Brief Understanding of “Wolf Child” Story and Argument for “Poverty—of –Stimulus”

張靈芝

【Abstract】The basic function of Argument for “Poverty-of-Stimulus” （APS） is to explain how the children successfully acquire the native language in the situation of the poverty of stimulus. However， if a human being is brought up in isolation， he cannot acquire any language. “Wolf child” is such an example. The paper mainly talks about the authors understanding of “wolf child” story and the argument for “Poverty-of-Stimulus” from the perspective of language acquisition.

【Key words】language acquisition； Argument for “Poverty-of-Stimulus”； “wolf child”

1. Introduction

In the early twentieth-century， the strong views of Behaviorism and Empiricism stated that the childrens language acquisition was a result of the repeated study and needed stimuli. If the stimulus occurred sufficiently frequently， the response became practiced and therefore automatic （Rod Ellis， 1999）. In contrast to Behaviorist Learning Theory， Innate Theory （1960s， Chomsky） states that the normal children must be born with the ability to acquire a language. These innate language features lie in one part of human brain called language acquisition device （LAD）. According to Chomsky， Argument for “Poverty-of-Stimulus” is the basis of the Innate Theory. Children can gradually acquire a language under the circumstance of “Poverty-of-Stimulus” and the limited language experience.

2. “Wolf child” story

In 1920， Singh， an American missionary， found two weird children in Indian forest. They looked like wolves and had the habits of wolves. The younger kid died soon after she was rescued. The elder girl was about eight years old， named Kamala by Singh. Although they were brought to the human world， its still extremely hard for them to learn and master the new habits and really acquire the human language after several years of training. “Wolf child” story gives us some enlightenment as follows：

2.1 In Behaviorist Learning Theory， imitation and positive reinforcement can aid Children to acquire a language. However， imitation alone cannot possibly account for all language acquisition. Besides， positive reinforcement doesn't seem to speed up the language acquisition process. As for the case mentioned above， “wolf child” was trained several years by imitating the adults around her and repeating the sounds she heard， but she still didnt successfully acquire the language that was taught to her. And the previous habits of “wolf child” prevented her learning of a new language and human habits.

2.2 Less exposure to language might prevent or slow the process of language acquisition. If a child is exposed to a great normal language environment， he or she may acquire the language quickly and spontaneously. Nevertheless， if a child is brought up in an isolated and abnormal environment with little exposure to language， he or she absolutely cannot acquire any language. In the case， “wolf child” learnt to speak some simple words and sentences after nine years of training instead of reaching a normal language level.

2.3 The capacity for language in human beings （Chomsky called it LAD） has a genetic basis. It seems clear that the basic capacity to learn language is innate， while the particular form or meaning connections of individual languages are acquired through prolonged exposure to a specific speech community. As for “wolf child”， her LAD may be destroyed or influenced by the long exposure to the wolf “community”. Consequently its extremely difficult and tough for “wolf child” to acquire a real language.

2.4 Language acquisition is affected by the critical period. In Innate Theory， LAD is a human-specific faculty which functions during the whole process of language acquisition for a normal child from his or her birth to about 12 years old. In 1959， Wilder Penfield and Lamar Roberts （neurologists） pointed out that the best period of acquiring the native language is from the birth to ten years old. Because the functions of human brain during this period are easily “shaped”. Later in 1960s， the view was developed with the study of Eric Lenneberg. He thought the critical period was before 12 years old. If not receiving enough language input in the critical period， one cannot have the competence to completely master a language. In the case of “wolf child”， Kamala was about eight years old when she was saved and back to human society. She was at the end of the critical period， and lateralization of her brain was formed. As a result， its hard for her to fluently and easily acquire the native language， especially the grammar rules and deep structures. According to critical period hypothesis， language acquisition not only depends on the training and learning， but also on the competence of mental. If one misses the critical period of the development of brain capacity， he or she will have no ability to acquire the complete and complex language system and cannot speak fluently like normal people. Although the critical period hypothesis is controversial， it also plays a key role in the research of language acquisition. “Wolf child” is such an extreme example， which to some extent proves the significance of the critical period in the process of language acquisition.

3. Argument for “Poverty-of-Stimulus”

Chomsky officially coined the “Poverty-of-Stimulus” theory in 1980. He illustrates that children are not exposed to all structures of language， yet they fully achieve the necessary linguistic knowledge at an early age. Even if they receive less language inputs， they will finally master the language with the lack of language stimuli. Its Chomsky who explicitly put forward Argument for “Poverty-of-Stimulus” （1980）. APS illustrates why children can get the specific and complicated knowledge of linguistics even in the stimuli-poor settings. On the one hand， “Poverty-of-Stimulus” is ubiquitous， which is one of the basic features of all living creatures. In this view， language acquisition is also a natural， spontaneous and unconscious process. Its unnecessary for the children to make more efforts to get trained or educated. On the other hand， “Poverty-of-Stimulus” is truism. Both the human development and language development， determined by the basic genes， are the expressions of the biological attributes. APS is suitable for every aspect of linguistics， especially in the language acquisition of children.

4. Conclusion

In authors view， to a certain extent， APS has its positive effects as well as limited or controversial explanation. As for the case of “wolf child”， Kamala， before she was found， lived in the awful language environment with the “poverty of stimulus”. She learnt nothing about human language but to howl like a wolf. When she was brought to the human community， “Poverty-of-Stimulus” existed but didnt make more positive effects. Theres a hypothetical view that its because the LAD of “wolf child” declined and was destroyed that she failed in completely acquiring the native language. Another hypothetical explanation is that “wolf child” missed the critical and sensitive period of language acquisition. Besides， its because “wolf child” was exposed to insufficient language inputs and her language competence was inhibited by the previous habits. No matter which answer is tenable， both “wolf child” story and Argument for “Poverty-of-Stimulus” are worth studying in linguistics.

References：

[1]Chomsky，N.1980a.Rules and representations[M].New York： Columbia University Press.

[2]Chomsky，N.2010.Poverty of stimulus：Unfinished business[R].GLOW-in-Asia，Beijing.

[3]Eric Lenneberg.1967.‘Biological foundations of language.New York：Wiley.

[4]Nagai，K.1997.‘A concept of critical period for language acquisition.Bulletin of the Society for the Study of English Education，32，39-56.

[5]Rod Ellis.1999.‘Understanding Second Language Acquisition.Shanghai：Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

[6]王強.刺激貧乏論詮釋[J].當代外語研究，2012（4）.

[7]楊小璐.關于刺激貧乏論的爭論[J].外語教學與研究（外國語文雙月刊），2004，36（2）.