Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-p5m67 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-22T20:53:30.068Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Why is language unique to humans?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 August 2009

By
Jacques Mehler ,
Marina Nespor  and
Marcela Peña
Edited by
James R. Pomerantz
Jacques Mehler
Affiliation:
Director Language, Cognition and Development Lab International School of Advanced Studies SISSA/ISAS CNS (ORO, rm 13) Via Beirut 4 34014 TriesteItaly
Marina Nespor
Affiliation:
University of Milan Bicocca Psychology Department Edificio U6 Piazza dell' Ateneo Nuovo 1-20126 Milano
Marcela Peña
Affiliation:
Cognitive Neuroscience Sector SISSA/ISAS Via Beirut 4 34014 TriesteItaly
James R. Pomerantz
Affiliation:
Rice University, Houston
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Linguists, psychologists, and neuroscientists have studied language acquisition with the tools and models available to their respective fields. Linguists elaborated some of the most sophisticated theories to account for how this unique human competence arises in the infants' brains. Chomsky (1980) formulated the parameter setting theory (hereafter, PS) to account for how infants, on the basis of partial and noisy language input, acquire grammar. PS assumes that infants are born with “knowledge” of Universal Grammar (UG). This includes both genetically determined universal principles and binary parameters. Universal principles describe the properties common to all natural languages. Binary parameters capture the grammatical properties on which natural languages differ from one another. The linguistic input determines the particular value of a parameter. PS postulates that exposure to the surrounding language determines how the parameters of UG are set.

We acknowledge that PS has many virtues. It addresses the problem of language acquisition without making unjustified but common simplifications, for example, that imitation is the privileged mechanism responsible for the emergence of linguistic competence. The theory, furthermore, is quite appealing because it assumes, realistically, a biological perspective, namely, that the child is equipped with a species-specific mechanism to acquire natural language. Moreover, the PS theory has been formulated with sufficient detail and precision as to make it easy to falsify. In contrast, proposals that assume that language is acquired by means of a general learning device appear more difficult to support.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Topics in Integrative Neuroscience
From Cells to Cognition
 , pp. 206 - 236
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abercrombie, D. (1967). Elements of General Phonetics. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Belin, P., Zatorre, R. J., Lafaille, P., Ahad, P., Pike, B. (2000). Voice-selective areas in human auditory cortex. Nature, 403(20 January), 309–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bertelson, P. (1982). Lateral differences in normal man and lateralization of brain function. International Journal of Psychology, 17, 173–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertoncini, J. (1981). Syllables as units in infant speech perception. Mehler, Journal of Infant Behavior and Development, 4, 247–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertoncini, J., Bijeljac-Babic, R., Jusczyk, P. W., Kennedy, L. J. and Mehler, J. (1988). An investigation of young infants' perceptual representations of speech sounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 21–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bertoncini, J., Morais, J., Bijeljac-Babic, R., McAdams, S., Peretz, I. and Mehler, J. (1989). Dichotic perception and laterality in neonates. Brain and Cognition, 37, 591–605.Google ScholarPubMed
Best, C. T., Hoffman, H. and Glanville, B. B. (1982). Development of infant ear asymmetries for speech and music. Perception and Psychophysics, 31, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bijeljac-Babic, R., Bertoncini, J. and Mehler, J. (1993). How do four-day-old infants categorize multisyllabic utterances?Developmental Psychology, 29, 711–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L. (1970). Language Development: Form and Function in Emerging Grammars. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, P. (2000). How Children Learn the Meanings of Words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bonatti, L. L., Peña, M., Nespor, M. and Mehler, J. (2005). Linguistic constraints on statistical computations: the role of consonants and vowels in continuous speech processing. Psychological Science, 16, 451–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Bryden, M. P. and Allard, F. A. (1981). Do auditory perceptual asymmetries develop?Cortex, 17, 313–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Béhavior. Language, 35, 26–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and Representations. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of Language. New York: Praeger.Google ScholarPubMed
Christophe, A., Guasti, M. T., Nespor, M., Dupoux, E. and Ooyen, B. (1997). Reflections on prosodic boot strapping: its role for lexical and syntactic acquisition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 585–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christophe, A. and Morton, J. (1998). Is Dutch native English? Linguistic analysis by 2-month-olds. Developmental Science, 1(2), 215–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christophe, A., Guasti, M. T., Nespor, M. and Ooyen, B. (2003). Prosodic structure and syntactic acquisition: the case of the head-complement parameter. Developmental Science, 6, 213–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colombo, J. and Bundy, R. S. (1983). Infant response to auditory familiarity and novelty. Infant Behavior and Development, 6, 305–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutler, A. (1994). Segmentation problems, rhythmic solutions. Lingua, 92, 81–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutler, A., Mehler, J., Norris, D. and Segui, J. (1983). A language specific comprehension strategy. Nature, 304, 159–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dauer, R. M. (1983). Stress-timing and syllable-timing reanalyzed. Journal of Phonetics, 11, 51–62. Le coup de grâce porté à la théorie de l'isochronie des intervalles inter-stress, et la mise en évidence d'une base phonétique et phonologique pour la sensation de rythme syllabique ou à stress.Google Scholar
Dehaene-Lambertz, G. and Dehaene, S. (1994). Speed and cerebral correlates of syllable discrimination in infants. Nature, 370, 292–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dronkers, N. F. (1996). A new brain region for coordinating speech articulation. Nature, 384(14 November), 159–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fodor, J. (1975). The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Geschwind, N. (1970). The organization of language and the brain. Science, 170, 940–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hebb, D. O. (1949). Organization of Behavior. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K. and Golinkoff, R. M. (1996). The Origins of Grammar: Evidence From Early Language Comprehension. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jusczyk, P. W. (1997). The Discovery of Spoken Language Recognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jusczyk, P. W., Rosner, B. S., Cutting, J. E., Foard, F. and Smith, L. B. (1977). Categorical perception of non-speech sounds by two-month old infants. Perception and Psychophysics, 21, 50–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J. and Chun, M. M. (1997). The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience, 17(11), 4302–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kluender, K. L., Lotto, A. J., Holt, L. L. and Bloedel, S. L. (1998). Role of experience for language-specific functional mapping of vowel sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104(6), 3568–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P. (1987). The special-mechanisms debate in speech research: categorization tests on animal and infants. In Harnad, S., ed., Categorical Perception: The Groundwork of Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 355–86.Google Scholar
Kuhl, P. K. and Miller, J. D. (1975). Speech perception by the chinchilla: voiced-voiceless distinction in alveolar plosive consonants. Science, 190, 69–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhl, P. K., Williams, K. A., Lacerda, F., Stevens, K. N. and Lindblom, B. (1992). Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. Science, 255, 606–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ladefoged, P. (1975). A Course in Phonetics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological Foundation of Language. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Liberman, A. M. and Mattingly, I. G. (1985). The motor theory of speech revised. Cognition, 21, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liberman, M. and Prince, A. (1977). On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 240–336.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1987). Mechanisms of Language Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Manrique, A. M. B. D. and Signorini, A. (1983). Segmental durations and rhythm in Spanish. Journal of Phonetics, 11, 117–28.Google Scholar
Mazuka, R. (1996). How can a grammatical parameter be set before the first word? In Morgan, J. L. and Demuth, K., eds., Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 313–30.Google Scholar
Mehler, J. (1981). The role of syllables in speech processing: infant & adult data. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B295, 333–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehler, J. and Dupoux, E. (1994). What Infants Know. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mehler, J. and Nespor, M. (2004). Linguistic rhythm and the development of language. In Belletti, A. (ed.) Structures and Beyond. The Carthography of Syntactic Structures. Vol. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 213–22.Google Scholar
Mehler, J., Jusczyk, P., Lambertz, G., Halsted, N., Bertoncini, J. and Amiel-Tison, C. (1988). A precursor of language acquisition in young infants. Cognition, 29, 143–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meisel, J. M., (ed.) (1992). The Acquisition of Verb Placement. Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (1951). Language and Communication. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molfese, D. L. and Molfese, V. J. (1979). Hemisphere and stimulus differences as reflected in the cortical response of newborn infants to speech stimuli. Developmental Psychology, 15, 501–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, C., Cooper, R. P. and Fifer, W. P. (1993). Two-day-olds prefer their native language. Infant Behavior and Development, 16, 495–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, J. L. and Demuth, K. (1996a). Signal to Syntax: an overview. In Morgan, J. L. and Demuth, K., eds., Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
Morgan, J. L. and Demuth, K. (1996b). Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Morgan, J. L., Meier, R. P. and Newport, E. L. (1987). Structural packaging in the input to language learning: contributions of prosodic and morphological marking of phrases to the acquisition of language. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 498–550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, J. L. and Saffran, J. R. (1995). Emerging Integration of sequential and suprasegmental information in preverbal speech segmentation. Child Development, 66, 911–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nazzi, T., Bertoncini, J. and Mehler, J. (1998). Language discrimination by newborns: towards an understanding of the role of rhythm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(3), 756–66.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. (1990). On the rhythm parameter in phonology. In Roca, I. M., ed., Logical Issues in Language Acquisition. Dordrecht: Foris, pp. 157–75.Google Scholar
Nespor, M., Guasti, M. T. and Christophe, A. (1996). Selecting word order: the Rhythmic Activation Principle. In Kleinhenz, U., ed., Interfaces in Phonology. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
Nespor, M., Mehler, J., and Peña, M. (2003). On the different role of vowels and consonants in language processing and language acquisition. Lingue e Linguaggio, 221–47.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. and Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic Phonology, Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Newport, E. L. and Aslin, R. N. (2004). Learning at a distance I. Statistical learning of non-adjacent dependencies. Cognitive Psychology, 48, 127–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peña, M., Maki, A., Kovacic, D., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Koizumi, H., Bouquet, F. and Mehler, J. (2003). Sounds and silence: an optical topography study of language recognition at birth. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 10, 11702–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pike, K. L. (1945). The Intonation of American English. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Port, R. F., Dalby, J. and O'Dell, M. (1987). Evidence for mora-timing in Japanese. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 81(5), 1574–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Premack, D. (1971). Language in chimpanzee. Science, 172, 808–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Premack, D. (1986). Gavagai!Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Querleu, D., Renard, X., Versyp, F., Paris-Delrue, L. and Creprin, G. (1988). Fetal hearing. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 29, 191–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramus, F., Hauser, M. D., Miller, C., Morris, D. and Mehler, J. (2000). Language discrimination by human newborns and by cotton-top tamarin monkeys. Science, 288, 349–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramus, F., Nespor, M. and Mehler, J. (1999). Correlates of the linguistic rhythm in the speech signal. Cognition, 73(3), 265–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R. N. and Newport, E. L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274, 1926–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Segalowitz, S. J. and Chapman, J. S. (1980). Cerebral asymmetry for speech in neonates: a behavioral measure. Brain and Language, 9, 281–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidenberg, M. S. and MacDonald, M. C. (1999). A probabilistic constraint approach to language acquisition and processing. Cognitive Science, 23(4), 569–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E. O. (1984). Phonology and Syntax: The Relation Between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stevens, K. (2000). Acoustic Phonetics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2000). Do young children have adult syntactic competence?Cognition, 74, 209–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villringer, A. and Chance, B. (1997). Non-invasive optical spectroscopy and imaging of human brain function. Trends in Neuroscience, 20(10), 435–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wanner, E. and Gleitman, L. R. (1982). Language Acquisition: The State of the Art. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Werker, J. F. and Tees, R. C. (1983). Developmental changes across childwood in the perception of non-native speech sounds. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 37, 278–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werker, J. F. and Tees, R. C. (1984). Cross-language speech perception: evidence for perceptual reorganisation during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 7, 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wexler, K. and Culicover, P. (1980). Formal Principles of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Why is language unique to humans?
    • By Jacques Mehler, Director Language, Cognition and Development Lab International School of Advanced Studies SISSA/ISAS CNS (ORO, rm 13) Via Beirut 4 34014 TriesteItaly, Marina Nespor, University of Milan Bicocca Psychology Department Edificio U6 Piazza dell' Ateneo Nuovo 1-20126 Milano, Marcela Peña, Cognitive Neuroscience Sector SISSA/ISAS Via Beirut 4 34014 TriesteItaly
  • Edited by James R. Pomerantz, Rice University, Houston
  • Book: Topics in Integrative Neuroscience
  • Online publication: 08 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511541681.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Why is language unique to humans?
    • By Jacques Mehler, Director Language, Cognition and Development Lab International School of Advanced Studies SISSA/ISAS CNS (ORO, rm 13) Via Beirut 4 34014 TriesteItaly, Marina Nespor, University of Milan Bicocca Psychology Department Edificio U6 Piazza dell' Ateneo Nuovo 1-20126 Milano, Marcela Peña, Cognitive Neuroscience Sector SISSA/ISAS Via Beirut 4 34014 TriesteItaly
  • Edited by James R. Pomerantz, Rice University, Houston
  • Book: Topics in Integrative Neuroscience
  • Online publication: 08 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511541681.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Why is language unique to humans?
    • By Jacques Mehler, Director Language, Cognition and Development Lab International School of Advanced Studies SISSA/ISAS CNS (ORO, rm 13) Via Beirut 4 34014 TriesteItaly, Marina Nespor, University of Milan Bicocca Psychology Department Edificio U6 Piazza dell' Ateneo Nuovo 1-20126 Milano, Marcela Peña, Cognitive Neuroscience Sector SISSA/ISAS Via Beirut 4 34014 TriesteItaly
  • Edited by James R. Pomerantz, Rice University, Houston
  • Book: Topics in Integrative Neuroscience
  • Online publication: 08 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511541681.012
Available formats
×