The acquisition of language is perhaps the most daunting intellectual task that a child faces, yet it is largely accomplished by age four, an age at which most children still can't tie their shoes or tell time. How are young children able to acquire native competence in language so quickly and effortlessly? Why are adults' attempts to learn foreign languages often doomed to failure, despite their greater cognitive abilities? These questions will provide a forum for exploring current debates raging between nativists and empiricists regarding the very nature of the human mind. The two opposing camps have philosophical roots in the rationalist/empiricist debate of the eighteenth century (and even further back), and their positions are often represented in modern terms as differing on the importance that they ascribe to nature (innate constraints) versus nurture (the role of experience) in language development. In our meetings, we will analyze readings from linguists, philosophers and cognitive psychologists such as Chomsky, Fodor and Bates supporting each position, as well as empirical evidence which bears on these questions in the form of data from first and second language acquisition in children and adults, including the acquisition of sign language. Students will work in pairs, and will be expected to write a position paper of 5-7 pages every two weeks, as well as to critique each other's papers. The papers will be based on the course readings and on exercises in which students will examine data from child and adult language learners.

Hour: AUSTIN