoughts, so that when we later hear the same words, we conceive
>     the same
>     things, and when we conceive the same things, we remember the same
>     words"
>
>     3. "Among different languages, even where we suspect the least
>     connexion or
>     communication, it is found, that the words, expressive of ideas,
>     the most
>     compounded, do yet nearly correspond to each other: a certain
>     proof that the
>     simple ideas, comprehended in the compound ones were bound
>     together by some
>     universal principle, which had an equal influence on all mankind"
>
>     4. "[t]here are only two things to learn in any language: the
>     meaning of words
>     and grammar"
>
>     5. "...besides the vast number of different figures that do really
>     exist, in
>     the coherent masses of matter, the stock that the mind has in its
>     power, by
>     varying the idea of space, and thereby making still new
>     compositions, by
>     repeating its own ideas, and joining them as it pleases, is perfectly
>     inexhaustible. And so it can multiply figures in infinitum."
>
>     6. "When for example on hearing that the word ?K-I-N-G? signifies
>     supreme
>     power, I commit this to my memory and then subsequently recall the
>     meaning by
>     means of my memory, it must be intellectual memory that makes this
>     possible For
>     there is no relationship between the four letters (K-I-N-G), which
>     would enable
>     me to derive the meaning from the letters. It is intellectual
>     memory that
>     enables me to recall what the letters stand for"
>
>     7. "... knowledge of things is not to be derived from [language].
>     No; they
>     mustbe studied and investigated in themselves"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Tom Roeper
> Dept of Lingiustics
> UMass South College
> Amherst, Mass. 01003 ISA
> 413 256 0390
>
> >

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Info-CHILDES" group.
To post to this group, send email to info-childes at googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to info-childes+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/info-childes?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/info-childes/attachments/20090716/a5c0521a/attachment.htm>