View
3
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
University of Nigeria Research Publications
BABATUNDE, Yusuf Adebayo
Aut
hor
PG/MA/91/12458
Title
Age and Sex Differences in the Acquisition of Yoruba
Fricatives: A Case Study of Ondo State College of Education Staff School Nursery Pupils
Facu
lty
Arts
Dep
artm
ent
Linguistics and Nigerian Languages
Dat
e May, 1995
Sign
atur
e
OF YORUBA FELICATIVES : A CASE
STUDY OF ONCO STATE COLLZE OF EDUCAITIC~N
STAFF SCHOOL NUI;(SERY 1
U l ~ V l B S I T Y GI" NIGEBIA, NSUW(A
DEPARTMENrl' OF LINGUIST1 CS AND
NlGEKLAN UXGUAGES
AGE AXTD SEX DIFF%RrnCES IN THE AC4UISIrPION
OF YORURA FT(ICATIVE3 a A CASE STUDY OF
ONDO STATE COLLEGE OF EDIICATION STAFF
SCHOOL NU1ISl'BY F'UI'JIS
A PROJECT REEOKf
l ' t . ~ ~ t l . ~ i b f l ~ ~ ' w ! - ~ Y;a '\rtf i ~ t 2 > 3 ~ t , = r + d ~ ~ : t t e S ~ ; L I C : ~ - % ~ ; .
in 5'1e ~ J P J q r L r r f r ~ t o f L i l ~ g ~ i ~ t i c s and Nigerian
Languages, Univers i ty of Nigeria, Nmukka, has
r a t i ~ f a c t o r i l y completed the requiramantu f o r courses
and project work f o r the dagrae of Master o f Arts ;
( M . A . ) i n L i n g u i s t i c s .
The work embodied in t h i ~ project report i s
o r l g l n a l and has not been submitted i n part or T u l l
f o r any diploma or degree o f t h i s or any other
Univers i ty .
--------- ---------- P r o f , B. 1 Oluikpe
Chief Supervisor, Dr P .A. Nwachukwu ( ~ e a d of ~ e p a r t m e n t ) .
- iii -
T h l s work 18 dedioatsd -Lo the eaonornioally oppressed
i u Nigeria and bepnd.
1 dl1 like t o expr~m rqr gra3itude t o Almighty God di-:s%
pmt action, msrcies ma ~ u f dmom d o it poadbla for ma to
b e g i n and complete t h i s uozk ~ucraeaafhlly, k ! ~ profound m8tltudc
ctaoperatlon and understanding maw tha work: through. I am
l ike a relation of thdrr.
t o G a r r y aut this s tudy . Ny special t h a n k s go t o Mr. 1.L Ojo,
t h ~ Rwi9tra.r of t h e Collqye.
I would like to rwieter also my sincere approciation f o
Massrs G d y u Faniyi, F e d Fatokun, A H n Aldnbisoye, Olu HaIinde,
J.1, Fasmmi, l u k e Oluwafad, Tun$. Orroeye and Niee Kmi Aboderin
f o r t h e i r invaluable assistance.
Ky gratitk.de also gags to Mesars Tunde Thtiny, Bayode
bjala, h c a a Fatunsin, TQFB D u a m l a and Mm. E.T. Q u m o l a f o r
t h e i r words of muouragement,
To Alhaji (h) 3ayn Salami, I say, I am grateful.
I am equally grateful to Dr. 3.0. Bandah, Mesars
F.O. O~mbayo and E.B. Kctlswole Par assiatiw in t h e &slyaiiY
of the rezult a.
I am particularly $ ~ a t ~ f l . l l to the follow in^ menibam a? my
family f o r providing t h e needed support encour~enent3
Chief J.O. Fatotla euld Mrs. Mojisola Bab~~tunds. To R i y L , K e m i
and T Q ~ B , I am ~ a t e f u l .
CHAPTER
. .
. # .
.I.
.I.
.. . l
I..
... m . 1
m..
m..
. o m . l . a m .
. .. 6. . ... m . .
. . . . . . I..
. l . . . .
...
T h i s s tudy was dtsefgnd t o investigate age and sax
differencea in t h e acquisition of fsicatives in Yoruba as a
f i r a f Language with a view t o promotine knowledge in ch i ld
phonological development. The eauple comprissd sixty 3 - t o - 5 year-alds randomly drawn fmm t h e numery p u p i l s of Ondo %ate
C o l l e g e of Education Staff Schoal, Jksre-Ekiti,
Four pic%uresl c a n t a n i n g four ob j ec ta eaoh, fiia~tl re
Acqulaftion lnatxument (FU), designed by t h e xa~earcher,
validated by arpsrts, a t a ~ ~ e r a c o r d e r and two aaaaet t e tapea
were used, wi th the a sa i s tmce of ' th ree experts, to collect
GmpUe fmm the subjscte .
To haw t h e direction of t h e findings of t h e study
ai.,.raga percentage scoaea were obtained through a method pattamed
after h lay , B u r t and Kraahen'e (1982). Croup Maan Method for xale
t h e cor+ma w a s mbjected t o
(2) Them iu a ei&tlaant differmoe bdwrsn
o h i l b m aged 4 and 5 in the af the
ar t iculat ion of the frioativss in Taruba.
(3) There is a ~SgnlPloant dif ferenus betwesn
ohildrsn wad 3 and 5 in t h e maaterg of the
d i a u l a t ton of' the faur f-slo&tivsa in Yarubri,
(4) There i a no signlfluant differenae betwean
male and female children in t h e aaquid.tion
of the Srioativee in 'loruba,
It was alaa dfscovemd t h a t the childmm mubatituted
diffemnt oonsunant aounda for the onee investigated with * \a following as t h e predaminmt pdtsrna.
':he t;txu htid i m ~ ~ t i c a t i o n s f o r p m m t s , whom
FIGURE PAGE
............................ I Yoruba Consonant Chart 5
Average Percentage Scorea o f Subjects
According t o k e ............................... w Averwe Percentage Scores of Male and
.......... Fernale Subjects ........................ S w e n t Substitution Emam of Children in
t h e Ar t i cu la t ion of /8/. .................m........ Sagnent Substi tut iyn Error3 of Children In the
~ ~ t i c u ~ a t i o n of / / ............................... J Swment S u b s t i t u t l m Errcars of Cbildroa in the
Segment Subst i tut ion &ora of Children in the
~ i c u l a t i o a of /tJ ................... ... ....... A 'Peat of Differerica between Chilctren 4e;d 3
and 4 in t h e Acq~iisltion of f i icat ivea in
A Trsat of Differmue betueen Chi~d ran 3 aah
5 i n t h e Acquieition of fiicativea in Yoruba,. . . , .
A Test a f h f f a r a n u e betwean Male and Female
C h i l d r e n Fn the Acquisition of hdaat ivsa in ............................................ Hornha
c o m r r l ~ n i ~ d icn .
f m y q e bchaviour i a a pecu1iar:ily of makind. Bar-t;er
~ H e r v e s t h a t i t is Itinguar,-el mre obviously t h a n (1564) ob
m y t l : i r ~ y else, tha t d i s t i n g u i a h e p man from t h e pest of the
I 1 He b e l i e v ~ n t h a t even thouph o t h e r wdniids
corn-uxlcate w i i h one rlnolhtlr, OT ut any rate ctimulate one
ano the r t o action, they do t h i s "by m a w s of criea". Cr:1~.3
by animals, sccording t o hirn,are not u r t i c u l a t e nnrl by t k : r
he nmma t h ~ t t h q l ~ c k et;rucl.uru, which enableo us t o
d i s t i r g u i s h v o u e l s from conemiants and d i v f d e n hum.% utt.elb lice
W O T ~ S ~
T h i s v i ~ , is rel.,Farc~d by Cimson (1783) when h e
as: c r t s t h a t ona of t h e c!;iof characteristics of t h e human
be ing is h i s a b i l i t y t o c ~ m n i c n t e t o his fe l lown complicated
messages mnceming every aspec t of h i s activity.
h m g u s ~ e as a mesns of coimnunicatian is used both in
speech clnd writaim ( C h r i s t opherssn, 1981 ). As Barber ( 1 $4)
obaervea, l q : u ~ a is bas ica l ly somethiw which is sgokm,
t h e v , ~ i t t e n lWua.ge is zecondary und derivative. Hurlock
(1378), describiw comunication a an in te rchamp of
t h o u # a and feellnp, contend^ t h a t t h e inte-nchange can be
carried out with arly form of l quage - gasturea, emtional expeserions, epeach or writtsn l an jpage - but it l a mst comanl y and effectively done by ~ p s e c h . Evan though t h s r e
d i f f ersnt f o m s of languwe beh~viour, it i a tho spoken frsra
t h a t is basic t o comlca t i r r n m d t h e most af fec t ive o f t h e
formo. It is for t i i i a rea:lun t h a t in t h i s st~ldy we w i l l focus
on speech, x d h e m speech -will be uaed t o rafer to t h a t forr
of larqza#e i n which ~ J t i c u l a t e words are used t o convey
meaning (Rurlock, 1978).
Studies have been carried out t h ~ - t focusmad on
phonological development. B l e n (1 9821, for example, observe,
tka t phono lodca l universals in adult l w a g e arrd in 1aqgiag.l
acr,uisitfon bava been t h e subject of debate aod investigation
studies, howcver, haa hecn t h e Eng1ish languag~. This
i~vves t iga t ian irr this study.
Although t h e ,qrL%rnent mieht be preferred, as Eblan
(1482) observes, citing Irgranl (19761, t h a t ?.he general
developments? processas used by c h i l d r e n in 'learning their
f i rst languwe seem t o be similar regardlasa of the languwe
beiw Zeamad, t h e p i n t nust be mede that indiv iduals d i f f e r
1 a.Wu ,qea m a ~ l have an lder: t ical i n v a n t o r y of phonemes, t h e
pbonemas may pa t t e rn ~ u i t e differently in the two l q a g e a .
Flglinh and Igho ?or example, have /3 /, s velar nasal. T1.e way the souad f u n c t i o n s 111 Ehglish is d i f f e r e n t f r o m t b ~ w q r
it does in fgbo. Wheretls t h e sound can o n l y occur s g l l a b l e - .ly and word - nedially in mlish, e.g. / (JCing), it can occur in 1310 syllable - i n j t i s ' l l y aa i r l
u / rnemim *drinkp ih addition to occurrirag ward - L
oedia l ly as in / ~ Y V / neminyj. 'bee'. It d a o s not o o c u ~ L
in m r d f i n a l pas t t ion in Tgba.
T h s o r i ~ t s have d i f f e red markedly on phclnc,logicul
development. As will be shown in t h e next chapter , t ho v v r i c u s
~ h r n = . j ,:A h i t h e r t o prol.~!.mded on phono?ocical developa~ent are
incompatible. No stud^, therefore, i n i t i a t e d with a vLr:*< t o
s h e 2 d . i ~ light an l-.ou c h i l d r e n acquire leslflrags is inopt, It
is against t h i s back-pxmd t h a t w e w i l l see th ia s tudy as
n ~ c e s m ~ y .
1.2 Statement of Prublem
It bas bean show^. that f r l c 3 l i v e s have prcved t o be a
very d l r f i c u l t a e t of r;hommes f o r c h i l d r e n to aoquire.
Ingram, Chris tenam, Vsstch a d 'debater (1%,0), cited in
E%lm (19$2), for erampls, have show, t h a t w l i s h - n p e a k i w c h i l d r m fin?. f r i c a t i v e s t o be a d i f f l c i i l t clasa of sounds
t~ acquir+. A s imilar observat ion ~ j r o r ~ p t e d E b l m ( 1 9 & 2 ) t ~ .
i n v e s t i g a t e t h e acqu i s i t ion of f r ica t ives by th ree - year - old children learning 14ericm Spmish . The presmt study is s
response t o this type of abselvatian among the children
In a p i l o t s tudy c a m i d out, t h e remarcher of tl-,-.e
present ctudy discovered that ch i ld ren learning Yoruba as L
first larguwe found fricatives to be a very d i f f i c u l t set
of aounda t o rea l ise . Yoruba has f o u r f r i~a t i ve s :
Rowever, be for6 .re :on, Ldar the p i l o t study and examine i !I@
a r t i c d a t o r j features c.f these fr icat ives it w i l l be
necebz try t o re f lec t b r i e f l y on the consonant phonemes of
Yomba.
Yomba has a t o t s 1 number of eighteen cansonant
phonemes. figure t belou presen ts t b e phonemes, taHng
c o p i z a n c e of place m d manner of ar t i cu la t ion , and t h e
s t a t e of t h e g lo t t i s ,
f i m ~ a I : Yomba Consonant
Us have ddibsrat aSy imored any full dasaription of tha
m n ~ a n m t phonclmea because our fclwe is the Fricatfvea. P.o
s;hawn by the above ohark and as hinted aaxlfer on, Yoru~a km
vbiceleae. The phoneme c ln a c m ayllable - inktial ly ah&
t h e sound be cal led a vra ice le~s g l o t t ~l approximont. Hi.;
at t h e ~ l r s t t d s zt a l l . Be su,qgests t h a t it should be
described 33 a V O ~ G ~ B S S approrimant w i ~ h the placa aE
a r t i a u a a t i o n Peft unsge~i f3ed. He then adviatie t h a t it t3ould
ba removed from t h e c h s r t and listed under o t h e r symbols,
A S t h a q h Catfard acqrew. t h a t what b d r f o g e d says is r i g h t , he
wmt~ t h e ztatuq quo t a b e maintained f o r a reason which lLe ~ . + s
is ~ e r h i t p a mare phonolo,+xtl am1 pi tct ical than s t r i o i l y
~Lonetj c. Kc arEuFt:; l.l.al; there fire so many I w ~ ~ ~ a p s in lP; i c h
0218 DT I~UIL IA~: B O U ~ . ' I ~ Y W B C * ~ O R [ E ) as a spllebic aar~in - as EI t e r n in a eerie3 o f conson,mtc (Cat ford, 199~) . O n w h ~ ' ~Iar
i s / WBS a u t ~ s t i l - u t ed P w , - t h i i t where / f/ uppcarar; sy 1 I ah1 P, - ir: ; t i a l l y there has no d i f f i c u l t y for t h e c h i l d ? ~ r > d 2.6. For example, w h i l e t h e
cbildren t q e d 1.7 end 1.1C ~wmlc! have d i f f i c u l t y i n s( in1 is l ; .' ( - ' 1 , %
t h e ponn,? ir ' hm . i l ? -yq ' , / - f i i m i \ ~ j _ 1 / the c h i l l ;o;r- 2.f8 had no problem. Ia ,":.ct, i t was dincovered tl?:it f o r :.I
tnunda. The c t i l d r e n 2.6 and 4.2 cou1.j r e d i ~ r ill/ a 11.
t iins d l f f i r ; u l t f o l b,: 50 examine tlrfs in t h e s ~ e e c h of
ch i ld ron ~ y e d 1.7 s n d : + 10,
I t is o u r ocu~oarn in t h h rrtudy t o irrvestf&i?
t h e r o l e y laysh hy &.:a I n the ~ o q u f ~ i t i o n of r'rioatives i t i
Yorubn aa a f5rd 7mg.;;t'a h u l . 1 ~ drolrn that a h i l d r e n
dlffared saaording t o *;a i n t h e m e t e r y ol" the Prioativee h
t h s pilaf a t u & ~ .
Tha ahildren wed 1.7 arrd 1.10 wra bbth malo and
feo~ls respeotjvaly. It uan d i f f i c u l t t o show if there u 19
any difforanoe in the ~ ~ q u l d t i u n of tha friuatives in teA,ns
of sex between them 5ncauee o f t n e l r limited utteranoea.
Also becauee of t h o :qa Jiffr=raics batwarn1 t h e ahildrsn @,.XI
2A (male) an3 4 .? (f emdo) ~ : c ooilld not gain an insight lnto
whether or n o t aex consl.ituted a barrier in the s f . qu la i t i ~n
of fr fo~t ivea . Havy,~ar , I t has S a m ahawn t h a t in eaoh W E 8
of l w a f i a s t u d y sox d i f r b r a n c ~ ~ ~ i y p e ~ to exist: ( k ~ a i t p r
1flq). Acoo~diny to h e r , r a a e e r c h ~ ~ sllch ae &@nJ (lo?! ?,
$kBrn~r ( 7 975), and TmtZ :ill (1 475) hdve f~ t r k ld sex diffn*t.r9efl
in d l ff ,gm$ marrrr of I rJ,pw5 21 UC*. '-'ha !kI'kifi~t~ of 'or nnb
Mc;hsbe ( t g q l ) r n d Snow mil H ~ h l e (79771 ocn-tradict
r inam of theee 3 t u r L c . ~ . Q i n ~ a none of' thaee studies foc::.qed
e p & f i o a l l ~ on t h e anq$.sition of ffj~iAtfvft8 f i r a t
l emwe nnd %n ;~ r iS . cu l a r on t h e CWuis i t l on 0:'
.'i n s . c : F - f 7tlidy T h i s study was intended t o i n v e s t i g s t 6 age .mil sex
dif ference3 in t h e acquisition o f rricatives in Yoruba as a
f i m t huywaye. It was hoped t h a t by t h e time t h e r e s ~ a x h
was completed i t would 3~corn.e known i f t h e ~ e ware age and
sex diSferences in t h e ~cquisition of f i i c a t ivm in Yoruha
as L j . It m a almo hnl~ed t h a t based on t h e findiws of tfis study applied linguists would be b e t t e r able to d a s i v
a rood. p r o q r m e of s tudy f a r preschaol cbllidrezl in this
area. It was equally hcped t h a t llangua~e teacbers
would have a better underdandiry: of t h d r pupils'
difFiculties, thereby d s a i g n i q activities t h a t aould
ass is t them.
It was expected t h a t t h e findiws of t h e study would bo
a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o h o u l c .lge w,d cause f u r t h e r research in
p h m o l o ~ c a l cleve;lrspment.
7.5 Purmse o r Study
This s t u d y was designed t o i n v e s t i ~ a t e if t h ~ r e were
+:e and oex differences i.1 t h e acquisition o f f r i c a t i v e s i:,
Yoruba as LJ. I n ~ t h e r ~ o r d s , i t w;rs in tended t o Eincl 01::
if :q,:e -an,? :ex c a r ~ z t i t u t a d barriers in t h e ecquiBitlnn of
2.0 TntraJua-t j on
An attempt v l l l ?w made i n t h i s chapter t o e ~ a m h e
tt .coreticn1 ss well as empirical s t u d l e a related 'to t h a
present study. In part . icular , reinforcemalt theory and
Chomsky'a i n n a t e n ~ s s thoory A l l be a g p r d e s d . I%ur
~ t h e a a ~ ~ are fomulateb t~ p m v l d a anauare t o t h a
researnh q u e a t i a n s afterr a summary o f t h e review,
t h m u ~ h the a c ~ u i e i t i o r ~ o f a 1-e human beinea are & l a t o
communieata w-i +h one m o t b e r with far renter efficiency a d
with more elaborate 1in;;uistia competency than wry o t h e r
npc i e s . Thfs 49 fur ther . reinforced by Hottebob (1975) : ,
h n q u ~ e m x u r s in o n l y one sPeci&, man. (sea also
Chnmaky, .TYT?a, citing llesoartee, on t h e aaaerkian t h ~ t
l a z w ~ ~ c is a spacieb - apsc i f i c human p x s e s s i o n . ) P n l m r r (1974) describes t h o 'art of u a i q t h e apoksn and averyd: c
form of any given languaqe' as that in whioh every man, , . , .mah ,
and child t h r n ~ h c l u t the world is a ~killful adept. It if an
-'I !IT, t c f L l . :j;urfios : * \ * I --A
If we EW t h a t n c1:ild dam not auquira h i e f l x n t
l a q u z e throuyh my cofizciaua eff a r t or ert ernal3;r orqa~i!*. .I
p , q m e , how d a m he bacarne pm92cien-t: in it? Irs will
attempt an answer t o t h i s quaetion in t h i s aacti-wr. Tho
i n i t i a l Fmpetus fo r t h e s t ~ r d y of ffrst - lawywe dvreloww..f 23 a cen t ra l t o p i o in p s y n h o l ~ u i s t i c s wse offered by
i n t e r e s t in t h i s f i e l d u r humm endeavour. We will r e f l ec l
ok,ila on t h i s l a t e r .
I h n k ' n i l e , l c t us examino zomp o t h e r poss ib le ways
of ~ s w i d i r q : :i answer t a our p u a s t i o n . Ii-@ua;fic behavi~ur ccul
h e sesn as b o t h z o c i d ;nnd cogrAtive. Ylatson m d h d ; g r e n
( 1979) opine t h a t t h s ar:7wnentbs f o r soc ia l Sebeviour enphe,isa
t11,:: ~ m i x 1 context ir. which a child develops, vhmeas thoso f o r
cocni t ive kor-nviour TI ,LIZ US t h a t Ian-aye a l so develops o u t
o f t k e need t o order :s.,I t o c m t r o l o n , % senvi z~men t . T J ~ B
t h m r i e n we xi11 examine in this sec t ion w i l l ta! :e cot.njsa.:co
of these v i e w of l i n ~ i a t i c b u h m i o u r . I d us b~;;in :I:#
exmininf= t h e behoviouri:-;t theories of' lmguwe aby~ ia i t i c , , .
,2.1.;.1 Be!>,! ~ o u r i s l . I ' h ~ t ~ ~ ' i e 3
Here w i l l be Ciscussed rainfc~cernent and social
lemmin: ? Leori es. A considerabln ~ r o w r t l o n or the
d l s c u s s i c c s s i l l b e cant red on r e in fo~camen t theory.
- Hrl~ i fo~r :c r ren t ThcoTy 7.1. .L
P s y c h o l o ~ i s t 3 who ba l ieve i n tho reinforcement t h e n ?y
of mx:uq;e acquisition ar,yue f h z t e c h i l d a c q u i r u n lmy1;;;e
t h r o u g h a d u l t rainf orcerxent of proper lin,yuistic fnrn~n. 5'Ain
j m i n t of view i a o f f e red by leanin : ; t h c o r i n t s , ~ o s t not:lLty,
ar Turner and I!slms (1979) ~t it, B.F. Skinner, a paycboLy$mt
bo::n f o r resoarch andea~vo~r in operait conditionrR7_
Because of the considerable impf tmce o f Skinner's ( 195" !
V s ~ b n l Bthavicrur I t w i l l receive o u r prime attention I n :'!c
~ x m i n a f ion of r e i n f o r c ~ n e n t t k ~ o ~ y .
Skfnnar p r e s e n t s in VerLnl Bqbaviom a relnforcme:. :
t ~ l e o r y o f 1xypry ;e ncqu i~ , i t i on . It is t l ~ praaccul1ation b"
%-inner in t h i s book t o r a l s t c his olqc-emt - condi t ton-in~l +hmry of lesrnin~ t o v c r b d h ~ h m 5 w . x . 1::. n't L.ealrt:! 3
fuc t ian . la l malysig of verbzl b c ! w b i 3 i v , :!G 4.3 l o t
~ r e t a n t i o u s nborlt tl-is nr; Ihe title 0:' L l r ~ f i ~ d c t i n p t e r
of t ko book read i ly r e v n d ~ r A P.lhe.iional Analysis of
Verbal Cei,zviour. Verbal Behxviour iu g e m h o r n t L e
A f u n c t i o n a l analysis o f verbal h e h s v i c u r will then
rcvcal t h c con t ra l l in ; : variatJns cnd h o x a verbal reoc;oascr
as t h x t reinforced t h rou$ t h e c:edist ion of of h e r parsons
nosda cert xin reflnamer. t s. IIe c m t ends t ha t t h i s is necssa ry
k h e r explains, even t h o ~ t z h he ~ s y s t h e omisdon u f the
l i ~ t m c r l z b a h n v i d ~ r r c m be ju~t l f ' i cc l beozuas it 'i:; not
nececss r i l y vexha1 in a,;$ apec ia1 senfie', that 1 !!.a I ~ e h n ~ l , ~
of c e ~ k e r a d 1.ister.e~ faken 1,u:;ett.e~ ~:omflon t ~ 1 1 ? 3 t L$-V .
cal.lcd a t o t a l verkal. e i sodo9 . Skinner (1357) ar,Yef; t h r
' t h e speaker can t ~ e s tud ied ~ h i ] e a o s ~ m i l y : n l i . ; ; t z l l i r , end
tb4: l i s t e n e r w h i l e aasunin,y a ::maker'.
c u n t r o l t h r o u z h t h e a1tc:;ntinn o f t h e cmli : ions under di i ..:I
it occurs. The o c c u r r c w e of s ;~ccific instances can a l s o JQ
also ' becaus~ it has l i t t l e effect umn t h e physics1
kt ua axamim t h o ooncept o f reinforcemmt fn oper~i - t
envlmm~nt which bm a r e t m effmt u p n tha o ~ a n i a r n ' .
Re sqya 'euoh behwiour nay be dir;tinguiehed f m m aa t iu f t i a s
Y U C ~ me pzimariZy oonoernsd with the Interns1 monomy of
the organism* m d t h a t i a *by aalling a o t l v i t i e a nhiab
apsmte u p n t h e environment "opermt b&xui~ux". That
any u.t a f much be!~nviour i a d e s m i b d aa %perant behr?vic4mH+
A1thotq.h t h e tern 'oparmt "an be used intembngaably with
'raspme', it enahlea ue t o capture t h e diatinotlon betwem~
m h o t mae of hehmiomr and a kind of behwiaur (9ae
S'dnna'o illustrstian). The tam 'rm,.rona~' is oftan, f ,
Skhmer'rs view, u o ~ d f o r both o f t h e m men thn& 'it
d ~ n e not o m y the aemfirl m a m b eseilyta 'Operantv has
t o do with yrediet ion ant mntml of k t n h of behaviour, 1;~i le
a raspmae, as an inattmom, can be conple teb desuribed as %
form of behaviou~, an a p m t apml f im at l&wt one r8latl.m
t o a varim..le - the sffeat t h e boh~viour haer u p n the mvimnment - and i e therefma not n purelg foslmd wit
1957). We caul2 re@ r e s p n a e 'EL@ an h a t m o o
of sn 0prrzri.t only t hmwh o b J & f ~ e ibnti~ion'kion' rWi -- .
A apeakar is a u i d t o psnaaa 'a verbal rapertoire'
opermt, whetiwr Hvarbsl ~1 othenrise, acquiree strength
a~;d continuas t o bs m d n t a i n d in at-h whsn rsappnsee
w e Praquantlg fa l lowed by t h e wmt aalled wrdnfomacamtHv
He t h s t t h e process of noperant o n n d l t i o w m is
mat mneplm~ua when verbal behaviaur 18 firat aoquirdl.
Tho y@entl, aooordiny t o Urn, sata up s rup&oire of
respbmaa in the uhtld by rsinfaming batanme of
a r e m n s e , h d f a r a reapma t a be ~trmgthsnattby
reinfomentent it mat anpaar rrt 2emt onoe (31dnnert 1957)-
NOS, a31 tha oomplex forme of adult behaviour are h
. -Hnn~r'e opirrion in t t a ohildts ~mmndit ionsd v o o d
rsge~tulra , 3khner nWg t h a t t h e g a r a t need net waft
for t h e emenpnae of t he f i n a l Porn+ This is i l l u ~ t r a t e d
with a demnstmti~n sxp&mcmt which uam a pigem,
The yauw o h i l d is taught t o speak+ In t e a u h l q the
oh i ld t o talk, ' the formal speoifioationl3 upn whlch
relnforcamnt f s oont irqy$t are a t ff ra t gmatly relnred*
If my sespnae is found t o seatm3le whether v w e l y the
stnndard bahsrvicrur of the oawunity i t ie reZnforasa md tr
oloseP appmdmation f a insimted upon when it contin~tse t%
~ppw frwuatlgr Bldnnlrr then maye tha t In ' t h i ~ MarIYISk
vary oomylax verbal forms may b+ raauhrd7, &rsuk3 tha
aontiwenCios of reinforcement h e m1uedP 'aha pmpaH'tial:
of :he verbal response unJm@ a ohaage in the 0 t h ~
direotionl. Skinner refem t o t h l degarrwatiaa of the f o n t .
of dl i ta ry oommands aR an sxample, IlluatratFng with 'a
m r e u i t with n new squar: to be ~ a n l i i ~ b i o n d to f o a l o w his
o omruld~',. Hs mmaa t h a t remami% conaequenusa oont inue
to be signlflrsant &ta r v a r b n l behavi~ur h a barn aquirarl.
"reg have as t h e i r p r h o i p a l funetian t o nustain the respbnce
in ~t ra@t . Ths f?equonoy of a epesker'~ &meion of a
r e ~ y m a l a ~dspnclent upon the 'overall frequaoy of
rain-Pnrament In =L e v e n verbal co-ty'. Tho osseation
of m i n f m c e m a ~ ~ l r : Yhm~;:$ some ohnngr crf almumtanoer
wakens rn G ~ B T ~ rad ' m q effwtLvdy dlsanpsar in
&innt ian ' .
=me? t L . c m e r p l a ! ~ tha t operant re inforoemnt ' i ~
simply n K~F;I of c o n t r o X b a the probability of wourrenoe o r
a o a t a l n clzlss of verbal reaponsea'. Rainfoming m q
instanass of 1 r o s g n m of a given form makee iter oloourrellca
'h ighly n ~ k a > ~ e ' , vhere:,a t h e withdrawal of reinforoemerit
ellminates Tt f r o b t h e verbal, rspertoirar Skimar ~ b a ~ m ~
th!d 'any Lnformntlan ra:udiPlg tho ralatlve -~uetzoy of
reinforcmunt c'ussnutt.amstio of w e ivm verbal o o d t g is
obvioudy valka3lr in predicting suoh behaviouf' r
A gtvan msponsct c .mo t be rehforard ut~lssm it O ~ O W * J S
For a @ic~l;lr rospmc t o be reinforoml 'we simply waL: unt i l
it o o c m q .
is re inforced , t h e y are import,mt. They a r e i n p n t a n t in .;o
L- ,;tr . ;is t ksy b d w i o u r may be reir3orr cd.
i40mmtemandH, eta. rcfera t o I s verbal opermt in wbkch
(~~bnnsr, 1957). or the extension of thetle twme Sea
Aa shown above, acquisition of languageb from t n e
t h ~ t fhr? cauaatian of bail,. i o u r is much mre c o m p l l o a t d -,!am
WHB p r 6 ~ i o u ~ l y thwht
In atbar words, pediction of verbal bebaviour should. not
only t ake i n t o ac3mrurt information about externdl control ,
but also about how humana prooess and orgsniea t h e input
data* Chomky opines t h a t 'theso character ia t los of t h e
orgmim are in general a complkoated pmduc t of inborn
st ructura, t h e gw&iaally determiriad course of mtwnf ion,
a n d past experlame'. For him, therefore, Skitmertf;s thesist
wUch date^ the prknoiplss of his laboratory expariatats
t o v a b d hsthaviour, ignclree the ccrnrribution of %he
m&sa t a w a r b the complax prooasa of language t;oquiai?!.or;.
The thoei8 makm ealisnt erternal faotors o b a ~ m s d i n t k a
~+p&.wmta wtth tlewer organiwna'. Arr e x a d a a t i ~ s r a f
Verbal Bgb.avigur ncr douht mvoah, aa C h ~ m k y argrsa, that
the m t c n i a w claim of Skim@ e o far f r o m being j u s t i f i d .
The eramlnatian ravra'la further $hat ' t h e inaightw tha t have
bem achieved in the labaratarias of tha rein2'o.raement
theorfat ,,. a m be agplied t o onuplax human bebauiour on ly
1 1 1 ! : - o rm;.t ..;rn:.s ;IS:;!. s u i . ,:l'icial uqy'.
C:;13:r.zkd. ~ ; ~ p l : z i r . z t h:.t the nntinl-1s ' z t i m ~ u z ' , ' r e ~ ; ~ o n s c ' x d ' reinfs :c~:r;.ent' uwn r::~icfi Slcinner's ;!ro$;r=tnrr.e is >;,r;crl ' are r d a t i v n l y d e r i n ~ d w i t h r o s . p c t to 'LIIe be - > r a a s i x ex;~,:rir;lcntz wid o t h e x simi1:irly
r e s t r i c t e d ' . Ext endin? t i 1 9 : r n t o rea l - l i f e b e h , w i a u r , for
i i i m , s i l l be facad with c~. r t , s ln d i f f i c u l t i e s . For example,
C1.1omslr:r : x k s :!bet her : ~ e o:-,mld re;yrd oe o s t imulus ' ruly
;:hyzic:il r:r;erl.t t~ which *' 7 ~rgmiv31 13 ca;>abls o f reactinl:'
on n ,:riven occasion o r ' on ly one t o t f h i & t l ~ e organism in
.!'zr:t r cnc ts ' . iumther cl-1::1len-:e is pozed r :nust any ~mrt
o ? 'izh::l.rjnur b~ refcrrod t o as a lL-..ipwce, o r 'ctlly o n e
comcc.ts:l l n i t i r s t i m l i iii I s v P ~ d ;:.opt?. Accept in:: t hn
' t i ~ ~ ~ d v i e w i n h n t h rsst,ocls r ~ i l l l ead t o ti;^ aoncluzlan
' i h r t t br1;:tviul;l. has nct bclm dcsmnnstrzted t o be l s ~ f u l ' .
Aa:ce:~tlr~:, or, t h e o t h e r l~;..:id, t hc n u r o v c r fiefinit i o n o
; , au ld ir, Chor.:.sky'z v i w ; m a n t h a t S ~ k a v i o u r is l n w f u l by
d e f i n i t i u n . Chumski' ex71 ; ins t h : ~ t ' t k i a ract is of l imi ted
si,-gnif; c ~ ~ c ~ ' , EF.rgufw t i l a t ' m z t of cihat the mirnal doe-; wi:.'
e im;~ ly nut; be considered tl.;.havimr: Pnychologist s will the] I
3a:re To C ~ O O Z E b5twtien be1,wiour which is lawful anli t h a t
. - . . .6. .~.~I- .*. ~ C J f i ~ t .
Ch~msky aontenb that, f o r S h n e r , ne i the r ccl~r;;,. ; e
conaimt mtly adopt ad, Ha caplsFna t h a t LWmer mly uses t ho
reaults of expwlnrenta 'for the rjroientiffc charactsr of his
a y ~ t em o f b eheviour, and m d ~ i o m e a e es . r evi dame for its mafre ' . He then oonaludes that this 'oseatea t h e
i l l u s i o n of a rigoraua ~cientific theory with a very braad
BOOPQ *.I ' Chmerlry obaervea that stimulus and respanse d e f i a a su
'a of t h e anvimmenf; and a pa& of behaviour' roapao-tivoly
'if only they aro Sawfully related hava not been shown
t o figmo very u i d e l y b ordhary humm b&tiviour9. He
rafers t o t h e deviae of s t h l u e a ~ n t r o l whioh m&m, fur
eramph, r e f e r an~e to a red chair as a uchr t h a mn t r o l , .. of the stimulus r e h a s ? as ta;tn~Le aa it is mp~y' . dmr.3- :-
aaya a wide a h a 6 of reepunaes a m ba aocounted f o r fn
temne of SkinnerIan functional analysis by i d m t f f y b g ths
contrulling a t i ~ l & ~ He aomments that t h e mrd stin;u!us
haa loat a l l objeot ivi ty in this ufiqs, ahawing at irwl i hava
bmsn d r i v m bsuk htw the organinm, snd no longer p a r t of t h e
phggiual w ~ r l d . The ol&n by 8 l d a n ~ *bat his system ' p t 3 d b
the p m t l a a l mntrol of verbal hehaviour' iu dlamfased as
false bemuse 'we m i m o t aontml tha property sf a physioal
'verbal o p e r m t ' as ii i:las; oE responses of identif . iahlc f o r ,
On t h e notion of reinforcement, C h ~ n s k y conten& t h a t
S k k n e r ' s definition, although perfactly a>propriske ' f o r
t h e s t udy of schedules of reirtfollcement I, is ' perfszt ly
t ha situations and conditions under ighich t h e y a re rair , f o r c i w ) ' a
lsarnirg w.d cont i r iwd a v r i l a b i l i t y of L e h ~ v l o u r is 1i:;euj.s~
reififorcener.t is q u i t e emptyr. R i 3 a rgmcnt is tha.; his
Ez egue11y says t h t i t his use of t h e term c o r d t i o ~ i r ~
su f fe r s from a s i m i l a r d i f f i c u l t y dismissiny 2: ,pin tls::s
t h e c l a i m t xr i t i m t r u c t i on anri in;part irg o f inEurmat ion
a m simply mat te rs of c o n i l i t i c . r L ~ ~ ,
aii112::; :.,lid o t h e r c i i l . d r e n 8 . ITe d i s m i s s s 3 as unt rue t h o c l L i i :
' t h ~ t c t l i l l 3 r ~ n can l e a r n i xtxwe:a o n l y throl;:$-i ' '~ ie t i cu locs Bra" oil t l l ~ p s r t of ~ d u l t s ; i l l 0 3hay13 I h c i ~ ve rba l reper to- - .e
+ .~ruu::f: c~ : .cT ' i~ l ~di f'f erc171; 1 :.I. re j nf u r m a ~ n e t ~ i ; addit&, honeve r , t k ~ t :iT CI~.;~' bq T h a t s u c h i: T e is o f t e n t h . 3 custom in s c ~ d e f i ,
f smi l i co ' . Chon&.y sc:p t3 h a s n o t been alj le t o Eind c,u:mr..
l o r ti:^ d o c t ~ i n e o f 5kiwLc?r cind ot 'ners t l i i ~ t 's10w r>nC
c : : r E F u l ; i ;a, . i :k, of vt.,~'t~.: 1 1:eh;rvlour t h r m ;h d i f f e r en t i . a l
r a i . ~ o r c e ~ . i : 3 3n : . I ~ s c I ~ ~ ! ' . B nece:;si l y ' . ~ ~ h ~ c . z i r y ex;; l : i i~~a i111.'. !tie w.zr;ller j l ~ ?;;:;i=.l; f x t o r s ;uch
A 5 ' r&j lrf ~~'~c.Tl!:li:, C ~ S L Z : ~ ~ i ! l . : ? f i ~ ~ i : f ?IL-; . ILTZ? l n i l ~ i : 3 i t i v - . ! I G L
1 i aa ,wc i t y tr; -,..,~,?i.; l i z e , hy sothesl ze snd rircGe:;s
~ n f o m a t j . o n c~;~:x:..t (3 i n : ;ract in I m,ruaTe acquis i t ion is
c a m p l s t e l ~ unkr~om. fie t h e n sugyests that what is ndcessary i n
such a case i s r e s e ~ r c h , an15 'not dogmztic and perfec t ly
arbitarjr c la ims , based on anAopries t o t h s t s m d 2 pqrt of tF&
c x ? c r i ~ m t a l l i t e r a t u r e in kihich one h;?pens to be s n t ? ? e ~ t e d ' =
Chomaky obserues that i h e p i n t l e s s n e s s of t h e s e s l z i n s
becomes clear when considarat ion i s ~ i v a n t o t he rr:ell-Px :,:n
d i f f i c u l t i e s in determining t h e extent t o ~ k i c h inho-r
structure, maturation, and l.eernh are r ezyns ib l r3 f o r f;l';.z
particular form of a s k i l l c d or complex perl'orms.ce.
ceu words, Chomskj. contends t h a t st an sarly stage ::e ril;lj
r e p e t i t i o n 1s found t o be f a r from exsct; a t t h i a s tsse rhe
It seems t ha t t h e r e iz nk i the r empirical evidencv nor ;11y kxaxn a,::um~nt t o s u p ~ r t say specific clzirn u h u t t h e r e l a t i ve irnyor t m c e of "fee+Scckl' from the envimm~ant a d t h e "inde2chdti.a cont r lbut i a n o f t h e organism" in t h e rlroc?e;. of la-qusge acquisition, (pi 565).
I11ust~ating rci?h ~ ~ a m p 1 e b ~ Chomeky a h a m that Sldm&~'s
eyetern f o r t h e desorf pt ion of verbal behavfour i e greesly
d s l e a d l h g r 3kfnrrerqs definft iua of verbal bshrwlous wf ah
his rdinement of e m s ie arftiafead. It ia argued t h a t Ma
aseertlon t h n t w i t h the refinement 'we narrow our uubjmot
tt what f a t r a d i t i o n a l l y recogdaed as t h e v e b a l f i e l d '
appears to he ,rmeaI.y in orror . Chemaky nee8 ddprivation an
a q a t e r f ~ u a notion* Ra m t l e e th3t no ~ t t a m ; r t f s mad* t o
dmscrtbe a met had of determhing * ' r o l e v ~ n t aondltlans of
de@vatiann Independant ly of the R a o n t s o l l d n maponme, Ha
a180 dlsmta%ra aa aonfumd 3Hnne.r'~ m t l o n of 'avlrraive
at imuli'.
ChcrmaQ d i s d e a e s c r ~ an i l l u n i o n tha a l d m by 5kimeA1
t h a t Urn new deaoriptive aptam i a superior t o thm traditional
one, On tmta, he asgues t h& the cbaauxity of the notien
atimlua ountral makea thc oonoept rather myskiaal. He dosd
not h x , f o r example, why t h o verbal cortmnmity should sat uup
' aats in t h e child. Sk imar la o l d m t h a t hie a n a l p i e of t h e
ac t Fn tarmo of at imuLua r!ontrul ie an irnpmvemrnt over the
trabf t l om1 fosmlatillom ,;i t h respct t o refarmos and ~nsanbq
i;e d i a d a a e d as untrue. On eohoi t operant, C'lzomnky noten thr,t
no at tempt 13 made t o define t h e sanee in whioh a 0hi1d9e
cchoic response is I1sini lar tf t o t h e ~LLF.UIUS a ~ k e n i n
t h e fati:erls bags voice. Skinner's V l ~ x of senteace
s t ructula is Yeen as inadequate whe tPL~r , BS C~OC>!CY d b t I= :
in t e r m s ~f au toc lo t i c s , syncst egoreinat LC expreos lons , 0:: grarmat ica l and l ex ica l mrphern~9.
Cornanti% genari;lIjr fin Veybfil g e h ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ t l ' , C h o ~ d r y
contends thet i f Skinner's terns &re t&en i n t h e i r l i t e r a l
medw, t b ~ description c o v ~ s -:lrr.ost no asgect o f v e r b a l
behzviour , m.d taken metaphorically, the dc8cri;jtion o f f ~ r s
no improvernc,n.t o v f ; ~ var ious t r a d i t i o n a l fa~rnu1atior.a. h'o then
rounds o f f by e:~y,vi= t h j t a refusal t o study t h e contribution
of the c h i l d to li%r.gid,ye 2earr,inz pe rn~ i t s only a ~ u p e r f i c i a l
;=ccount of language acc,uisition. In Cl-~orn~ky' E: ap ix ion , 2 d
study o f hurnm t e h r v i a u ? t1i;t is n u t b z s t d un
t o have argued tha.t i f we were t o learn langoage as Skinner
01eFned wa might s ~ a n d a 1 i f a time at the task and @till not
lemn i t a inherent rudiaente a at son and L i r r ~ r a n , 1979). The
parents OF adulte in t h e child's ernrironment dl1 only
reinforoc th3 p m p m I in jqdmtfc i forms generated by t h e ahild.
This menna in effeot t h a t i t w i l l t ake the o h i l d slrvsral
yewo t o gain rnaeterg a ? the language. Indeedl he might
spend t h e whoJe of Ma l i f ~ time tr- t o acquire lmqwaga.
There mema t a be judif ioat iwn for the staaae of
Ch~msky. Although it aould not be entirely ruled out that
a h l l d r e n learn through i d t a t i a n , imitatbn alana 0 m 0 t be
uaed t o sxpl- languegs mqulalt ion. Lsarnlng tbKlugh
' h ~ b l t u d rsmpanaea t o a set of ntimlua ~anfigur&tioae'
preelrppees t h a t thsrr is a deflnitm eat of uttrrana+s h m s
can gonerate. Rillowing Ghomelry, it oould be argued that
' B rel3etft.f an of smtarrcrm is a rarityv. WHmrma@m wa
h r u d l y rapeatad sxaent for eraphaaier. 5 t is f 0 ~ US, &!3
Chamelcy poatuZatae, t o accept t h a t t h e una of languege i e u r m t i v a
ae- hl~mane w e aapabla of pmeslating utteranaas they have nel, oar
heard anyone produce and more importantly, f o r lauk of
avidenus t o euppart the bshmiouriet sppmaa. The a r w d
0;' Chumky ( 1 9 2 ~ ) t h d a
The idea tha t a peraon haa a "verbal repertoire" - a stock of ut terancers th&t h e producm by "hah i t " on asz appmpsiat e o c ~ a ~ i o n - i s a myth, totally at verianua with the obaerved use of language* (p 118).
should be 5am as t h e abvious. It is yet unknown t h a devioe
t ha t c a n ba ernpl~yad t o deterzalne t h e number or set of
It is gart ioular ly unfortunate t h a t vooal behaviour should be
3?dmer idantifiscs. Whether t h e m o t h e r Iorm shou1.d be
i n experiments with laver organiems ezpmsa i t e t r iv i a l f ty*
Language use i s innovative and following CfiomsEgr, we
Peel t h a t it l a 'frao Prom o a a t r o l by external stinuli m d
appraprkate to DQW a d ever c h a r g h g s i tuat ion**
Having examined Skixmur ' a rair~forusm6n-t theory, ua wi l l refloat br ie f ly on a rdated theory - Soafal learning
p--rent8 and o the r adul ts oan lead children t o adopt gramatioal
forms tha t o rd ina r i ly t h a y would not use u n t i l they ~ a s 0
considerakly older, They f m t h e r contend t h a t a l l t h a t seema
t o be neceesary i e for t h e adult to play t h ~ role of a model who
r ~ s t a t e s in a nmra mmplax f i r m an idea the c h i l d h a already
u t terad.
Dela ( 1 9 7 6 ) l a , hmevar, quoted to have s a i a tha t nmaroua
reason8 hevet h d i o a t d that i d t a t i o n is not an im:artmt
determinant i n t h e a q u i a i t i o n of 1 a ~ p . e ( ~ u m e r and 3 3 ~ l i ~ ~
19791, Turner md Hsllme (1979) mdntafn t h a t manyof tho early
attempts at re;lmduow adult ~ p e e c h resul t in retha: cpyptio
utteranom, auch as *all S n e sticky'. Thay p i n t out that
the rn~A drmatio wldenss againet i a t n t i o n as an ~ x p l m a t i a n
of laAguese acqnf s i t i o n is t h e language !atf e m of those
children who oannot ap&&, yet can hear normally,
In faa t , the findinhm of cognitive psyohology revaal that
u e t a k n ~ m a o t f c stru~tur~s raquilrs more oomplsx oognitive pmoembea
than othera and ooneequently depand on a gr@ator maturation 1wsI
(Xessler, 1971 ). K e a d ~ r argueEi t h a t ~ u o h maturation is ac)F
aiohieved mere74 by the aonrmulation of stimulus - rwpnab3 , but t h u & t h e a p p m p r i a t e develogmmtal s t q e . Lermekarg 13 ai tea
t o have stre~sed 'that lmgwgs ie apeoics - ~ 2 e o i f i o folIowa
a oortsln developmmtd schedule regardless of the ?ir&atic
t B B t the only sure indication that m o t h e r body paaaasas a
h m a mind , that it i s not A mere automation, i a Lts abfPity
about the fact that he draws, on o l a e a i o d l ingu id ic ; thwry
(1979a) reaotim to the clritica who have deecribad h i a ';iorB
aa i n lmge meaaure a return to t h e conoerns md of ten wan
tha s p ~ c t f f i o doctrines of t r ad i t iona l linguistic ' theory1
This i~ true - appamrztly t o an exLent t ha t aany csitiaa do not realize. I d i f f e r f r o m them only in regardirg t h i s o b e w a t i o n not as a o r i t i o i s m , but rathsr as a d&inita meri t of t h i s work, (QP. 72 - 3 ) .
two parallel, interrelated goals in the study of lmguage -
Themy of hnguaga w i l l ooncmn itself with w h a t ara t h e
primary dm, howwar, l a t o dmelop a Theory of L m g w g o + This
not, however, reclaiva our prfme a t t a n t i o n here. Batha, we w i l l
make as our foous his theory o f lnnguwa aaquisition, aIthu;;b,
a f the topin , h q p a g o aaquiaiiion device i a preeented cs, a;n
ingut - otitput sydtern as shown belowi
Chomsky explddm that determining t h e oharnutm
matter, He oontmde that there is rro plaoe f o r any dogmatio 1
or arb i t ra ry na~mptirrns about tha i n t r b s i o , 1m.d o a t r u c t u r ~
c l t l r q Chomoly, 1967 1 MaELX, 1 ~ 0 1 , la del andintl axpldnab
Tnmer m d R a l u (1979)~ upm mturs w l l n ia t h e usrmbrd
c c r t a r For t h e o h i l d t o clgvdoy an u ~ d ~ ~ ~ t m d i w o f womb tb
c o r t e x mat msturs in the firat; y s a ~ . This I s bwwsm i t le not
f u n c t i o W at all. at birth.
Chosnekyr [1979b) argLlea t h a t the only eanbltima that aunt
be m e t in devc10pit-g a nodel of h a t a montd aapaofty s r a timea
pmvided by t h a dfvwnity 09 l z c y q ~ ~ r n ~ un8 by the neamoity t o
provfdm emplrica3J.y a t t a s t d crsrnpetmos within the ampirloxl
~ o r ~ d i t i o n e , Be is of t h a o?fnian t h a t it is not saay to forrm-
lata a hypothesis aaout h a t e 8tmoture t h a t i s d o h enough
to meet the c o n d i t i o n of em:drfoal adequacy, It is t h e oontehtion
of Charaskg (1flgb) tha t khc comge%anae of an adult, or evm a
young c h i l d , is aaoh t h a t ws met at t r ibute t o him a knowledgo QP
lqvage that e r t e n b far bopnd anything t h a t he has laarnled.
h r Nm, t h ~ dnt B avn i l abh as input a a n d i t u t s a @mall pmpodim
of t h e Ifrquiatio material. t h a t has bson t h u u w ~ y maatered
aiderlng satual psrformanoa.
No referred vagurly t o tha oreativs urra of l a a g u ~ f i at
the beginning of t h i n aeotimr We w i l l now mphin what in
Chomakyls d e w t3in means. Wa hnve ahnwti %hat thin v l w
ie not new t o linguimticr pe bmelry (19721) M h e r bodixmar
Chumsky LEI of the o p h . h n t F 3 t t h e ahild haa t h e irrnata,
b u i l f - i n aystm that mables h i m t o p a s e a lmguags data Srita
oonstmmtian of mlsa md _nrduos appmprlate g r m a t l o d
epawh ( h e S m d S t m m P 1979). Chomahy'e arl~~urnant hrrr i a t hae
the o h i l d ha^ the h a t e oakauitg t o aoqufrr Zanguagm. A ahl ld
is capatla of rlweloping a a d of l b g u i d f o mlae that fill
anabls him t a generats prsftr w mumbar of uttermom, i ~ ~ o l u d i r ~
those the uM16 has nmirr bsard anyone utter befarsr fn lothar
wrb9 the ohild oan generate aantsnaee that are m t l r s l g hle
o m T h i ~ ra t ion ci Chomaky r u l e e out the paaaibil ity of the
uhilb l e e minu by imitatian, In h i a v i m r thr 'gmaatlvl:
tsmsfamatianal gmmmr' maul& togather #hat is h+ard (oslled
t h e euzfaoe atnraturs of rr aenhme) and what l e meant (the d a q
stmot ure) (9tmdetrore, I 979).
Chornskr' E theory haa comidwable influaha0 on
oontemprwy l i r g d s t a an3 peycha'Lo@ata. T h i ~ doea not mean
that t h e thmry is devoid of aritioim. Turner md l I s h
(1979) f o r rmampls, argue t h a t whether or not t h e entire
deep stmoture iu universal mng a l l languwea a t i l l r4ma.ino
a oontravemid ieisue. 3earIe (1999) also ramark.3 t h a t fmm a
pfiiheophm% pint of view s great flrirl ie menmed and a
=mat d ~ s l is I& malaerr Eiowwer, a soholm puta it maofnt?y
2 1.4 T h ~ 1 2 i 8 3 of I r h n m l q d a ~ l - r)w.wlana& - -- Yrr i t i l l ezzxhe I n t h ~ 3 sslctfan mare epooqlfio theoriea
of language dmaloy.bagt whaoe fooas is phomlogloal d ~ ~ b l o p m r n t ~
' ~ 1 . d %ill be ;~m.Irlded rflt essentially be a wmmry of t he
t~lwrios id&ightad by Fmmmn m d ~ardoa ( 1 ~ 5 ) *
Sefsra we b~&rt an a~minatian of th8 theorlee I t ul;ll't
be r,eoeosary t o reflccct Briefly on what the re~uirmente c \ P n
tht icrj of ~ E o n a l o g l o a l devehpmmt are. Far:g~am md Qernim
(r?75] Lire of tha opin iag thaC, a thwry o f p h m ~ ~ i ~ a ~ dwb
lopmad; mast amount Par the dme3opment of dl the ol.l~arste+b-
dioa ef m &?dt phonolom ae npealfied by phonulog~aal t h ~ o q ,
aa u c U na knai;n fprstn at' ohill?. pbnology riot aovsrsd By
p h m r s h , - F o d l, ,,msj. LI fi t,her WOL-~LB, a t h m r y of plmnoladc -1
i ~ e l o p r w i l t ntould n;r t to l i m i k e d t o 8 deaoriptian of adult
laniy~~zag&, k u t atended t o the childgur They d m aontand t h a t
n t : m q of r$m.alagio=il dmelapmnt ahatild be corroiatant w i 7 k : .
rl br~;dar theory o f l . w u a , g develoyjm~~t, r e l d a b l e t s t t e a H n n
o t fither m ~ e o h of developnmrt, and mpirfoally tastnble.
Veb: h a *wid d k jf PJ ,;l 0 t har awm ea, Ferg.ieon nrd
Gul.ri cti i9e i i t i - f '~ ~I>IJT t h e a ~ l e t 3 02 phnologf oal dwolapmari-t .
Thme w e behavi~urLaf t ' c e o ~ i e a with am~hmi~ r e ~ n i o r ~ o r n m ~
B r ,mcturali~t tileosies, t :ie nat urn1 ~ ; i ~ m l o g ~ a i d prosodio
thwrlas, Some od tiio thanxian zce no dou5t b a e d on t h e marc
gariard thnuriaa.
Tiia 75eha iour ia t t l ~ r o r i e ~ arar;rinod are by Mower,
Whits, Yumi rmd O b t e a d , Tha h s t known of them thmrf es
i s identif ied a3 the t f a m u f a t & l ~ y Mokrrer in tha l a t e tgc?Os,
X-t l u +his , howgmr, t h a t w i l l be aonaiderad, ham. The d d m & c
given in support of the theory wan obtainad fmm researah with
I t ~ d d n g b i r b a ~ , s.8. p m t e i , whes mtrlneS 3f $u~ndu were
icIentiua2 t o tl~atr trdnar'a ut termam. The firat &ep 1.n
t h e theory i a sald to hr t h a t the okrild (or b i d ) attsnds t o
m i i d m t i f i e with the aesdeker ( l .e . rnqther or trsllna)r
F~llclwing this i~ the maooia-tion of the voarltswt ham of the
~c*-at,akar vS t h r-ntary r~i:~Po;n~wnt auoh ag Eoad and pttm. Sotxira that b e a raamblmi-c to tho?.@ of the aaretmkm ~ i r 0
s e l ~ m % l v e l y rainfarod. It ot!ou'ld be mtad t h a t t h a thsoxy
l a a h expeimsnt Kl avidmoe on p h o n a l o ~ i sr 1 duvelv paant.
1 J ~ n a t ~ l e e 8 , I* contfrmm t o be ol td and given ~ a u t . i ~ l ! a
approval by r n q v others ( ~ e r g t s o n u d Carniaa, 1975). There
a m ertensiona of Mawrar's f k m q ( S M I Ferkvaon imd QiirxLua
for leatatmiam by Fwd mff ~la l j tead) .
f i aminent amng the pramnmto of stntutumsliat t h ~ ~ ~ c ~ i u
a r e J a h k a o n and Moehnita, '3ie m e t i n I luen t i a l . l a t h e
phonologimf t h m ~ j of Jakabnori. TLa t h e o r y repeemts fin
attempt to relste the clhfld'a phonolog ica l daveloprn~tlt t o
p h a n o l o ~ i o ~ t hmry by aampnrine; Z he aaquial t kan cd Cant raai o
nith i m p l i o a t i m a l lam which ,gwern t h a rrynuhruay oi' a l l
lw-agss of the mr2d (Foreu~un m d O m l c a , 1975). I t 111,
therefora, seen, RU t lie firat s t t m p t tc czpldn Lho r toqd r a l t J . : l n
of flW3n0l0~"~ On t h e b d . ~ of l h q ~ 8 f i ( l U ~ L V A T ~ ~ ~ E ~ L J ~ J X C I : L T < ~ T
laws t h a t undarlia tn'sr,v mrllfiuation of L&&uagtl, inLiv idu . , l
o r eaulal (~clrguaon mcl G d a 7 . , 1975).
Two disoanthmus pm-lods we rdcrogniaed bg Jnkobnan* The
f im t i a the pfnlangmge b a h b l i i x 2eriod 3;ld t h ornoad, o he
~ o q u i d t i o n of largugsl propar, fn the f i r a t >mior1 e e or;m:s
t h r L t m a k e up the o h l l ? ' s uoi s l laatians. The mmda do not
show a q - u d a r o f davelcqmmi and ' o a a nci resmmblmae t o
the ' p r ~ b n u t i o m o f t h u folloK5m pa;riaU', A ralativrly
~tn ivorea l end irrrmimt onlm is fallowed by the o h i l d in
tho aeaond pmi ad t o p i n in ten t i ane l aan tml ooar the sounde
of the nurrmurling d ~ l t l w ~ a g e ergus us on ond Garniua,
1975). Plotahex m d G a ' t ~ 1 l 1 ( f f l8) u p l a i n that t ha pradiotionn
of J&son m a qutte c jwlifio about t h e ordm in uhioh
aont rmts wcruld be aoquird ty ohildrenr a f t e x the mtabli~hmrit;
of the inftisl aonacnnnt va. vowel apposition $n a CV syllab?u.
&en t h o u g h them are at1183ea uhiah show suppOl?k for
t iiia t h m r y , i t has a n j o g e ~ some oritloiam. S&bssnnu
r r c a ~ L t i a n of +.WE dloaan t inwue p n 2 o d e is the maat o r i t f uism?
of MR olairn~. Pmiou lmly orltdciaed i o tho o l a b tha ' t
t h e m ~ m d a of ths prslanguwa btixbb'llng p r f o & laok any ordw
of bevelsnpment ( 3 ~ 5 BTomt, 3 g O and Cnrtfmden, 1970). The
&maion o f the theory by Mosbwitz doas not arparats the
babbling period Prom l a t e r spasoh dwalopman%. Thi r f a
A depmture f r o m J a h b m n ' ~ danue.
Ratusal phonology theory ammaat aa Farg~mn mil
G a r n i o a (1775) point ou t , EL U ~ ~ V W B E L ~ , inrmt~ s:,$tmtil db
phonoloziasl pmaesm uhiah, in tkis mat 1m.gungr - 5hndcmt
~ ~ R J C B , C ~ ~ C P ~ E I ~ ~ B R t l -a f u l l :yet of restriaiione of ?he humam
,J peeah capaoi ~y + The p h o ~ o t i u rapream tatione of the ohllb*s
pmduotiona m e held t o derive from the appl ioat i cm of this
innate aystem of an abatmct phwmlogical ragraasntatian (sea
F a r w a n aod Gmfoa, I 975). R e s u l t i ~ f r o m t h e b t e
8 y n t m are t h e utterancma cnildrm rmlisei in t h e parLud d t c r
bakbllng. A mJor oontrfbution of the theory is t h e ~ t t e r n p t
t o akmw ths role of aoguisilian i n biatori~el ul,m.ge ( ~ s r ~ u w t
mil Gmdaa , l',j75>,
The lmt I~RDPJ HI d-11 e x d . n a f a tho pr6socU.0 theory
uhbsr! p m ~ % = t IG 'dat~0tlr ir'affi13n doe& 8C.L P ' L ~ 1;0 ~ ~ D L B T L L ~ B B
a r ;die p d l a t i l o n a ~ ~ b o w t the om3rr oP aaquieitian of fmlw-r
o r oy;l.asitiom arrd also about he relation o f suoh an ordm t b
:'xu d i a t r i t u t i o n of featured and oppositio~m anow t h e langua.;m
of t h e ~or11.l (Fi3rma0n and Csmdaa, 1975). He rmognlsss
irrdividunl diffsrruroes in l;ngua,ge mquisition, The data baa:.
a f the fl-nory 1s very t 3 m ~ t 3 . ~ r d iCa h a are limLtaR. In spi r~
u f d l thZae anmmu t o qumtiona r a l r r t l t y : t o xhy a o h i l d ado ;;e
a p r t i c ~ l a r eubetitutlm p s t b m in a word and wee mot-hcr .'-I
#I~ the r word are attrmp-ted d r i tha theory* Cont~ ibu t fona t o i3u ,?s
genera2 Luaoriee of linguistlo o o m p e t m ~ e and tant&,bls pebLc: 1.0na
"qyl dna1_3-&a&
Sir tbla amtion dill be m m h e d studLee done t o confirm
or rejaat Borne of the o l d m a progeoted i n the theorlea d l ~ m t ~ ~ & ,
We will , however, focua mre on studies uhoaa p r i m e oonoern xaa
t h e lnvaetieation of ws m d s a diif~ranam in llaqguws
i~svah::rnrnt whiah f p, d m tha Lonuern i n t h e grmnmst dudy.
it hns been ohown i t 1 th.3 oritiaism of the seilzforammt
t h e o r y t~.at ahould t-qp L u m i ~ ; depend on athlts'
ralnfarument 02 t h a ~ g ~ m p 1 5 . d e I f lngufdio forms the ~ h i l r l
pmerotea it xLll tnks a c h i l d Isis W s t i m s to aoqtrire langm.?e.
In faa t , Tuxmar and H s b ~ ( 1 3 7 3 ) obaeirvs t h a t one of the
p r o b l e m tn t h i ~ appmnah f a t h a t rawr ~ r u r s t a K h l l Fmun on the.
f m t u d correotneoa of t h e ohSd'a opawh pat te rn rather plhrrrl
on t h e grammeticaJity of the -i;dtarnar This lltl a oommn
phmarlcmnlmrrn amng peento uha arls rurdoua to sap f hair o f l l d n n
oo;l.reatne;;s o f the child% apmnh, they w e m intaretat HI in
was t r u e or f a h e md an u h e t h r r the a h i l d p e r f o n d wall.
1.1547, I?-33, N d w Z m a ( 1:166) m d 'eltan (l3r3) WB also
ci tved t o hava fuund m p p n ~ 3 for the rse;ulas wid l a d l
PrwTwaion of stagen of nhonda&aal dwslopent; out l i n d
by Jahbeoa for pmductian, $ar pwoayt ion, Sahvmhkfn
($949) i a oitedr Howwar, mms w3sertfone o f Jakobeon are
yurbetiund. 3ra daim thx? the gUdan w aid h a r m aoquird
late* for example, lhoker umplriaal a u p ~ o r t , GirlSlryy h p l b
(19471, Ferguasm and Uanlioa (7975) repart t h a t thma ara
aoqtdmd p u i t e aarlg. S h d i a r by B l a m t (19'70) ard
Cmtt mdm (1970) ars o i t eU t o ahax tha t ths babbling period
i s R t i m e of stmaturd Eevelopittant that ie ne l thw Zrralcnr~lt
t o &~nolo,ry saquiaitf on nor w madual approrlmat;ion mo a g n - ~ w t
the cr'laim o f Jdmbaon that; it h a no davalopmental tranb,
U s o e r n l ~ , Forgueon m d EarrrLas (1973) ccntand that
imprtmt Znotor fn t h e uneatiafwtary natuse of %he theor ie l
of nLonole~lu 11 d w e l o p a e ~ t i a the of k t a o d d n
o r n o i d quwtiwe n f fmt, far exwuphp the ~ h l l d ' a o a f y
pmomtbon larrh date, allawing o o f l i o t i r ~ s thsorkw, Sonic
dudiso (Elmas gt a l p 1971 1 ibplatkl 1 TO) ~ U o h ahowed &dk;lo@
of B U ~ U aaari&&irsn by irrsmta bva: sup# t o the Nal ' iQk
of ~ d t h ( 7 973) and Btaarpe ( f %9) that f ha ha5 f u l l
8 :
Data La laakira, f o r lermple, on :ha crmlla'l ~~uestion of t h e '-
relat ion betwssn l w a g e hpt to ttie o h f l d a d . his awn
nentenoe respansee of six three - year - old mmlingual
The method Fn Fhlen (1982) is eindlar to t ha t used in t h e
d i ; f o r a n o ~ iq t h o aoquia i t ion of t h a Four Yaruba f r loa t ivan
:.,.~~L'rl q u f nix ~ u ~ J L - L % TJUJIB ~ I L I f ~ r thi: : r w m n t h e
d d a l ~ x l t o Sc o?sllai>aed ' ~ L t l i h e ~ ~ h p o u p aomsa sax
f o r f u s t h e r a s l p i o : Snou :~d Ih'hls (1977) ~hcrolls foarxsr m e
=-:IT difr'errsnaes i n t h o nmnu:~olation o f fornk,.rr eourrlle made
so;. ~!iffercnaas oalimt in data ,mnl js i~. Tha study hsil
tw t& -Ll~c r ~ f ~ t h a s i a t;,d tll-- ysmo u p t o t h ~ of nrbwty
c e r s t l t u t d a critioal , m 5 o r i Eor tumya,y~ aaquiaition. Tho
rar~lta of t h e ntudy, howwar, slmued t h a t mna of tha sex
dif faencee for 5 7 yaw-elk, 11 - 13 year-0113s~ 15 - 17 gcm-old~ m i a d 1 1 2 t n m e ~ k n i ricant, nor m e t h e overall R~
rlFi' r ~ r r m c e ~ i ; n ~ f i ~ , m t . The ~ c o u l t E fnr malea rlnd fwalae,
~LCC~DLV; t o thnm, l i k e th.e o ::LOT riGudy, mw ;~301od for
fZ11.i lmr con?arisam. Tahta ::ILL Y00d ( I 981 f fn t!~ef T invaeti-
::~t;on of t i l e fanotarn relatfn; t o t ransfer of acoant from the
P L r r t to n r;ccond 1rmyu~:a n o t d t h o oBeem~Cion ?hat mmm
1m.l l l k d y t o PJIIOW meant transfer thm man. They,
haucvar, aonoluJed t h a t o a e p s a t c x2 t e ~ t of L!::r; d iPFermoo
1115. n o t gliald s iji,nifYo:mt r evu l t ,
Tho f i n d i m of f i n m a ( 1 3 7 5 ) ~ ' h & y i I l and F3xreftl-I
(fr*~) 1 7 ~ ~ 6 in the oq-&nite C L ~ ~ f l t i o ~ h t h b L l ' f l @ (1775) md
Trudr ; i l l ( 19'75) a r c 6l'd ir L , c I ~ ; ~ Q (+979). It is 0 ~ 2 . d bg
L 3 ~ ~ i - t ~ ( 1 , ; ~ ~ ~ t h a t sex diift-remaes ~ d s t in each c r e u of
~ L T L - U ~ : ~ ~ t u d y . Q ~ o RWB + ' I R ~ l n q u q e a t ~ d y ~OOUBHGLT on
e i f h c r o f two a s p o a t s t tho atmctural or the funational. Tnc
s t r uc tu r a l f aat x e u o_' Isrnyqya inolude pbono l o g y ( pronunoiation,
intonn;tfo$ r,itcfLj, nj~tactios (?rarms?, ~wr~hulorly) mil
esmmtioe (diot ion, amphora , lexicon) ( & p ~ d . t a , 1 9 9 ) .
E ~ p o a i t o r e r r ~ ~ t s 4 i,,tt r m e ~ ~ o h e m auoh aa R m d ( 7 375) p
Xrmm (13751, m a Tru;ri;fll (1 975) h w s fctund sex diffmpulseo
i n finch area rwpca-livdy, The diffarenos betwarn these nhd
t h n other ~ t u d i m , xhich nb~wnd no sex distinotfon In the EUY..,;
invarrl i ,pted, n u c t hava b ~ e n hmwht about by differmuea in
r n l Ti14 d l f f l d r @ n ? c may wain have a.ri~m f r o m the
fact t h n t tha. s tuL lea isere 4 r a r r i e d out in d i f f u e n t h r ~ ~ ~ e z .
It in o u r I n ~ o ~ e n t fa f . 1 ~ :rwent study i.rr l m w whsther
rLiff~ranoaz axist or n o t I n t he acquiaition of friaa-tives Ln
Yorub3 bst:~et,n sh, uemc. Tr-e f l n d i r q of t h e a t u k ~ mqv ha:,
I1 -aly;ul in , - ~ ; - u - , G ? i r ~ ex.,lm?t i o n s f o r t h o dimrspmoicn
o-~oemeli it, thl : akrli~r ~jtwYea.
For 9 t u ~ i i m t h d f m u ~ - e d on we difleranora In Lra!;~r!v:c
a n q u i ~ P t i m w emmine C m e l l (I 901 ) nnmr .mhi 1 ~ 1 1 1 3 1 3 ( I -
C'iomglq (7569), c l t c d in C h i m q md Cowtello ( 1 9 3 3 ) an8
,.lilootian c ~ f how t h e rnlatian liotwesn request tyno =id enea of
I t ie s h o m t h ~ t f n mary c a m , tho d l f f a r enon betwcm t h e
(1981) inveot iga t ad factors inf 1uenoS;ne children's h y p t h a t i c z l
Snod and J [ r h g 1197'7)~ :a I:llo::n e n l b r , @s,& wo
~ i f i ' ' e ~ ~ n ~ a 3 tiic ~mnmc'-.t l .cust :> :' fa lzfgn iroun&. It shocrld
bc m e n l i u ~ ~ a i l sat t h p d u d 2 f c ~ u r n ~ d or_ secor~d. Innguae;s aopr&i-
t ion . The r ~ ~ u 1 . t ~ 9 g ~ c d t ( it t'l83 t ,TO y o w q p ~ t tiroupe t mtd
h n l t h e lowaot score? md t > ~ a txo oldsat g r o u p , tlna highaa t
(310:: m d Hhhee, 1777). -4ccorZiq; t a L.ern, li'i~ftoen a 3 tho 24
eo~ulr,'.: t e.atml a h o u d ? i r X l f i o a ~ t ~ ) o ; , ~ ~ L v B utsrmla$ions with
q a , Inz1u;llt-q a l l c h t ~ t e r r : o r t h 76 v ~ . . a l s ' . T h ~ y , however,
add t h a t ibr t h e n,htu-rqlLst i r : s t .~r i j ~s diiferenoea in p r o ~ u n d 3 -
t i o n & i l i t~ ~ L i ~ ~ l p ~ ~ z r e 3 . 11;: 4 - 5 r o n t h s dfl;er starti- t o T B W ~ t } \ c acccriL lbnqxq~ (3no.1 irm! Thrrls, 1577;. For tho Zx'txlrrrto~
~ t u . ~ , i d t , & t i o n of fcrfiifm :firrlo imrasaad l inemu with W o *
Ch6rn3kyts ( 1 ~ 6 9 , ) ~ t ~ t l y , I O ~ S I S ~ L ~ I n Chiw and hrrtelh
(1 333), h w e e t i ~ a t a d t h s 1cglr lr ; l~t lca o f apt= by ahlldren
a;scl 5 t u 70, Chontsky h,3d 3 t t l f i w l tlm mqdin l i ion of four
b:l ioh otmctursa by nat ive U , ~ > B ; ' , ~ ~ C of Ihgll~h u~indf e l ~ n t f i n t ~
nohool ~ p i . 1 ~ a3 he? infomrr,:r-, It ic ? t ? ~ l * d mri
l:ofitollo (1983) t h n t Chom*w~ :I~I.-:;. S?,OHU': t n a t i m r m ~ ~ e 13
a t u r . a s examined in respaut of &:a differences were all in
the erne dire at ion^ mastery of t h e phanornma inyentigated
a:c round in t h o na turd i s t l c study, They expldn that1
TLey further explain t h n t r
Thay noaort t h a t the older aul~jeate wm m t ~ h bettm? at other , '
l ' h d r suggestion t h a t a d u l t s wera perhapa l seb raliwt on
2,a Hywthesgz
!lavirg srhcvm t h a t a m D r 0 aoaeptallz fllnory of l~nguq@
acqui~i tion i d required, t h a t data neu9 t o ha p r a ~ i b d on
c r u c f d questions of faat in r e l a t i o n t o t h e more B~BCI~IC
thmries of >honoTo&cal davehpmmt md t h a t t h e A n d i ~ ~ s 01'
i. Thma is no aip~ifiomt diffaranor between
~ h i l d r a n a& 3 on3 4 in the m ~ t s r y O F t h e
iv , There i~ no e~LgnlPioant: diffsrsrroa between
male m d Pamale children In t h e aoquiai tian
of t h e frlostivsn
3.3 - l n a t r u m e n t ~ A number of i n s t m a n t a uas u8e.d in o u r y t n g out the
study. Four piuturaa, aaoh oantdnLnq f o u r objeuta, rare
dmigncd by t h o riass~rrsbm i r m aut jocts ' epontaaeou~ neming
of the abdeots (3ea Agpmdlr 11. &cb ab jm# name wae
intendeb t o tat t h ~ oorrmt rsaliscltion of ons of the M o a t in
etudisd. An hetrument namait Trioativsl Aoquiaition Insfrumant
(Fa) (gee A p p a n d h 13) waa aZao deafgnd by t h e rmaaraher.
The inmtl-went whish mudated of t w o umotiona waa intarrded t o
.C aat t h e oorrsat realisaiion of the fricatives F U v d I g a t d
in ioolated u a r h and smtmcma. A t q a reuordsr and two
orssette tapea were used t o rword the subJeata' rediaatfon
of t h o words end santenoes (aantahsd in FAT.) and their
apntaneous namhg of t h ~ objmts En t h e pioturea.
Re3iabj lit^ and . V n I l ~ i t _ v # ~ f t h s f q ~ t ~ ~ r n a n t ; a
3 4 2 Velidlty
With tha aasietanur o f experts in teat uemtrua t ion ard
J9+uoedu.re i q d Adn4pkst rat io;
The eubjrate were expeated 50 obaarvm the piutureol
ono d-tm the other, f o r eomr time and than nma the abjsota
In thm cu3aordhgQ. The piotwm wms prmesrn$sb on, mar
the other by the raeemhex a e a f n t d by thrar nxprrtm t o
saah of the ~ubJmtm. Twu af tho e z p a d a worm lillguiafa
togsthm with whaa the rwmrohm rroord& h i e ~ b s s w s t i o n ~
Thn t h i r d -pert who baalt with elr&r.onior hmdlrd t h e tap*
recorder, Same of tha ~ u b j a & s ~ a f a m tsauhwm a100
aaaisted in the &d.niatrat-Lon of the i n s t ~ w n t r . Two
taaohura aaoiats.;. In d i s p l y l l x g the piclcmea t o tha rubj.mtu,
while m a wha rfiapnsi'bla f n r p m ~ e n t i n g the ~ ~ ? J j l w t a far thr
aeraise. Yet some other6 cj i l tdda the tmting room mdnf ained
t h e peaae among t h e aubjeota. They were reapnaibls for the
orderly prmantation of t h e a u b j e ~ t a .
One of t h e Ihgdtats, a apmia l ia t in Y~mba* road out
the words an8 s e n i ~ ~ c a e t o the p p i h one af'tlr tbm other, Tha
realised in t h e trst item. The muorded reupmas ware
trrworibad and aorralatd with t h e t i o h aa t h * ~ a m ? h @
&rate t o ratnllaiera e m r e in ewring aubjectn4 Pb$pfi$ebr
To get tth t o t a l raw aocrrum for eaah of the naunds hl,i
f o r aaDh w b j s u t the f l c b w e e oauslt&d, To eet ~ L B @and
t o t a l , the to ta l s of t h e saotions were ad&&.
3.7 & t ~ Annlynla
The f'allod.ng a t a t i a t fda l pbcedure was used M tbe
malgsin o f t he oorpue nnl lwted by the reeearohmrr A
tabla of norms waa mnatnlcmted Ewed on agu and cer of the
aubjeats by ntasrr~ of oom;.~tar.
To ahow the d f r e c t i o n of t h e findiws of tha atudy
simple garoanttaga, abtained through a mvthod &te.'nad
aft;- hlay, Burt a d Krar?hm*s (1982) Croup Mean
Hat hod, was uad.
For tho four hymthcsea t - tea t e t ~ t i t i ? t i c n l tmhnique
was amplogedl To ehow -If the roaulta were significant , oaloul a t ad t-valuee v m m re lnt ed to t sbulat ad t-valuua
a t 0.05 level of signifloonua.
4.1 Iatrodua$>qn
An &iternst is made in t h i a uliaptor t o p e e a t the
r e a d t d of th3 00rpuu andyead, ?h mrpra wse o o l l e o t s d
t o ~ d d t :he hypothesera ganarxted for the study. h l l o u i q
t ha preatrnt,iti~n of tha analyeis i e t h e dincumfan of th
r e m I t ~ .
X t o t a l number of airty mbjeots uwr u e d in t h s
study, T k y rere rwbrnly bun Froin nureerg wpila of
P n d ~ SSatc Gallctge cf ELlrreatZon S t a f f SohoaZ, Xkera-=ti*
The ch i l i l r en , aged 3 - 5g aonoisted of twenty-nine mlsr and tdl-ty-one females. F'rom eaoh age grade waa drawn a
smple of trenty subjsats,
The rssulta of t h e analpfa and t h r h fntar~drtimw
warm 'basal on the hymthuau. For t h e four hyWhurr t - 9 u t
~ t a t i a t i w l twhniqus was wployed and t a b l e s VII - X s a t on pagas 94 - 93 ahow tho rmlts of tha maJymls, To ahow t h e d l reot ion of the findings of t h e etudy a mathod
patterned Bfter Dulayt Burt and Kraubn'e (1982) ( I m p
Mean ?!&hod w a s u a d te obtain t h e aurrwe p a r s a t a g e aooraa
of tile yubjrofr aaoordiw t o Wa and mrr- Sm@auzt ~ h 3 i t ~ W m
Before present ing t h e rssulta of t h e hypthwrm
t e e t a d it t r i l l be nwleasary t o a a & e the aver3ga perocmtrqa
eoorea of t he aubjacta aumrdirrg t o age and erx in a d r r t o
how t h e dirsotion of ths f k d i r - q ~ of t h i a . t u g . It will be
neaesamy aloa t a prseent t b a eqyrtent subst i tut ion errom
abla2cvd in t h e analyeis of She corI#xe.
l ' b i ~ Ld?le tho . :u t h l 1 t f o r eeoh o f t L . d a b l a s the
.ver%a garcantage mores Increase w i t h a-e. For / h /, fo-
~xrungla , the w e r q a perodtqs e m r e for age 3 l a 61.92,
T U B inoreaeeer t o 82.89 fo r 493 4 and 85.27 for we 5 . ' h e
impl iaa t ion of t h i n is t h A ~ubjwta'unalmaetary of t h e
f r ioa t ivea invea t igst sd tn~rsased with t h ~ r chmno Io@cal
we*
4.21 3aq;rnqt Sr r l ; l a t i tu t ioz~ Errom,
Baring r o f l d ad on t h o = m m g m psroontmp summa of
the ~ n b j s o t ~ on t h e bade o f a q m m d sex* we tn13 now m x d ~ e ,
the e-ar~t s u b o t i t i ~ t l o n e m r s c i h a ~ m d i n the analysis of
the oorpua pmsratwi Jn t h o rduby. Since t he subjmta
exhibited a general pattern of rr-mt nubletitzrtialq thm
clisaumsion here i t i m t ' n ~ d on a j ~ e OF msfr
~ 1 1 ~ u I ~ Eblm ( ( ~ p f l i ) , xs will, I d e n t i e ~ W W I t,vp$s 0 '
error1 atopphq, a ~ b a t i t u t i o n an& ddat ion , but in the
p~esezltatian o f t h e raaults of this study ua dl1 oal lnpse
t h e f i rs t two mdar ' ~ t r h s t i t u t t o n ~ ~ Aaaor3lrg t o E~IAH
{t992), stop#ng i~ a su t e t i t u t i on pmosea. Tlrs t a m fs ueaa
by him only whan t k r a u b a t i t u t w augment ia a true atap L r .
the rei-tlaaament of a phoneme by any o t h e r alase of ~oundd
it 1s not reatplat4 t o t h e rsplaummt of a phonuae by tn
Subati-tut inn arsaowzted for 99.08 pement of t h e rmra
mi^ / / / - 0.09%. / 5 / w ao aelrtion -or. ~ s b l e s TIE - VI how the ~ u b s t i t u t h n erxlrs of ths ahildren in t h e pmductfon af t k m frimtivea imreatlgntad,
T n h l e IV shawr t h a t +:he subjwtr sub&ituted /t/, /$ 1
snd /t - I/ / ..- Tho pattsmr~] -*r - - tT] had tha
Table 5' showe that the prdorainant p i t t a r n of auhutitution
pattarn xaa I-r ]+ Lb lwith 24.11$. Tha aribatitution of -
Aa ahom by t h i n t a b l e t h e osloulatad t-value i a g rea t e r t 9 a n
t h e tabulated t-valde at 0.05 l t ~ v 9 1 of a i ~ i f i o m a a , f l e a
m d 4 in t ~ . o w q u h i t i ~ n the f r i ca t luaa !n Yoruba.
!1yyat henl s X I - ---
The hywthesia e ta tee t h a t r "There is no ~ Q g d f i o m t
w e tented by means of t - t en t ntatistical tscfin;lgnrD The
I1 af the fricatives in Yamba, To G d the hgpthesilr t-tmt
of ths snnUsks fa peaenter! h Tabla X below*
Varildbls , pnumbm Urnan ! Standard I
I I--
4.2-3 m~uunuign-
The reoulta of t n i e a t u u &owd tha t the maetsry of
the f o u r f r h a t i v e s in Yonrba imraased with t h e aubjeocltn'
ohrctnalagical we. Par amrn?la, Table I ahom t ha t the
nverogs percentsge s w r a e fur the vaxiablen inarssetd wlth
=a. The f f n d i ~ s of *hie atudy support the fhdtnga of
C u r e l l ( I ~ Q ) , 3nov and R5111a ( 1 9 7 7 ) ~ Chameky (1%3), c i t d
i n C h h g m e Coota l lo (151133, and Huozajii ( r y e 1 ). C a m a l l
(1981) h d invsdiyatrrct how wall ohildran agd 4 t o 7 ~ u l d
Werm-tand lgiffsrerrrt typm of inflrmt reque~ta and how t h e
ralaWon bdveen rsqusat tyrse a d sms of maprehmaion
oanpmsJ from children t o ar'lultn. Al'bhcsugh t h e G ! n ~ h € K b of
C n r r d l diffsm f r o m t h ~ t of the preueaf dudy, bath have on€
t h i n g irz c 9 m n I l a n y ~ x e ~ ~ q u i d t i o n r Age w a s equalxr
oantrolled Ln both ~turlias. The rmulta of the s tudy e11o;ied
thn% mmtery fnosemrd d-th warn Aoowrdlmg to Camel1
k381),
The mraary ~ o h o o l m g a t 64.#
of all 40 t s ~ t i%em aorrwat; the
Hndmgartler;~rs &id better, gattlng
73.5s aarrect 1 the first gradsrs
idid batter yet, getting 78;g o~xxeotg
and the aamnd g r a d m did beet
of all, eettfng a bQh of 92$, 335).
Carrel1 (1981) d d e that Yn werg oase, the dirPerenae
b ~ w e e n the perfarmame o f one grade - ~ g s 1 eve1 w e atnt ia t iaa l ly ~ i & f l a a n t l y b& t e r t hrtn t h a t of t h e n a t
lover ,pads - agr l w d ,na ahom by tha t e a t of ~signifluar:aa of &lfYmanona in pmmnitio~a h m independat anmplsa',
Our ibdcnga aanflm thrrt t h e &Pfarrnoes batwren the 4 ~ s c
w m s sl-,cpiflcant+ Tabla VIIp fox mmtpls, &owed that tho-a
warn a afgnifloant difieranar bbtwra ahi ldrra qrdl 3 aad 4,
Tha dlffa~anoa bstuaen ohildren agsd 4 and 5 war a q u d b fbc~lb
a t wti atlaally ~~i&Fl,ormt ~ ( 3 rsvsald by % M e VIIT. A BL ile
~ w u l f uas ahmm hy T a b l s TI'. f o r children agd 3 a 5 .
~UZAJ~I (1991) ~ t u d ! - & sixty 3 - to-6 yeax o l d ahiI8re;: im o r d m t o amma oeeaPa aspeata o f t h e i r a l f l i t y t a anwm
q ~ o ~ t i o r t ~ ~ l l u d i w t n hymthe t i~d weds* A g h , the poht
shdulb be madr %h& arstr iisltarset in t h i a study uaa b#mm orat
of t h e faot tha t i t irrvreki~ated language ~ q u i s L t i o n K i t h z q c ~
csrntmUd. The f l n b g a of t h e a b d y &ev& t h a t mfieat
res kvne ae Lnaraaaed with ws*
Smw and 9 i U a [ t 977) h v m t i g a t tad q r d f f f ~ ~ m o r a b
tha p m n m n o i a d i ~ n BI fomim a o m h I'br hudy Oamtsd tha
hypather~is t h a t t h e y # ~ s up t o the age of p~b&y o o r r d f t l r t ; ~
B mft l o 9 1 g;ef iob f o r laqyuqs aaguiaf t lon. A l ~ h ~ ~ the foaurr
of' t h e study was awonrl lar:asgn aoquisitfaa, th r &may
oanaern c~f the B ~ U Q an9 t h e p - ~ ~ ~ f i t n f l ~ YBU thm aaquhition
o f dlatlno-tivtr eomd d t s + It i a £'or t l d e maam tha t we b
not eee '1t.i aamparbon d r ~ m betuaar~ t h s atudies aa inept,
Tha ~,dLngm of the ~ t u Q ahmad t h a t the two y o ~ m s ' t
groupe ta&sd had the lawsat auarm and t h ~ two oldest gmupel
ths h i g h a t (3mw and h h l ~ , 39;77)+
Chomokfa (7969) ntudy f a xqmrtad C h i m a d
LToste1110 (j993). Ch~maky Snveatfgatd the a a p ~ a l t b n of
9yntru F, clid'ld~eh fYom t h e ,-.gee of 5 Lo 10, h r
j u n t i f i ~ a t l o n ~ D T d'+t lng tbLe ~ ~ t u d y is s m e as f b r othem.
I t i a reported t h t increaae in tho number of carreat
reaparms in Chomlqr's ~ r u d b r aanaapondsd with
0hmb3 ~ P K ~ C B ~ &
t h e s u b s t i t u t i m patterns of tho Modaan uhi1Cren and &@id.
cornanants in the language, can only o c c m in Xomba syl lable-
between the fin-a o f t h e etudies I s tha t while /tJ/ i a 1,.. t i d
inventory of the phonernsa of Spenlah, i t l o not Sn t h a
substituted for one in t h e lar-mgr. Howmar, whllo trying
t o ahow the origin of (sl-.~ l t ~ l in S p d s h Lblm (1982) I, 4
requ i f i r .~ a longer ' e t eady rstate8 of t h a wtiaulatore.
t h e basie uf tUs t.qpmant explain t h a t mime Yombm doma mf
hwr /t /, /t/, t h e atop component* v s readily subatitutad .--
l e u r ~ t before the l a t t e r bused on the principle
t h e oh i l d r an in t h a atuily reported acquired i t / befarr /B/*
/ Whi la we o m explain ths t tho pattern \-J]+ [ t ' ] -
w a a repar ted t a h w s oubsti tuted /d f o r /f/ in four of five
a i d the fact t h a t it has b c m a h m t ha t it ia aaquirad
early may be used to explain i ts su ta t i tu t ian f o r /f/~
Tabla VI ahowed t h a t the pradodnant pattern for /h/ ie -, . The substitution m a aomnmat x h m the sound was 2
preo6dbd by / i / and moaeedsd by /z/. The r e a l l s ~ t i o n , themfore, m ~ t have been influsnoob by /i/ ao fhs
Our da ta showad t h a t [ k ] ( 2 . 9 6 ) and
whiuh t he eauad auourrad in t h e littarenass (use2 in the
%
renderad alt.smatively ea 'Iws'. It m q y be pueitsd t h a t in
v:wiety of aounda far t h e ones investigated+ Thie trend
Different sounds a r e reportad eubstitu?ed for the onea
1nvae;tlgatad in h i 3 ~hrrdy. For example, for /h/ the saw&
Tnble X I E showed t h a t t h r r r s waa no signifioant
of tho four fr ioat lve sounda (see Table IV'a
m~lvrris), The f h i d i n p aould be used ca euppork the f~ndl~rpls
Cookine anfi Ilchnbe'a ( 7 981 ) ~1tudy yam a compamtfv~ s t u d y ~f
the use a0 picruree and objmta in &a+e~eFng uhlldrrn'l~
reuoptivs and produatfve lmguagr. Tha atudy meda use of
a i r t y - s i g h t 4- mrX 5 yem-olba. Their findings ahowad t ha t
no sex differafloe d e t a d witbin any of mix aubjsat groups
and they had t o m ~ l h p a s the data ' v i t h f n aaah gmup aoross
sex Tar f u r t h e r onalyeerrv. Snaw an13 Rohls (19'77)~ ah hint&
@arll.ar, inveetigatsd aga differenaea in t h e p~crnrrmiation 6::
f arcign eounde* The rsaults of the study c h ~ ~ i e d t h s t nune
of the eex d1fl"ermosa f o r 5 - 7 yea-o'lds, 11 - 13 ye-lh, 15; - 17 year cold^ m d a d u l t u wss ~fgnl f icmt , nor w a n the o v a r a l l a m dfffermoa signlfloant. TAP remxlts for mal-
m d females, amording t o t5w9 were po?ed Par further
a o a p d e a n e r
Rauuvsr, t h e fin&nga of the present mtudy contradfot th..
fhdinqa of T&a a d Wood { lgf l l )y batner ( 1 ~ 5 ) ~ and
Trud xi11 ( 1 g 5 ) (IIramsr arici TmdgIl1 are a i t ed In Ehpaita,
1975). h p a a i t ~ (7379) ~mports t h a t in awh arm of lan@&o
study m a r diifsrmosr appsar hd d a f . h a o r d i n g to her* t h z
studv of lanmlgs faoua+r on ri thsr of two aspmtsl tbe a t r u a t ~ ~ d
or t ne funatioml. The atruatural. f'raturas of latkpagm inalnds
phonalcgy ( pmnunctlatlan, intanation, p i t ah), mot 10s
(grrrmmer, mrphologg) md rmat i a r ( d ia t ion maphora, lex iccd
(hps i to , 1 ~ 9 ) . S h m eham tha t reeearohem suah as BrenlL
for t h e differmao betwaen the f i n d i ~ s of t h i u atudy and
t h e e t u d i a ~ beutsuas us do mt h o w tha objmta OF t h s i r
t o them, a asparata ? teat of t b i a diffmanaa did not yie ld
The atuQ m a motivatd by the observation that
A pflot s tuQ wae o e r r i e d out whioh sherud that
the a H l d wed 2.6 t h a t waa found uaeful for the rstudy. Tha
s u b e t i t u t i o n patterna of llhe ch i l d ware found t o be
Literature relevat t~ the s t u b uae rsviewedl Studlea
that the human brain i a pra,pxumed t o enable individuale t o
csmte rrnd underetmd languags. The first two thebriss which
were behaviourist in nature were f o w d t o be inadmuats in
Frimt Lvs Aaqulsf t ion Inetrummt (FAI), baaigrsd by tha
resa:lrcher, The researcher iiiudalutered the irmstrurnent
wLth Zhe ao~1afmo.a of tiwea e r p e r h on nifty 3- t o 5- yam-old?
randomly ampled m n g the plpih of the w e e r y s d i a n of
diroauered t h a t t h a pa~w:~linant pattern f o r / 8 / m e
-*
hTBT0 r f ' 6 \(44.5@) anI:U]+ a] (41.18~). T ~ O 1 IT - 1 I-- - - L ' -,I predominant pattarn for / 2 / was [ i l - y l l c p , (42.55%). This
I t ~ d u l d be a a i d t h a t while W:R c a n v f i t u t e e a barrier
Lrt t h a &orlidsitLon clP frf0ol;iverl in Yomba, eax is no barriar,
1% cmild. ba m i d t h ~ t uhilcirsm uubotitutad v u i m z s . rrounb for
the oilss h v e a f j gatad with the fal lowln< am the predominant
yat hv:crim
grndually by i r r d i v i h a % o h i l k e n and t h ~ t we au wa
lliscnvared in t h i e stud;, 1s a barrier t o language B O ~ U ~ E ~ ~ : - C I I
in goneral, they will be Lesa amloue e'bart gattirig their?
ohil&mn t o speak-
The Qindinga of t h i s atudy heve implications f o r
poychoh$iata, psyohoha&nta md U n g u l ~ f a generally
bmauea they would nard ts v d f y whether on t h e bmia of
t h e finding-a mre ~ a n e r a l l z a t ions aauld br mads a b u t ohlld
phonologioal davslopmmt. It ahouPd i n t a e d th8m to find
of etudy f o r numerp 'dadergartear p u p i l s in the area
~ n v e s t i & d . They would need t o take i n t o canaideration
and h n n c b e r ~ , Elizabeth (ads) Foundations af Lawpm~e
Deve lopmc t~ t t A Mult id tac ip l fnary Appmach7, 1 , H a w Yorkr
A c ~ d m m y P r r a ~ , 181 - 8.
B l o u t t , B.C. (1970) "The Prellnguistic S y ~ I s n or h o Children",
Anthr2ological Liruyistic., 12, 326 - 42. - - P a l l a s , Rabsrt C. ( I 379). Laarnina. Theory. Now Yorkr Hul t ,
Rinhart and Uinatan.
(1972b) ' k - g u m g m and the Mind' 18 Crugson,
Elizabrth w d Camhdpn A. ( a d # ) . ,Lanmqm h Fhoation.
Iondon and h e t o n x Boutladge and K-n Paul in association
v i t h TLs Open University Prmaa, Pp. 129 - 35.
b
B l a n , Ray E. ( 1 982) r L Study of the Auqulriti~n of Moatis ss
'5y Three - Year - Cld C h i l d r l a barni~y Ftxdoun Smrd 3b1 in ' w w a and Spec* 2 5 ( 3 ) , 201 - 20.
Fer~unon, Chrullm A. and C;mnic3a, Olga IC, ( 1 9 5 ) 'Thsoriea o r Phonola&ad b d a p r ~ e n t ~ h s b e r g * M o E. mi! Lanaabsrg, Eliaabeth [bds) , F w n d a t i c g u . . ~ i h m w s licnrrlo=a', Haw Ymka Aoadray beam, t 53 - 80, ---
B l b l , K l f l r s d F. (,1990), & g ~ ~ f n ~ I A mm+g. a f bsoPoZWdrr_ I 1ntqrpret:at~gm. Iandoni whim and Co, M b r h-
Tahta, 3allLa and Wood, Margaret (@I ) "hrelgn docants8
PBatora Relatiw t o Tmwmfar of Aocant from the E,rs:.
hn@mgrs t o a Seccsnll LRqptqe'' f n hngmge and Spsor ., 24 (31, ~ 6 5 - 72,
Tmbst zkoy, H.S. ( f 968). I n t ~ d u c t i o n t a t h e fiincigles
n f Phonological Descript ions Ihrray L A . (t=s) arid
Bluhme, H. ( eds )*
White, Lydia ( I 982). G r m a t i c s l T h w r y mC3 1-6qw97e
Acquisition. hr&echt : Fmis Publicat ions.
Wimhr, Stephen (1976). A h i m e of Verbal Bshaviourz
Operant View. New Jereayr P r s n t i c e H a l l , IGG,
Appendix 1
i. ehoro (rabbit)
\ ' f \ 'b . aluhosa
I
\ sun
i
(Ths white oap that & gave t o Femf uhs ti&: f o r
pulled t h e otsp' aeaselessly). / ,' ,' " / , I
o m ~;ld'nddL fa Ifa tit1 t i 1f-s fi bi i f a fun un
# / -. / 2 a. Aso S a h t o mom noo
.I I 1 1 I 1 1 1
1 / / / / - .' / ' \ 3. a, Ha s huha nl - ! a n se t o fi ha aiha ibi t c ' ti
(~asuna waa remvfnl: maize shaft till he wria trapped
( the food povided by. t h e deoeased's first wife was
h he . way we cmk& t h e baana is very goocij.
4. I a q g h t 5 . a Baouround ( s t a te wbethor t h ~ su3je:t is
TOTAL I
(iii) Oae I . . I / * * * \ I.../
( ivj s;.l;n& * . * -I
iuu 1
sa;o L
SZCTIOl~ DI SEjTEZXXE
\
1 0) ~i la 1
( i l l fm4m (ti)
(iii ) h 1
(id furl (v 3 FA 1
1 & (la'&
.f
fun
/ ! f 1f4 (tM ti)
sf'
Be (ypn)
TOTAL
3 (1) Haf (a) h& (ILL)
ha'
s B \ / / \ /-
aaee ( ~ a dam &&I
TOTAL A
BABATUNDE_Yusuf_A_1995_12458PreliminariesTitle PageCertificationDedicationAcknowledgementTable of ContentsAbstractList of Tables and Figures
Chapter One: IntroductionChapter Two: Review of Related LiteratureChapter Three: Research MethodologyChapter Four: Analysis of Data, Results and DiscussionChapter Five: Summary, Conclusions and RecommendationsBibliographyAppendices
2009-04-30T01:21:30-0700Ojionuka ArinzeI have reviewed this document
Recommended