children are able to express more abstract ideas that go beyond the physical world around
them and to talk about their feelings.Theories of Language Acquisition
Young children quickly acquire the language of others around them. Nativists argue that we
are born with a biological predisposition for language, while behaviorists insist that we
develop language by imitating the sounds we hear to create words. There is no debate about
the sequential stages of language development described in the above section. Representing
the nature side, nativist Noam Chomsky says that our brains are prewired for a universal
grammar of nouns, verbs, subjects, objects, negations, and questions. He compares our lan-
guage acquisition capacity to a “language acquisition device,” in which grammar switches
are turned on as children are exposed to their language. He cites overgeneralization as
evidence that children generate all sorts of sentences they have never heard, and thus could
not be imitating. He further believes that there is a critical periodfor language develop-
ment. If children are not exposed to language before adolescence, Chomsky believes they
will be unable to acquire language. On the nurture side of the language acquisition debate,
behaviorist B. F. Skinner believed that children learn language by association, reinforce-
ment, and imitation. He contended that babies merely imitate the phonemes around them
and get reinforcement for these. A baby’s first meaningful use of words is a result of shap-
ing that is done by parents over the course of the first year. Today, social interactionists agree
with both sides that language acquisition is a combination of nature and nurture. They
believe, like Chomsky, that children are biologically prepared for language, but, like
Skinner, they assert that the environment can either activate this potential or constrain it.
Cognitive neuroscientists emphasize that the building of dense neuronal connections
during the first few years of life is critical for the mastery of grammar.Thinking
Thinking affects our language, which in turn affects our thoughts. Linguist Benjamin Whorf
proposed a radical hypothesis that our language guides and determines our thinking.
He thought that different languages cause people to view the world quite differently. Some
words do not translate into other languages. In support of his idea, people who speak more
than one language frequently report a different sense of themselves depending on the
language they are speaking at the time. His linguistic relativity hypothesishas largely been
discredited by empirical research. Rather than language determining what we can perceive,
a more likely hypothesis is that the objects and events in our environment determine the
words that become a part of our language.
Do you ever think about how you solve problems to attain goals? If so, you engage in
metacognition,thinking about how you think. We usually manipulate concepts to solve prob-
lems. Concepts enable us to generalize, associate experiences and objects, access memories,
and know how to react to specific experiences.Problem Solving
How do we solve problems? Most problem-solving tasks involve a series of steps. Typically,
we first identify that we have a problem. Next we generate problem-solving strategies. These
can include using an algorithm or a heuristic, or breaking the problem into smaller prob-
lems, developing subgoalsthat move us toward the solution. An algorithmis a problem-
solving strategy that involves a slow, step-by-step procedure that guarantees a solution to
many types of problems. Although we will eventually solve the problem correctly using anCognition 135