Re: First language acquisition
- From: "ranjit_mathews@xxxxxxxxx" <ranjit_mathews@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 12 Sep 2006 20:46:44 -0700
Nathan wrote:
Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
I wanted to make the issue much simpler than what is happening
in the real world, where a child has to manage with his limited
capabilities (compared to an adult) to learn both vocabulary
and grammar.
This is a seriously flawed assumption. Why in the world would you
assume that a child acquiring his first language has "capabilities to
learn both vocabulary and grammar" that are limited compared
to those of an adult?
How would a child be able to learn Fowler's distinction between:
1) He is a man that is never at a loss, and
2) He is a man who is never at a loss
without growing up enough to become literate and choosing to read
Fowler?
How would a child add "flatulal" to its vocabulary, a word hardly ever
heard in speech but one that one occasionally comes across in print,
without growing up enough to become literate and read print media?
Not only are there mountains of actual
evidence against this, but it contradicts common sense!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: First language acquisition
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: First language acquisition
- References:
- First language acquisition
- From: Mok-Kong Shen
- Re: First language acquisition
- From: jaspers . jason
- Re: First language acquisition
- From: Mok-Kong Shen
- Re: First language acquisition
- From: Colin Fine
- Re: First language acquisition
- From: Mok-Kong Shen
- First language acquisition
- Prev by Date: Re: French negation
- Next by Date: Re: what is etymology? (linguistics and biology)
- Previous by thread: Re: First language acquisition
- Next by thread: Re: First language acquisition
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|