Re: a behaviorist approach ... quesion to ponder...

[Guest guest]

RESPONSES IN CAPS, BELOW

> The following is my answer to a question in my Child Psychology

class. It is

> an article called " From Communicating to Talking " by Jerome S.

Bruner. <SNIP>

> Bruner feels the behaviorist learning theory (known as BF

Skinners

> Verbal Behavior today) is inadequate in explaining language

acquisition

> because it does not address the combinatorial and generative effect

of having

> a syntax that makes the structure of sentences, never heard by the

child,

> possible (123).

JEROME BRUNER WAS TAKEN BY NOAM CHOMSKY'S VIEWS ON LANGUAGE. HE

APPARENTLY LIKED THE " TRANSFORMATIONAL GENERATIVE GRAMMAR " THEORY

THAT CHOMSKY PUT FORWARD. CHOMSKY BELIEVES THAT PEOPLE ARE BORN WITH

INTERNAL GRAMMATICAL RULES THAT ALLOW A PERSON TO SPEAK

GRAMMATICALLY. THIS, OF COURSE, IS A THEORY. NOONE HAS FOUND

SPECIFIED INNATE PROPERTIES OF THE NERVOUS SYSTEM THAT WOULD GIVE

RISE TO CORRECT GRAMMATICAL USAGE.

An example of this, for my son, is when he is ready for bed

> he says, " And now good night, " a phrase he learned from a video

when he was a

> toddler. (He is now eight.) He does not know how to change the

sentence

> structure to be syntactically appropriate because he has

not " heard " it or

> has not been " taught " it differently. My son is missing

that " link " that

> most children acquire easily.

IS IT SOMETHING WITHIN YOUR SON THAT IS MISSING; OR HAVE THE PRESENT

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS NOT WORKED TO HIS BENEFIT TO SELECT

APPROPRIATE ALTERNATIVES TO THAT PHRASE?

> **(Verbal behavior is the type of teaching that we have used

with my son

> to teach language.

I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT VERBAL BEHAVIOR IS NOT A TYPE OF

TEACHING. RATHER, IT IS A THEORY OF HOW LANGUAGE WORKS, WHICH IS

CONCERNED MORE WITH THE FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE RATHER THAN ITS FORMS.

Anything new, we teach by breaking down language into

> mands, tacts, intraverbals, etc. to help him comprehend its

meaning.

> (Otherwise, he would not know that a train is something you ride,

in addition

> to identifying " train. " )

BRUNER AND CHOMSKY REJECTED THIS ANALYSIS (THESE TERMS)

[Guest guest]

Recomination is taken into Skinner's system in his section on autoclitc

frames. As I have said before, several generations of research have

formulated under the heading of recombinative generalization to account

for systax. Please fee lfree to read my articel in teh 3.2 issue of the

behavior analyst today.

Thanks,

Joe

On Tue, 12 Nov 2002 rhondamiga@... wrote:

> The following is my answer to a question in my Child Psychology class. It is

> an article called " From Communicating to Talking " by Jerome S. Bruner. The

> question is " Why is a behaviorist or learning approach inadequate for

> explaining language acquisition? "

>

> Can the behavoralists on this list help me to understand this better? Is

> there something out there that will help us teach our children syntax? Is

> this a missing part of the puzzle?

>

> Bruner feels the behaviorist learning theory (known as BF Skinners

> Verbal Behavior today) is inadequate in explaining language acquisition

> because it does not address the combinatorial and generative effect of having

> a syntax that makes the structure of sentences, never heard by the child,

> possible (123). An example of this, for my son, is when he is ready for bed

> he says, " And now good night, " a phrase he learned from a video when he was a

> toddler. (He is now eight.) He does not know how to change the sentence

> structure to be syntactically appropriate because he has not " heard " it or

> has not been " taught " it differently. My son is missing that " link " that

> most children acquire easily.

> **(Verbal behavior is the type of teaching that we have used with my son

> to teach language. Anything new, we teach by breaking down language into

> mands, tacts, intraverbals, etc. to help him comprehend its meaning.

> (Otherwise, he would not know that a train is something you ride, in addition

> to identifying " train. " ) He Bruner feels the behaviorist learning theory

> (known as BF Skinners Verbal Behavior today) is inadequate in explaining

> language acquisition because it does not address the combinatorial and

> generative effect of having a syntax that makes the structure of sentences,

> never heard by the child, possible (123). An example of this, for my son, is

> when he is ready for bed he says, " And now good night, " a phrase he learned

> from a video when he was a toddler. (He is now eight.) He does not know how

> to change the sentence structure to be syntactically appropriate because he

> has not " heard " it or has not been " taught " it differently. My son is

> missing that " link " that most children acquire easily.

> **(Verbal behavior is the type of teaching that we have used with my son

> to teach language. Anything new, we teach by breaking down language into

> mands, tacts, intraverbals, etc. to help him comprehend its meaning.

> (Otherwise, he would not know that a train is something you ride, in addition

> to identifying " train. " ) He continues to be non-verbal but his receptive

> language has greatly improved through this type of teaching. I am very

> interested in researching this further to see if there is a missing link that

> we can incorporate into an intensive teaching format that may improve his

> ability to use expressive language efficiently. How do you teach syntax to a

> child who sees the English language as a foreign language to begin with?)

> continues to be non-verbal but his receptive language has greatly improved

> through this type of teaching. I am very interested in researching this

> further to see if there is a missing link that we can incorporate into an

> intensive teaching format that may improve his ability to use expressive

> language efficiently. How do you teach syntax to a child who sees the

> English language as a foreign language to begin with?)

>

>

>