CONCEPTS IN UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR

1. Universal Grammar (UG)

Universal grammar (UG) is a theory in linguistics proposing that the ability to
learn grammar is hard-wired into the brain. The theory suggests that linguistic ability
manifests itself without being taught and that there are properties that all natural human
languages share. It is a matter of observation and experimentation to determine
precisely what abilities are innate and what properties are shared by all languages.
UG theory proposes that if human beings are brought up under normal conditions (not
conditions of extreme sensory deprivation), then they will always develop language with
a certain property X (e.g., distinguishing nouns from verbs, or distinguishing function
words from lexical words). As a result, property X is considered to be a property of
universal grammar in the most general sense (here not capitalized).
As Chomsky puts it, "Evidently, development of language in the individual must involve
three factors: (1) genetic endowment, which sets limits on the attainable languages,
thereby making language acquisition possible; (2) external data, converted to the
experience that selects one or another language within a narrow range; (3) principles
not specific to FL. [FL is the faculty of language, whatever properties of the brain cause
it to learn language.] So (1) is Universal Grammar in the first theoretical sense, (2) is the
linguistic data to which the child is exposed.

2. Language Acquisition Device (LAD)

It is a hypothetical module of the human mind posited to account for children's innate
predisposition for language acquisition.
First proposed by Noam Chomsky in the 1960s, the LAD concept is an instinctive
mental capacity which enables an infant to acquire and produce language. It is
component of the nativist theory of language. This theory asserts that humans are born
with the instinct or "innate facility" for acquiring language. The main argument in favor of
the LAD is the argument from the poverty of the stimulus, which argues that unless
children have significant innate knowledge of grammar they would be unable to learn
language as quickly as they do, given that they never have access to negative evidence
and rarely received direct instruction in their first language. Chomsky has gradually
abandoned the idea of a LAD in favour of Universal Grammar and a parameter-setting
model of language acquisition (principles and parameters).

3. Principles and parameters

UG holds that a speaker knows a set of principles that apply to all languages, and
parameters that vary within clearly defined limits from one language to another.
Principles of language are rules or abstract principles that permit or prohibit certain
structures from occurring in all human languages. The principles cover grammar,
speech sounds, and meaning.
Example: The principle of structure dependency asserts knowledge of language relies
on the structural relationship in a sentence rather than the sequence of the words.
(English) The artist drew an eagle.
(Bahasa Melayu) Pelukis itu melukis seekor burung helang.
In both languages, the sentence breaks up into a noun phrase (NP) the artist and verb
phrase(VP) drew an eagle. These phrases also break up into smaller constituents. The
(NP) the artist consists of a determiner (Det or D) the and a Noun (N) artist, while the
NP an eagle consists of a determiner an and a Noun eagle.
The above sentence shows the existence of UG allows a speaker to follow certain rules
of grammar (a sent4ence has to have a subject) to correctly construct a sentence in that
language.
Parameters of language are systematic ways in which human languages vary which
determine the syntactice variability amongst languages.
Example: The use of past tense in English and Arabic which is non-existent in Bahasa
Melayu.
I went to the market yesterday
Semalam saya pergi ke pasar.

English (change in verb go to went)

BM (no change in verb pergi)

4. Surface Structure and Deep Structure

The departure from structuralism is determined by the element of 'surface' and 'deep'
levels of grammatical structure: two sentences may have similar surface structure but
very different underlying structures. In other words, there is a level, the 'deep-structure',
level which gives an insight into much of the inherent semantic ambiguity of apparently
similar surface sentences. What relates deep structure and surface structure are
transformations.
Example:

1) John is easy to see

2) John is eager to see
Despite the apparent similarity of the surface structure, the two sentences are very
different at deep-structure level. In fact, the former sentence can be paraphrased as to
see John is easy
On the other hand, the latter cannot be re-interpreted as to see John is eager because
it is ungrammatical. The sentences differ in other respects as well In sentence (2) the
NP John is performing the action (the agent), whereas in (1) it is rather the patient of the
action; lastly, in sentence (1) John is the object of the complement verb see (the
complement verb is in relation to the whole sentence : easy to see; the object of the
verb complement is the object of VP), whereas in (2) it represents the real subject. In
other words, in sentence (2) deep structure and surface structure level are closer than
in sentence (1)
http://www.maldura.unipd.it/ddlcs/GeD/gentile.pdf (4.8.2014)
5. Critical Period Hypothesis
The critical period hypothesis states that the first few years of life is the crucial time in
which an individual can acquire a first language if presented with adequate stimuli. If
language input doesn't occur until after this time, the individual will never achieve a full
command of languageespecially grammatical systems.
The evidence for such a period is limited. The duration of the period also varies greatly
in different accounts.
In second-language acquisition, the strongest evidence for the critical period hypothesis
is in the study of accent, where most older learners do not reach a native-like level.
However, under certain conditions, native-like accent has been observed, suggesting
that accent is affected by multiple factors, such as identity and motivation, rather than a
critical period biological constraint.
The assumption that there is a critical period is closely related to early
immersion instruction.
6. Interlanguage
Interlanguage is the term for a dynamic linguistic system that has been developed by a
learner of a second language (or L2) who has not become fully proficient yet but is
approximating the target language: preserving some features of their first language (or
L1), or overgeneralizing target language rules in speaking or writing the target language
and creating innovations. An interlanguage is idiosyncratically based on the learners'
experiences with the L2. It can fossilize, or cease developing, in any of its
developmental stages. The interlanguage rules are claimed to be shaped by several
factors, including: L1 transfer, transfer of training, strategies of L2 learning (e.g.

simplification), strategies of L2 communication (or communication strategies like

circumlocution), and overgeneralization of the target language patterns.
7. Fossilization
Fossilization refers to the process in which incorrect language becomes a habit and
cannot easily be corrected.
Example:
Many advanced level learners who have Spanish as an L1 do not distinguish between
he and she. This could be a fossilized error.