Language Learning: Domain-General & Specific Mechanisms - Essay Sample

Introduction

Psychologists have a consensus that language competence is pegged on understanding the language`s phonological structure, syntax, and examining semantics aspects. Language acquisition and learning can be explained in terms of inter-connectivity between the numerous domain-general cognitive mechanisms. This paper examines the domain specific and domain-general learning mechanisms as applied in the development of language.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Domain-general language learning mechanisms include habituation, prediction, and error connected learning, probabilistic learning, simple associations, and conditioning learning. Domain-general language learning mechanisms formulate that human beings are born with innate capabilities that facilitate learning complex language aspects in spite of the mass of knowledge being learned. According to Dwyer, Hogan, and Stewart, (2014), general domain theory is also termed as critical thinking and can be applied in studying the development of language in humans. On the other hand, domain-specific language learning mechanisms include whole object learning, taxonomical constraints, and exclusive mutual constraints.

According to Linda and Ether, (2003), general domain abilities in language development includes aspects of phonological awareness, aspects of working memory, and doodling and scribbling. On the other hand, according to Sweller, (2010), the domain-specific learning mechanism, which is also referred to as modularity theory includes learning abilities such as oral counting, counting knowledge and non-verbal arithmetic. The domain specificity approach postulate that humankind learn various language skills differently and there are certain variations within the brain for various specific skills. The human brain has a varied scope and knowledge frameworks that encompass domain-general and domain-specific that can be said to form part of language learning and acquisition mechanism. It should be noted that there is no consensus among psychologists on the aspect of modalities for measuring general domain language learning aspects. The topic has been controversial for many generations. The main paradigm has been on the realm of essential ideas necessary and sufficient for a correct domain-general to be justified.

Huffman, Dowdell, and Sanderson, (2018) postulate that according to modularity mechanisms theorists, the specific domains are independent to facilitate the acquisition of one language skill at a time such as word and syntax. The specific domain does not facilitate cumulative processes hence no beneficial roles in learning language skills. The new language skills are processed in the human brain. Therefore, according to Maddux, and Winsted, (2015), there is no clear framed evidence to base the point at language-specific mechanisms are significant in the acquisition of different language skills. Nevertheless, according to general domain theory, though the language data may be synthesized in the same manner and the same regions of the brain, the different general domains function interdependently. It should be noted that speech skills already gained may help gain other types of skills. According to the proponents of the domain-general theory such as and Maddux, and Winsted, (2015), the knowledge already gained helps in building other language domains after some time which contribute to our great language base. Language is a phenomenon that is said to be true and can be justified.

Proponents of general domain theory include psychologists Jean Piaget and Charles Spearman. According to Huffman et al., (2018), psychologist Jean Piaget formulated that persons have broad language abilities which are based on their past experiences, particularly early childhood experiences. The noble work of Psychologist Charles Spearman led to the evolution and further refining of the theory of general cognitive ability. Charles Spearman carried out numerous studies on children and observed that children gain different scores on varied language topics which are directly related. He concluded that the various correlations are connected to a common brain mechanism that is essential for all mental processes. Our perception and full comprehension of the surrounding assists in determining our understanding of the numerous factors that determine our cognitive processes. According to Maddux, and Winsted, (2015), comprehending our internal and external stimuli is spearheaded by general domains through various and mental activities. According to Huffman et al., (2018), the full application of aspects about general domain influence our language learning mechanisms. Furthermore, cognitive psychologists deal with various linguistic topics such as morphology, language history, language and culture among other linguistic fields. Children learn language through various aspects such as games and sports. Care should be taken while choosing the appropriate game and sport for children to promote growth and development of the child`s physical, social and cognitive domains such as word and syntax learning mechanisms.

According to Shah et al., (2017), the domain-general language learning mechanisms explains the various correlations in the different cognitive abilities. However, psychologists generally disagree on the origin of the positive language correlations. The work of psychologist Spearman was further developed by later psychologists such as Raymond B. Cartel who formulated that human language competence can be further divided into other broad categories. According to the psychologists, word and syntax learning mechanisms are cognitive based processes.

Huffman et al., (2018); and Rochel, (1990) explains that domain-general theories word and syntax learning mechanisms stress systematic analysis of the unconscious psychological, linguistic parameters that have a great impact on human linguistic ability during the formative years. The proponents of domain-general theory such as Jean Piaget and Charles Spearman postulate that early childhood activities and experiences provide systematic and positive expectations for learning word and syntax. According to Huffman et al., (2018), proper language development is gained after dealing with the internal environment of the child particularly solving the internal issues in the child`s mental capacity and learning the appropriate word and syntax learning sessions.

According to Huffman et al., (2018), the domain-specific theory focuses more on building clear goals for attaining language competence then strengthening language use and application. The young ones are trained on the acceptable word and syntax learning mechanisms and changing the improperly developed language levels to acceptable language levels. Moreover, creating a well conducive environment for word syntax learning mechanisms for the young ones is paramount.

Mandler, (2015) observes that the domain-specific approach encourages child educators such as guardians and teachers to monitor children as they learn language skills as they are unable to control themselves. Besides, there is need to formulate language rules and regulation and then focus on strong and positive prospects which will finally lead to well-based language learning consequences. Monitoring the word and syntax learning processes of the young ones by engaging them to know the appropriate application of word and syntax aspects is essential. If language educators' control and apply proper domain-specific theory tenets, effective and appropriate language competency results will be attained.

According to Broderick, and Blewit, (2015), domain-specific theory lays more stress on training and experience of the various language user. Experience in word and syntax use help support the domain specificity as opposed to general specificity. The theory proposes that to acquire competency in language skills such as word and syntax is not easy and that expert use is not easy to attain. One must spend years of training and have experience in the specific language aspect such as word and syntax. The aspect of experience opposes the general domain theory which proposes that language acquisition is innate. The domain specifies theory further proposes that language experts conduct researches at various levels with special reference to a specific word and syntax learning mechanisms. Furthermore, language experts have more data connected to word and syntax. The language professional for example will employ appropriate language styles in using syntax and further portray a high level of personal motivation in expressing usage of syntax as opposed to an inexperienced and untrained linguist.

General domain abilities in language development include aspects of phonological awareness, aspects of working memory, among others. Domain-general word and syntax learning mechanisms formulate that humans are born with innate capabilities that facilitate learning complex language aspects. On the other hand, modularity theory advocates that humankind learn various types of language skills differently and there are certain variations within the brain for various specific speech aspects. All in all, there is no clear framed evidence to base the point that language-specific mechanisms are significant in the acquisition of different language skills.

References

Broderick, P. C., & Blewitt, P. (2015). The life span: Human development for helping professionals. (4th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 43-52.

Huffman, K., Dowdell, K., & Sanderson, C. (2018). Psychology in action. (12th Ed.), Wiley.

Smith, L. B., & Thelen, E. (2003). Development as a dynamic system. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(8), 343-348.

Maddux, J. E., & Winstead, B. A. (2015). Psychopathology: Foundations for a contemporary understanding (4th ed). Routledge.

Mandler, G. (2013). The Limit of Mental Structures. Journal of General Psychology, 140:243-250.

Shah, S. A., Mushtaq, S., Naseer, M. N., Ahmad, M. A., Sharma, G., & Kovur, H. (2017). A text Book of psychopathology. RED SHINE Publication. Pvt. Ltd.

Gelman, R. (1990). First principles organize attention to and learning about relevant data: Number and the animateinanimate distinction as examples. Cognitive science, 14(1), 79-106.

Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances.