Languages and Thought

I'll agree with all of this - with one alteration. Take out deaf.

The research (and it is out there, and it is old (it was already basic in development psych courses decades ago), Google will help you find it, rufio) shows that people who are not exposed to language as children will have cognitive delays. There is interesting research on people who missed exposure to language for any number of unusual reasons - hearing or deaf - there is evidence of delay in cognitive development.

Sozo, the book that dduck mentioned earlier The Language Instinct by Stephen Pinker is one such source. I'm sure that if you looked through any decent psychology text you could also find pictures that show how the parts of the brain related to language are not directly involved in any other part of the brain.

That's pretty interesting, sozo - so math (or the speed of doing math) has a linguistic component as well. What about when the kids did problems and just wrote the answer in the paper, rather than signaling it somehow? Did the deaf kids in this experiment have deaf or hearing parents? What was the criteria for dividing them into groups?

I'm sure that for you, this is "common knowlege". The problem with "common knowledge" is that more often than not, it's actually common expectation. You see it consistantly a couple times, or are told by someone that this is the case, and you believe it, and look for it hard enough so that you'll find it even if it isn't there. That's why I want specifics. Can you give me any specific anecdotes?

I have to go now, but I'll be back to respond to the rest later.

Patio, I don't think proficiency with math has anything to do with proficiency with langauge, or at least as far as I have studied anyway. If you have some reason to think it does, feel free to explain it.

EhBeth, the whole point in using deaf children as an example was because they were consistantly put into that situation, not because they were deaf.

I think what you need to consider is that language is a medium, like a car. If you want to travel anywhere it's easier and quicker with a car than walking. Learning new ideas is easier and quicker with language than without it, whether it's verbal or sign.

Maths and language: one of the most influential lingustics of our time is Noam Chomsky; he has this crazy idea that language, or more specifically, grammar can be represent by mathematics. I have my doubts, but lots of other people seem to think he has a point.
Iain

Ahh, Chomsky. . . he's kinda fallen out of favor with the linguistic community, but his language-as-math has sort of caught on. At least in highly grammatical languages, German, Latin, I've seen (and mostly passed up on) classes based entirely on the formulas of grammar. Linguistics majors (of which I am not) whom I know often complain about how everything they study has been reduced to math, that there's no art to it anymore.

Whether or not this is all relevant, without the fundamentals of language, it's hard to be taught anything, and since teaching and sharing communication is the primary way in which babies and children learn (I would assume this has to be the case until they've been taught how to teach themselves- by reading, doing, whatever), missing that stepping stone is a bit like being too short to see what's going on around you without a booster seat. . .

rufio, I definately remember Pinker saying that ASL, like any other language, is only learned "accent-free" by people who learn it very young. It's true of spoken languages as well. No matter how fluent an adult learner becomes, if they do not learn language young, while the neural pathways are forming, there will be differences in their pronunciation and usage from that of a native speaker.

I have a cousin whose (advanced) degrees are in early childhood cognition. She says that, until you have language, you don't have memory. So how can a child with no language learn anything?

For one example, take Helen Keller. She was unteachable until she understood that things have names -- that language exists. Deaf kids without ASL (or some comprehensive, non-vocal language) would be in the same predicament.

There was an interesting interview on the radio this morning with someone from the local board of education. They are experiencing difficulties with children of immigrants whose parents do not read to them - in any language - before they start school. They are finding that these children are very delayed in many areas of their education. The speaker said that reading is reading/language is language. Once you can read in one language you can learn to read in another, but that if you aren't exposed to any language early, there will be problems in many areas of learning. I'm going to try to track down a transcript of the interview.

dduck, I'd noticed the same thing about rufio's post. "pictures that show how the parts of the brain related to language are not directly involved in any other part of the brain" is really not the point here. That part is somewhat debatable, itself -- the locations of various functions in the brain is MUCH more fluid and malleable than previously thought -- but it looks at ends rather than means.

How are any skills developed? How can skills develop without language? Will the skills that do develop in the absence of language be at the same level as those of peers who do have language? Language is the means as well as one of many ends.

Wy, interesting about the "accent" issue... I have spoken before about a Deaf Chinese man, who learned Chinese sign as a child, and then learned ASL later. He spoke ASL with a Chinese accent... his thumb was much further back in the "A" handshape than Americans use, as he would revert to a similar Chinese handshape. (He could physically put his thumb in the "right" place, but as soon as he started talking it would go into the Chinese position.)

That's really cool, soz. . . I love this thread- I've learned so much about ASL and about languages in general. . . it's been a lot of fun :-)

Dduck, I'm sure grammar can be represented by math, and I like Chomsky's ideas (for the most part). In fact, I've read things about studying phonetics in terms of math too. I agree that language is mathematical. I don't think that math is linguistic.

Wy, I know a guy who was born in Cleveland, and who moved to Switzerland some time after graduate school (we'll agree that that's not exactly "young" in terms of language acquisition, right?) where he learned and spoke German for some 30-odd years. He came back to America recently for a job, and now speaks English (and German) with a Swiss accent. Accents can definitely change.

I always learned that Hellen Keller was unteachable because no one could communicate with her. Learning the names of things was a result of the teaching, not a cause of it.

EhBeth - I wouldn't expect parents who didn't actively teach their children to read to take much interest in the rest of their child's education - would you?

Sozo, the brain IS the means. Where do you think language ability comes from? Our livers?

All kinds of skills develope without language. Where have you been? Perhaps learning them is harder, but that's because classes in these skills are taught in language. Are there any studies out there about brain-damaged people who lost the ability to use language and nothing else? I've heard bunches of those stories...

Yes, accents can change. . . look at Ah-nold. . . I'm convinced he talks more like an Austrian now than when he lived there. . . <gigglesnort>

And as far as I remember my biography, she had her communication breakthrough when she realized that water was a "thing"- that there was a word, a name, a concept behind that weird stuff on her hand. Of course no one could communicate with her, so I don't see where you can come off, rufio, with "teaching" as the beginning of her ability to communicate. . . if you don't know that there's a "word" for water, you can't very well learn to speak or spell. . . so I think that Wy's right is ascribing that objectifying her world as the beginning. I think Ms. Keller would have agreed. (Her autobiography seems to say so).

She learned what water was because she was taught, didn't she? She didn't come to the realization on her own - it had to be provoked out of her. It may have helped her understand abstract concepts, but it was not a cause of understanding - she had to understand to know that it was water.

In any case, I thought it was more of a breakthrough about language in general, rather than about water. I guess I could be wrong.

Well, not really. . . her tutor spelled water over and over on her hand until she realized that "water" was what she was touching. . . she herself says she came to the knowledge of objects herself.

I guess what I'm saying here is that you can't "teach" someone when they have no way of communicating with you. I can teach you how to spell a word, because I can tell you things and you can understand them. People who lack these basic conversation skills don't even have that option. They have to learn how to learn, and that, I think, is largely an individual process.

And although you may be able to develop skills without language, well. . . the reason your brain-damaged scenario works is because most of those people learned to function before their injuries. How? With language.

You try teaching something to someone who can't hear you, doesn't understand writing or abstract concepts, symbols, or anything else. Good luck.

Princess, that's just what I meant. Until that breakthrough, when HK learned that language EXISTED, she was unteachable. rufio, how would you have had her learn, for instance, to eat with a fork unless you had a way to TELL her? Her parents and other teachers had tried forcing her to sit still at the table, but to no avail.

And of course accents can change. Just let me visit the South for a few weeks, and listen when I get home again! What I said was, unless a person learns a language young, while the neural pathways in the brain are developing, they will always speak that language with an accent. The accent will come from the language or languages learned while that development was taking place.

Your friend from Cleveland undoubtedly spoke German with an American accent, even though he may have been so fluent it took an expert to recognize it.

William Raspberry's editorial column in today's paper deals with a project of his. He was raised in a small town in Mississippi and he's helping to begin a program there to help children achieve in school. Here's a quote about one facet of the program that's pertinent here:



This indicates that it's not only being read to, as ehBeth mentioned, but conversation and just being talked to that makes a difference in language acquisition.

p.s. Raspberry goes on to explain more about how the parents in this one small town are learning to make a difference in the "culture in which schooling happens." He's a syndicated columnist so you can find it locally, but here's a link:

William Raspberry - Nurturing success

[edited to shorten the link and thank ehBeth!]

I'm not a moderator or anything else in particular - but i can help with the link - when you're posting your reply (not in the quick reply window - that's a whole nother project) - click on URL - a small window will pop up - toss your link in there - hit ok - it'll then ask you to give the link a name


let's try

a link to a page of hugs and kisses

submit - and bob's yer uncle

hi girl . . .

I didn't know you knew Wy well enough to have known that Bob is her uncle's name.

carry on.

Well it is, but I know who the guy in the phrase is, too -- and bob's his uncle as well!

Did my post get deleted?

Obviously, if she didn't know about objects beforehand she wouldn't have been able to use them as she did before her teacher came. What she learned was the names for things. She didn't know the names for things until she could be taught, so knowing the names for things did not "allow" her to be taught. "Being able to communicate" and "knowing the names for things" are different things entirely.

Quickly, as I have no time but this part is pertinent I think, HK didn't become deaf/blind until she was 19 months old.