BF SKINNER

Picture
 
BF Skinner was more or less the pioneer of language acquisition theories. His theory that language was acquired under the principles of reinforcement was the first and most widely accepted language acquisition theory of the late 1950's and 1960's. Skinner argued that children acquired language under the principles of reinforcement, that they associated words with meanings. Essentially, if a child correctly pronounces a word or correctly composes a sentence with the correct grammatical structure they are met with reassurance and approval from their caregivers (4). For example, if an infant correctly pronounces the word "milk" and his or her mother responds with a smile and a bottle of milk, the infant is reinforced to pronounce the word the way he or she initially did and is assured of the meaning of the word (4). Skinner was heavily influenced by John Locke and the idea that humans are born with a "blank slate" or "tabula rasa" and was one of the foremost behaviorists of the century. He said that in his opinion explaining "behavior without appealing to any prior causes" is a "hopeless task," which is a behaviorist view (1). For this reason he strongly disagreed with Noam Chomsky and other structuralists. BF Skinner conducted many experiments including placing rats and pigeons into "operant conditioning chambers" to condition them to behave in certain ways (2). He used the principles of his experiments to explain language acquisition.

NOAM CHOMSKY

Noam Chomsky is one of the most polarizing figures in the field of linguistics and psychology. He exploded into stardom in the intellectual world in the 1960's when he wrote a critique to the great BF Skinner's book on language acquisition, Verbal Behavior, over time the critique became more accepted than the original work itself and is now one of the most widely cited works in the field of linguistics. The critique argued that language cannot be solely acquired by reinforcement and that there must be some innate structure or genetic component that helps humans acquire language (3). Chomsky said that the speed of which children acquire language is too rapid and too remarkable for it to possibly be explained by reinforcement, he said that if children acquired language through reinforcement it would take much longer than 2 years for children to understand the basic structures of their first language (4). He also pointed out that of the many species of animals in the world that humans are the only ones capable and creative enough to engage in conversation, meaning that there must be some inborn trait that allows us to learn language (1). That supposition was proven in the 1960's, when a group of linguists tried to teach a chimpanzee, dubbed "Nim Chimpsky" to learn English sign language and engage in conversation with humans, they found that after years of training the chimpanzee could do no more than ask for basic items, meaning that there must be an isolated gene present primarily in humans that allows them to engage in conversation (1). Chomsky also used a more personal approach of common sense, he argued that "humans are not genetically programmed to learn one or another language" and that if he "brought up a Japanese baby in Boston it would speak Boston English" and if he raised his own child in Japan it "would speak Japanese," and vice versa, he used this basic truth to argue that all languages must therefore share the same innate structure, this idea became known as universal grammar (1). Chomsky's main argument against behaviorist views of language acquisition can perhaps be summarized by his quote "if in fact our minds were a blank slate we would be very impoverished creatures, indeed" (1). Over the last 45 years Noam Chomsky's theory of universal grammar has superseded behaviorist theories of language acquisition, namely those of BF Skinner and have become widely agreed upon and studied by the scientific community.  

THE "DEBATE"

The difference between Chomsky and Skinner's beliefs can most simply be put as such: Skinner believes that language is learned, whereas Chomsky believes that language is innate, and is simply developed. It is also important to understand the psychological approaches that each man belongs to, Skinner is a behaviorist, whereas Chomsky is a structuralist. In many ways, the "debate" between the two men is simply a reincarnation of the timless question of "nature versus nurture," which people have found is impossible to answer most of the time. Before analyzing the "debate of the century" it is important to understand that although the two theories were hotly debated, the two men never engaged in dialectical dialogue. In fact, Skinner never bothered to write a response to Chomsky's critique of his Verbal Behavior saying rather immaturely that he had "no inclination to do so at all" because to respond he "should've had to read it and had no intention of doing that" and because he "found it boring" (1). Later on, BBC proposed a televised debate between the two psychologists, which BF Skinner refused, saying that "Chomsky loves to talk, so I told them that I would go on for a debate under the condition that they guarantee that we would receive equal speaking time" he then said jokingly that "if anyone wished to disprove Alfred Adler's thesis that a man goes into a field which he has some natural shortcoming, I suggest he cite Chomsky" (1). At the end of Skinner's life he said that he saw no reason to respond to Chomsky's critique since "a wonderful psychologist named Kenneth MacCorquodale has already picked apart Chomsky's review of my book page by page for me" (1). Supporters of Chomsky say that "Skinner is nothing but a stimulus response psychologist" or that Skinner thinks "people are nothing more than pigeons" or more humorously that "we should lock up Skinner and give Chomsky a carte blanche" (1). Since Skinner never gave a formal response to Chomsky and allowed a "Chomskyan revolution" to occur in the field of linguistics in the 1960's the verdict as to which psychological mind reigns superior will always be an open ended question, without any sort of consensus. Although it should be known that if there ever was a true debate between Chomsky and Skinner, that Chomsky won under the principles of both forfeiture and acceptance. Chomsky's theory of universal grammar is now the most widely cited linguistic theory and the most respected by the scientific  community (5). There are still heavy death metal behaviorist sympathizers, though, but only time will tell whose theory was correct. 
This is a really interesting video

CONCLUSION

Like many things in psychology, and in a broader sense, science, the issue of language acquisition is still without a definite answer. It is our task as humans to engage in the praxis of inquiry and conversly to seek out evidence and rationale to support our claims. People like myself have a certain advantage, though. We are humbled by the lack of acuity that makes us merely observers, but at the same time we hold a position over the brilliant minds that offer up their work for our judgement. No matter how intelligent men like Noam Chomsky and BF Skinner may be, it is still the the observer that holds the power of consensus. The debate between Skinner and Chomsky on language acquisition has become a bone of contention because of the longevity of the debate and the questions it reintroduces. But like the truism that in science there are rarely definite answers, there is another truism which could help us come to a compromise. That is the truism and the possibility that is often overlooked, that maybe, both of these men were correct in their suppositions of language. Which is why I contest that we look at the debate from a biopsychosocial perspective rather than from a behaviorist perspective like Skinner, or a structuralist perspective, like Chomsky. By looking at language acquistion from a biopsychosocial perspective we effectively confront this truism, that in life there is often more than one truth. Lastly, it is important to recognize the contributions that a simple disagreement of men have had on psychology. Both Chomsky and Skinner's theories have led to significant scientific advancements. Skinner's theory of language acquisition and his use of operant conditioning to explain how the process occurs has led to very practical real world applications, such as in the classroom or in the workplace (6). Chomsky's theory of universal grammar has led to and inspired many important studies on idigenous tongues in the Amazon particularly, but also other isolated societies around the world. Such as the study on the Amazon tribe that has no numeracy, which was actually meant to disprove Chomsky, but nonetheless was only conducted because of him (7). In many ways, the lack of agreement upon which theory is correct has driven both Noam Chomsky and BF Skinner to expand upon their theories, conduct new experiments and studies, and perhaps most importantly, inspire new generations of psychologists seeking to continue the endless endeavor of understanding language. 
-Doug

CITATIONS

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNwWQyLWcYM
2. http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfiHd6DyuTU
4. http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html
5. http://english.duke.edu/uploads/media_items/skinner-and-chomsky-thirty-years-later.original.pdf
6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1311079/
7. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/22/books/a-new-book-and-film-about-rare-amazonian-language.html
8. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/movies/project-nim-about-a-chimpanzee-subjected-to-research-review.html