The purpose of this research is to examine the proposition that much of linguistic knowledge is innate. The plan of the research will be to set forth the basis for that claim, and then to discuss arguments for and against it, with a view toward reaching a determination as to the extent of its validity, based on the evidence and character of debate in the literature.
The concept that linguistic knowledge is innate is connected to theories of how language can be acquired in early childhood. The professional literature makes clear that the name linguistic theory is given to the idea that language acquisition occurs because human beings have, built in to their physical and psychological makeup from birth, the absolute possession of the ability to refine their language and communication skills. Thus understanding language becomes a matter of sorting out or syntactically organizing linguistic structures so as to arrive at meaning. This internal or "generative" grammar comprises certain patterns of linguistic rules that are basic to human consciousness and "discoverable from the raw linguistic data provided by the environment" (Bohannon and Warren-Leubecker, 1989, p. 196). The linguistic view is that environment is less important to language development than simple exposure to speech that may be duplicated by the human being whose language is developing.
The theory that linguistic knowledge is by and large innate appears to be based primarily on the work of Noam Chomsky, the principal linguistic theorist. Noam Chomsky asserts that linguistics is "a sub-field of psychology" (Chomsky, 1969, pp. 14-15, et passim) which is to say that there may be a preconscious or subconscious content or substance, which is nevertheless in human beings rational, associated with language acquisition. He also says that attempts to derive linguistic knowledge from externally observable (hence "experienceable") data do not account for the way that ...