Test Your Knowledge Flash Cards 🔒Play Lemonaire 🔒Play Last Stand

Learning Theory of Language Development » Novel Language and Applying Learning Theory

What you'll learn this session

Study time: 30 minutes

Cambridge spec: 6.3.3, 6.3.4

The argument against the learning theory: children's use of novel language
Why made-up words like "I goed" are hard for the theory to explain
How to apply observation, imitation and reinforcement to new scenarios
How to build a full answer with the argument for and the argument against

🔒 Unlock Full Course Content

Unlock This Course

The argument against: novel language

The learning theory says children learn language from their environment, by observing and imitating other people and by being reinforced. That means a child should only say things they have heard someone else say. But children often say things nobody has ever said to them.

Key terms:

Novel language: words and sentences that a child produces but has never heard anyone say.

Here are some examples that children really say:

💬 "I goed to the shop"

Adults say "I went". A child who says "goed" has never heard an adult say it.

🐭 "Two mouses"

Adults say "two mice". "Mouses" is a word the child has made up.

Why this is a problem for the theory

Imitation cannot explain it. You can only copy something you have seen or heard. No adult says "goed" or "mouses", so the child cannot have copied them.
Reinforcement cannot explain it. Adults do not praise or reward a child for saying "goed". So the word is not being shaped by rewards.
What the examples suggest. The child seems to work out a rule, such as "add -ed for the past" or "add -s for more than one", and then uses it on a new word. That is more than copying.

So the argument against is this: children produce novel language that cannot come from imitation or reinforcement alone, which suggests that learning from the environment is not the whole story. (The biological explanation is covered in the lesson Universal Grammar and Critical Period.)

Applying the learning theory to new scenarios

In the exam you may get a short scenario you have never seen. You must use the theory to explain what is happening. Use these four ideas:

Observation: the child watches and listens to others.
Imitation: the child copies what they have seen or heard.
Positive reinforcement: a reward (praise, a smile, attention, getting what they want) makes the speech more likely again.
Negative reinforcement: speech removes something unpleasant, so the speech is more likely again.

Method: (1) name the idea, (2) quote the scenario, (3) say how it makes the speech more likely.

Scenario 1: Leila

Leila, aged two, watches her uncle answer the phone with "Hello, who's calling?" The next day she picks up a toy phone and says "Hello, who's calling?"

Model answer: This is observation and imitation. Leila watched and listened to her uncle (1), then copied the exact words he used (1), as the learning theory says children copy language from people around them (1).

Scenario 2: Dev

Dev is three. He says "juice" and his dad smiles, says "Good talking, Dev!" and hands him a cup of juice. Later that day Dev says "juice" again.

Model answer: This is positive reinforcement. Dev got praise and the juice he wanted straight after speaking (1), which are rewards (1), so he is more likely to say "juice" again (1).

Scenario 3: Amara

Amara, aged two, is wearing a scratchy jumper. She says "off" and her mum takes the jumper off. Amara now says "off" whenever something feels uncomfortable.

Model answer: This is negative reinforcement. Saying "off" removed something unpleasant, the scratchy jumper (1), so the speech was strengthened (1) and Amara is more likely to say it again in the same situation (1).

Building the 8-mark answer

A longer question may ask you to weigh up the learning theory. A strong answer has three parts:

Argument for: the Goldstein, King and West (2003) study. Babies whose mothers responded straight after their babbling made more mature, speech-like babbling. This fits reinforcement and the environment shaping speech.
Argument against: novel language. Children say "goed" and "mouses", which they have never heard, so imitation and reinforcement alone cannot explain it.
A conclusion: a short judgement that follows from the two sides, for example that the theory explains some language but not all of it.

Spend roughly equal time on each side, name the study, and use the key terms. Always check the command word in the question and answer exactly what it asks.

Common mistakes

Saying children never copy. The argument is that copying and rewards alone cannot explain novel language.
Using an example the child has heard. "Mummy" or "juice" is not novel. Novel language must be something the child has not heard.
Mixing up positive and negative reinforcement. Positive gives a reward. Negative removes something unpleasant. Neither is punishment.
Not using the scenario. Quote the child's words or actions in your answer.

Exam-style question

(a) Explain one argument against the learning theory of language development. [3 marks]

(b) A four-year-old boy, Sam, hears his older cousin say "That's awesome!" at a football match. The next week Sam says "That's awesome!" when he scores a goal. Use the learning theory to explain Sam's language. [3 marks]

Model answer

(a) Children use novel language, such as saying "I goed" instead of "I went" (1). They have never heard adults say these words (1), so the words cannot be explained by imitation or reinforcement alone (1).

(b) This is observation and imitation. Sam observed his cousin saying the phrase (1) and then copied it (1). The learning theory says children learn language by copying others in their environment (1).

Exam tip

For (a), always give an example of a made-up word and say why it cannot have been copied. For (b), quote Sam's words so your answer is clearly about this scenario.

Test Your Knowledge