Semantic Perception Theory

Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education
Kekang He
Semantic
Perception
Theory
A New Theory on Children’s Language
Development
Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming
Education
Series Editors
Zhongying Shi, Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
Shengquan Yu, Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
This book series brings together the latest insights and work regarding the future of
education from a group of highly regarded scholars around the world. It is the first
collection of interpretations from around the globe and contributes to the
interdisciplinary and international discussions on possible future demands on our
education system. It serves as a global forum for scholarly and professional debate
on all aspects of future education. The book series proposes a total rethinking of
how the whole education process can be reformed and restructured, including the
main drivers and principles for reinventing schools in the global knowledge
economy, models for designing smart learning environments at the institutional
level, a new pedagogy and related curriculums for the 21st century, the transition to
digital and situated learning resources, open educational resources and MOOCs,
new approaches to cognition and neuroscience as well as the disruption of
education sectors. The series provides an opportunity to publish reviews, issues of
general significance to theory development, empirical data-intensive research and
critical analysis innovation in educational practice. It provides a global perspective
on the strengths and weaknesses inherent in the implementation of certain
approaches to the future of education. It not only publishes empirical studies but
also stimulates theoretical discussions and addresses practical implications. The
volumes in this series are interdisciplinary in orientation, and provide a multiplicity
of theoretical and practical perspectives. Each volume is dedicated to a specific
theme in education and innovation, examining areas that are at the cutting edge
of the field and are groundbreaking in nature. Written in an accessible style, this
book series will appeal to researchers, policy-makers, scholars, professionals and
practitioners working in the field of education.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/14177

Kekang He
Semantic Perception Theory

A New Theory on Children’s Language
Development
123
Kekang He
Educational Technology Institute
Beijing Normal University
Beijing, China
ISSN 2366-1658 ISSN 2366-1666 (electronic)

Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education
ISBN 978-981-15-1103-5 ISBN 978-981-15-1104-2 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1104-2
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard
to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Foreword
Nearly two decades ago, in November 2000, Professor He Kekang wrote a

monograph, entitled A Theory of Creative Thinking—Construction and Verification
of the DC Model, which was published by Beijing Normal University Press. I was
then invited to write the preface for it, where I stated, “Professor He Kekang is not a
psychologist by profession; yet, he ‘bumped into’ the field of psychology from a
novel perspective. I respect this man, an education technologist, a computer
application professional, and an eminent doctoral tutor. His book is commendable
and offers insight into the creative thinking by means of his novel, unique and
valuable views, and also reflects the power of interdisciplinary study, which is
worthy of attention from the fields of psychology and education and even the
academia.” Today, in front of you, Professor He Kekang presented a new book,
entitled Semantic Perception Theory: A New Theory of Children’s Language
Development, which will be published in People’s Education Press. The book has
somewhat the characteristic of developmental psycholinguistics, and it indicates
that the further breakthrough in the field of psychology, which is truly admirable.
Is the language acquisition of children innate or acquired? In responding to this
question, Professor He, in the book, exemplifies two opposite views: one is from
Noam Chomsky, the theory of transformational generative grammar, which
emphasizes that children have an innate capacity for language, namely “language
acquisition mechanism.” Another view is that of Danald O. Hebb’s “interaction of
nature and nurture,” which emphasizes that child’s language ability development
depends on both the inherent structure of speech and the interaction with external
environment and experience. In fact, the first one challenged Chomsky’s view is not
Hebb, but his student D. McNeill. On the basis of Chomsky’s psycholinguistics,
McNeill constructed developmental psycholinguistics. There are two main differ-
ences between McNeill and Chomsky: one is from innateness to interaction; the
other is a shift in focus from grammar to semantics. Professor He believes that
language involves speech, grammar, and semantics, and that a new-born baby has a
natural capacity for language perception and recognition, but the ability to
v
vi Foreword
recognize grammar is acquired through learning. It is amazing that Professor He,

who is not a professional engaged in psychology research, develops such unique
psychological insight.
The concept of semantic perception presented by Professor He mainly refers to
“the semantic perception system independent from the general auditory system.”
What is the accurate meaning of semantic perception? Professor He proposed a
brand new proposition that is “semantic perception is the sixth sense of human
perception,” on which a detailed, complete, and scientific argumentation was made.
For the issue of semantic perception being innate or acquired, Professor He both
affirmed that innateness of semantic perception has physiological basis, meanwhile
emphasizing language acquisition of children based on semantic perception, and
put forward the idea of “the influence of environment and the critical period of
semantic perception development.” To prove this conclusion, Professor He not only
compared the two processes of children’s language acquisition and adults’ speech
generation and comprehension, but also discussed the acquired ability to read and
write. He exposited the critical stages of children’s language development and
analyzed the influence of semantic perception on children’s language acquisition
(LA). This argument is well-grounded, informative, persuasive, and even creative.
In addition, what is the relationship between semantic perception and language
development theory of the past or the theory of children’s LA? I think it is mainly
inheritance, development, and innovation. He systematically compares language
sense and the theory of two-signal systems from Pavlov. He points out that his
theory inherits and also improves the current children’s LA theory such as the
theory of Chomsky and others, which is justified and objective.
The value of Semantic Perception Theory authored by Professor He Kekang lies
not only in theoretical significance, but more importantly, in practical value as well.
In this book, Professor He discusses children’s language development and native
language teaching and the importance of Semantic Perception Theory on foreign
language teaching reform. He and his colleagues went into the field of educational
practice and conducted a series of reform experiments for native and foreign lan-
guage teaching by using Semantic Perception Theory in primary schools, which
obtained remarkable achievements. For instance, the innovative teaching and
inventive methods, which are formed under the guidance of Semantic Perception
Theory and other related theories, made the second graders to achieve the level
of the fourth or fifth grade in terms of literacy, reading, and writing ability. And
made the fourth graders improve English listening and speaking ability generally up
to the level of junior high school (equivalent to levels of four to five required by
National English Curriculum Standards). All this, not only shows that Professor He
integrates theory with practice, but also verifies the correctness and scientificity of
Semantic Perception Theory.
I often heard such appraisal of Professor He that he is an educational technol-
ogist. In fact, this assessment is not comprehensive. He is an authoritative figure of
modern educational technologist in China as well as an educator. He invented a
Foreword vii
series of educational theories, such as creative thinking theory, Semantic Perception

Theory, innovative thinking on the development of children’s thinking and so on.
Furthermore, he also achieved outstanding achievements in education and teaching
reform and experimental studies. According to the educational research statistics in
recent years, Professor He stays on top of citation list.
June 2004 Chongde Lin

Beijing Normal University
Beijing, China
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to all those who provided support, talked
things over, read, wrote, provided us with comments, allowed us to quote their
remarks, and assisted in the proofreading, editing, and designing.
Very special thanks to the team of Open Educational Resources, Smart Learning
Institute of Beijing Normal University, for their professional support and positive
contribution.
I would also like to thank Ning Ma, Associate Professor of Beijing Normal
University, who played a key role in the English proofreading, and Ying Zhao,
Associate Professor of Capital Normal University, Li Lin, Professor of Capital
Normal University, who helped to translate the full texts with high quality. I’m very
grateful for their enthusiastic participation and unremitting efforts.
ix
Contents
1 Child Language Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 Acquired Environment Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Innateness Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2.1 Language Acquisition Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2.2 The Critical Period Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Interaction Between Nature and Nurture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 Assessment of the Two Theories of Child Language
Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 7
1.5 Semantic Perception and Species Evolution . . . . . . . .......... 9
2 About the Proposition of “Semantic Perception Is the Sixth
Sense of Human Perception” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 13
2.1 Current Understanding of the Sensory Perception in Academia ... 14
2.2 Analysis of Neurophysiological Mechanism of Sensory
Perception and Its Constituents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 16
2.2.1 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis
of Elements of Visual–Perceptual System . . . . . . . . . . ... 17
of Hearing Perception System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 18
of Gustatory System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 21
of Olfactory System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 22
of Somatosensory System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 22
2.3 Objective Criteria for the Proper Classification of Sensory
Perception Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 23
xi
xii Contents
2.4 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis of the Semantic

Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 26
2.4.1 Neurophysiological Mechanism of Speech–Hearing
System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 26
2.4.2 Components of Speech–Hearing System
(Elements of Semantic Perception) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 31
2.5 Semantic Perception: Criteria of Perception Classification . . . . ... 32
3 Physiological Basis and Innateness of Semantic Perception . . . . . . . 37
3.1 Function of Semantic Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.1.1 Perception and Differentiation of Phonetics . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.1.2 Semantic Analysis and Recognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.2 Criteria for Determining Innateness (or Congeniality Capacity) . . . 40
3.3 Physiological Basis and Innateness of Function of Speech
Perception and Discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 41
3.3.1 Neurophysiological Basis of Function of Speech
Perception and Discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 41
3.3.2 Innateness of Speech Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 42
3.3.3 Innateness of Speech Differentiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 43
3.4 Physiological Basis and Innateness of Function of Semantic
Analysis and Recognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 45
3.4.1 Neurophysiological Basis of Function of Semantic
Analysis and Recognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 45
3.4.2 Innateness of Function of Semantic Analysis
and Recognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 48
4 Child Language Development Based on Semantic Perception
Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 53
4.1 General Models of Speech Comprehension and Speech
Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.1.1 The Blumstein Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.1.2 Levelt’s Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.1.3 The Gazzaniga Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.1.4 Comparison of the Main Features of the Three Models . . . 57
4.2 Models of Language Comprehension and Production Based
on Semantic Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 58
4.3 Child’s Language Acquisition and Adult’s Speech
Comprehension/Production Compared . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4.4 Main Stages of Child’s Language Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.4.1 Articulation Practice Period (Born to About 6 Months) . . . 65
4.4.2 Speech Preparation Period (7–11 or 12 Months) . . . . . . . . 66
4.4.3 Speech Development Period (1–2.5 Years Old or so) . . . . . 68
4.4.4 Speech Maturity (2.5–4.5 or 5 Years Old) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Contents xiii
4.5 Child’s Language Development and Native Language

Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 70
4.6 Analysis of Child’s Language Acquisition Process
from the Theory of Semantic Perception . . . . . . . . . . ......... 72
4.6.1 Children’s Language Acquisition Model Based
on Semantic Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 72
4.6.2 Child Speech Comprehension . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 75
4.6.3 Child’s Speech Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 79
5 Innateness and Perceptibility of Speech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
5.1 Innateness of Hearing in Speech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
5.2 Innateness of Speaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
5.3 Acquisition of Reading and Writing Ability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.3.1 A Psychological Processing Model of Reading
and Writing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 87
5.3.2 Acquisition of Reading Ability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 89
5.3.3 Acquisition of Writing Ability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 91
5.4 Impacts of Acquired Environment and the Critical Period
in Semantic Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 91
5.4.1 Inborn Ability and Environmental Impact . . . . . . . . . .... 91
5.4.2 Growth and Development Period for Semantic
Perception and Semantic Perception Sensitivity Curve .... 93
5.5 Importance of Semantic Perception Theory for Foreign
Language Teaching Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 97
5.5.1 Implications of ‘Child Language Acquisition Model
Based on Semantic Perception’ to the Design
of Foreign Language Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 97
5.5.2 Practical Significance of ‘Child Semantic Perception
Curve’ to Foreign Language Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.6 Perceptibility of Speech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
6 Semantic Perception Theory and Pavlov’s ‘Two Signal Systems’ . . . 111
6.1 Historical Background of Theory of ‘Two Signal System’ . . . . . . 111
6.2 Basic Contents and Physiological Mechanisms of ‘Two Signal
Systems’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.2.1 Establishment of Basic Conditions and
Neurophysiological Mechanisms of Conditioned Reflex . . . 115
6.2.2 Basic Contents and Neurophysiological Mechanisms
of the Second Signal System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
xiv Contents
6.3 Importance of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and Interrelation

Between the Two Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.3.1 Significance of Two Signal Systems for Human
Survival and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.3.2 The Interrelation Between Two Signal Systems . . . . . . . . . 121
6.3.3 Importance of ‘Two Signal Systems’ to the
Development of Psychology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
6.4 Relations and Differences Between ‘Semantic Perception Theory’
and ‘Two Signal Systems’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
6.4.1 Fundamental Differences Between Man and Animals . . . . . 124
6.4.2 The Relation Between Language and Thinking . . . . . . . . . 126
6.4.3 The Structure and Function of Analyzer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
6.5 Difference and Complementarity Between Semantic Perception
Theory and Two Signal System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
6.5.1 The Main Research Objects of the Two Theories . . . . . . . 129
6.5.2 Neurophysiological Mechanisms Involved in the Two
Theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
6.5.3 Inherent Nature Involved in the Two Theories . . . . . . . . . . 134
7 Semantic Perception Theory: Inheritance and Development
to Child Language Development Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
7.1 Inheritance and Development to Lenneberg’s Critical Period
Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
7.2 Inheritance and Development to Chomsky’s ‘LAD’ . . . . . . . . . . . 138
7.3 Inheritance and Development to Hebb’s Interaction Theory . . . . . . 140
Appendix A: An Innovative Study of English Education Leaping

Development Based on Semantic Perception Theory . . . . . 145
Appendix B: Guide to the Construction of Teaching Resource
Database of “Innovative Study of English Education
Leaping Development Based on Semantic Perception
Theory” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Appendix C: Exploration of Primary School English Teaching Under
the Guidance of Semantic Perception Theory . . . . . . . . . . . 175
Appendix D: Grasp the Critical Period of Semantic Perception
and Create a Communicative Context for English
Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
Appendix E: Primary School English Teaching Method Centered
on Verbal Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Appendix F: The Construction and Application of Primary
School English Teaching Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
Chapter 1
Child Language Development
Why can children aged four-five from any nation teach himself to talk mother
tongue, which contains countless variations in grammar rules? Does language capac-
ity resulted from natural causes or the acquired environment? How to promote a
child’s language abilities (including both mother tongue ability and second language
ability)? These questions are the issues of common concern among linguists, psy-
chologists, and educational circles. In order to answer these questions, it is necessary
to comprehend and apply fundamental theories of child language development (also
known as children’s language acquisition theories).
Thus far, there are three types of fundamental theories on child language initi-
ations and development, which is about how children acquire languages, namely
environment theory, innateness theory, and interaction theory.
1.1 Acquired Environment Theory1
This theory argues that a child’s language ability is acquired through learning
experiences. As the British philosopher, John Locke2 said to the effect that any human
knowledge (including language) could not go beyond experience. The behavioral
psychologists not only inherited the view of empiricism but also further developed it.
It is well known that behavioral psychology only treats specific behavior as the object
of its study. They believe that behavior can be viewed as a response to a stimulus, as
the process of conditioned reflexes and the results of repetition and reinforcement.
To be brief, language is nothing but the “verbal action,” which means that as with
1 Yuming, Li, Child Language Development. pp. 29–37, p. 83. Shanghai: Southeast China University
Press. 1995. 6.
2 Cited in Dechun, Wang, neurolinguistics, pp. 17–22, p. 102, pp. 97–123. Shanghai: Shanghai
Foreign Language Education Press. 1997. 2.
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 1
K. He, Semantic Perception Theory, Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming
Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1104-2_1
2 1 Child Language Development
many other behaviors, language is learned through a series of stimulus–response.

Furthermore, children’s language ability learns by repeating what they hear, and its
ability can be improved through positive reinforcement from their parents.
In fact, the verbal behavior is quite complex; it is both affected by language inter-
action environment and the speaker’s psychological factors, and thus this behav-
ior cannot be recognized as a simple ‘stimulus–response’ process. Therefore, it is
not accurate that just as behaviorists had conceived, through controlling stimulates,
responses can be controlled as well as predicted, such as various verbal behavior
of human beings. Many linguists, through sustained observations and experiments,
proved that a child masters a language mainly through interpersonal communication.
Besides, although sometimes children repeat or imitate adults and then they would
be praised, this way is not the main way that children acquire languages. In the last
century, while the behavioristic view occupied a dominant position so that ‘acquired
environment theory’ was once popular, this perspective is already behind the times.
1.2 Innateness Hypothesis
Two kinds of leading innateness hypothesis are worthy of discussion here, i.e., lan-
guage acquisition device (LAD) represented by Noam Chomsky and Critical Period
Hypotheses represented by Eric. Heinz. Lenneberg.
1.2.1 Language Acquisition Device
In contrast to nurture theories, Chomsky argues that a child has a ‘language acquisi-
tion device’ (LAD), which is determined by congenital hereditary factors. To illus-
trate how this mechanism affects the process of infants accessing mother tongue,
Chomsky proposed a language acquisition model based on Universal Grammar (UG)
in 1988. In this model, the process of infants and young children acquiring their
mother tongues described as below.3
Universal Grammar (UG) has specific parameters that can be fixed by experi-
ence in some way. Language ability can be viewed as an intricate network that is
connected to a switch box that contains a switch matrix, and these switches can
convert between two states. The switches must be set before the system can run, and
once the switches are set to some permissible mode of operation, the system will
operate according to its nature. However, depending on the different way of switch
setting, the functions of the system are different. The fixed network is the princi-
pal system of Universal Grammar; the switch parameters are determined by
experience. The data that is presented to children who are learning languages must
3 Chomsky, N. Language and Problems of Knowledge, pp. 62–63. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press.:
1988.
1.2 Innateness Hypothesis 3
be able to meet the need for a certain way of setting switches. After switches are
set up, the child has mastered a particular language and understood the fact of this
language—a definite expression has a specific meaning. Therefore, language learn-
ing is a process of determining the uncertain value of the parameter in the Universal
Grammar as well as the switch parameters required in network operation. Besides,
language learners must discover the vocabulary of language and their features. In fact,
language learning is not what children do, but what happens to children in a certain
adaptation environment, just as a child’s body grows and matures in a predetermined
way under appropriate environmental stimuli and nutritional conditions.
Thus, according to Chomsky’s viewpoints, the process of a child’s language acqui-
sition is actually a process in which the child actively discovers and determines the
undetermined parameters and related lexical items in the Universal Grammar. Chil-
dren are the active agent of the initiative to generate and develop language, rather
than an imitator who only passively responds to stimuli, as is the case with acquired
environmentalists. Children learn a language not by learning sentence one by one,
but by a series of rules of the Universal Grammar system (each rule governs a
large number of sentences)—as long as the parameters are set, the Universal
Grammar system is determined. Chomsky believes that this is the root cause of
all children’s ability to quickly master their native language in a short period.
Compared with the acquired environmental theory, Chomsky’s LAD theory,
although the above advantages, has not yet been widely accepted by academia,
because of its two defects:
(1) Chomsky’s argument that the infant’s innate ‘language acquisition device’ is
a product of speculation (Chomsky does not provide evidence of brain neu-
rophysiology). Moreover, whether the brain has an innate neurophysiological
mechanism that deals with Universal Grammar. It is still only a hypothesis, and
it remains to be confirmed.
(2) The role of acquired language environment has not given sufficient attention. As
mentioned above, Chomsky believes that the process of children’s acquisition of
language is a process in which children actively discover and determine the still
undetermined parameters and related vocabulary in Universal Grammar, and
this process does not require ‘a child actually does something’ as long as ‘in a
suitable environment,’ things will happen to the child. ‘Like a child’s body grows
and matures in a predetermined way under appropriate environmental stimuli
and nutritional conditions.’ It is clear that Chomsky believes that the process of
a child’s acquisition of language does not require children to actually learn the
language (not requiring children to actually do things), as long as the child can
be placed in a ‘suitable environment,’ they can automatically acquire language
skills. It is just like the body’s automatic growth and development under proper
nutritional conditions. Here, although it is also mentioned that there is ‘a cer-
tain suitable environment’ (indicating that Chomsky does not entirely deny the
role of the environment), in the whole Chomsky’s theory, how the environment
affects explicitly the generation of child’s language and development is rarely
involved. The foundation and focus of its theory focus are always on the innate
mechanism. Moreover, it seems that as long as children exposed to some lan-

guage materials and linguistic phenomena, they can acquire languages by using
the innate LAD, such as linguists, through finding grammatical rules from the
input language material.
1.2.2 The Critical Period Hypothesis
Another innateness hypothesis currently influential is Lenneberg’s ‘critical period

hypothesis.’4 In 1967, Lenneberg published his famous work The Biological Foun-
dation of Language. In the book, he presents a set of criteria for determining whether
it is an ‘innate ability,’ which includes the following six indicators5 :
(1) The behavior associated with this ability has appeared before it is needed;
(2) Its appearance is not the result of conscious decision-making;
(3) Its appearance is not inspired by external events, which must provide an ideal
environment for the development of capacities;
(4) Direct teaching and intensive training have little impact on the development of
this ability;
(5) The development of this capacity is clearly phased and related to age and other
aspects of developmental levels;
(6) There is a ‘critical period’ for this ability to acquire. It is challenging to master
this ability after this critical period.
Lenneberg believes that human language ability is in full compliance with the
requirements of this set of guidelines, so it is innate. The basic idea of Lenneberg’s
innateness hypothesis is to regard a child’s language developments as a natural mat-
uration process that is restricted by nerve functions such as vocal organs and brain.
With the growth of age, the child’s vocal organs and brain’s nerve function gradu-
ally grow and develop. When language-related physiological function matures to a
particular state, as long as the appropriate external conditions activate it, the poten-
tial language-related physiological function can be transformed into actual language
ability. Thus, the acquisition of children’s language ability is congenitally inherited.
Lenneberg also pointed out that during a child’s development, language ability is
initially dominated by the right hemisphere of the brain, and then gradually shifts
from the right to the left hemisphere, and finally forms the language advantage of
the left hemisphere (left lateralization).
Lenneberg6 believes that the process of left lateralization takes place in children
aged two to twelve and emphasizes that it is a critical period for children’s language
4 J. A. Wada, R. Clarks, and A. Hamm, Cerebral Hemispheric Asymmetry in Humans. Arch. Neural.
32: 239–246, 1975.

5 Chambers, J. K. Dialect Acquisition, Language. No. 4. 1992.
6 Stromsworld, K. The Cognitive and neural Bases of Language Acquisition, in the Cognitive Neuro-
Science VII language, M. S. Gazzaniga, ed. London: The MIT Press, 1995.
1.2 Innateness Hypothesis 5
development. After this period, if the left hemisphere of the brain is damaged, it will
result in severe language barriers, and even loss of language ability for life; if the left
hemisphere is damaged at the beginning or intermediate stage of this critical period
(i.e., before the localization of left hemisphere), the language function would remain
in the right hemisphere without being affected. This is Lenneberg’s ‘critical period
hypothesis’ on children’s language development, also known as the ‘natural maturity
theory’ in some literature.
In view of the current progress in brain neuroscience research, it is debatable
that Lenneberg’s view that the right brain controls the language ability of children
in early development (before the age of four or five); at least it is not supported by
experimental evidence.
At present, the more widely accepted view is children before puberty (especially
before the age of 10), both hemispheres have the similar potential to develop lan-
guage, and the two hemispheres are in a competitive state in the development of
language ability. There is no one-sided advantage. But with the increase of age and
social interaction, the demand for speech ability is getting higher, and the finer reg-
ulation and control of related neural mechanisms are needed, and the human brain
structure is inherently asymmetrical (as Wada et al. fetal brain studies have shown7
that the left hemisphere temporal lobe is slightly larger than the right hemisphere
temporal lobe, and the temporal lobe is the part closely related to the discourse
comprehension). Finally, during the competition in the two hemispheres, the left
hemisphere gradually forms the advantage of speech function.
Despite this kind of controversy, we should give full recognition and necessary
attention to Lenneberg’s critical period hypothesis. In fact, children’s access to lan-
guage has a ‘critical period’ (also known as the ‘sensitive period’), which now is no
longer a ‘hypothesis’ but a scientific fact that has been confirmed by many experi-
ments and observations (Chap. 5 will discuss this issue).
1.3 Interaction Between Nature and Nurture
This theory is represented by Canadian psychologist Donald Hebb. He believes8 that

babies are particularly sensitive to the sound pattern of human speech at birth because
of the special structure of the baby’s brain that receives, understands, and generates
speech. However, to make this structure produce verbal functions, it also needs to
have an appropriate environment and experience. That is to say, the reason why
human beings have verbal functions is that the brain has inherently a unique struc-
ture (speech center) that specializes in speech function, and can deal with abstract
language symbols. On the other hand, the role of acquired experience and the impact
7 Johnson,J. & Newport, E. Critical Period effects in Second Language Learning: the Influence of
Maturational State on the Acquisition of English as a Second Language. Cognitive Psychol. 21:
pp. 60–99, 1989.
8 Lenneberg, E. H. Biological Foundation of Language. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1967.
of language environment are at work. At present, Hebb’s views have been gener-
ally accepted by the international academic community. Over the past two decades,
with the progress of brain neuroanatomy and brain science research, more and more
evidence have been found for the nature–nurture interaction view. The foundation
established by this theory, i.e., the assumption is that the brain has a particular struc-
ture of speech (language center), has so far found that the following four language
centers9 do exist in the brain:
(1) Language expression center (Broca’s Area)—located in the left hemisphere of
the cerebral cortex (i.e., the third frontal gyrus). Its principal function is the
verbal expression. This region, if damaged, will result in a typical ‘expression
aphasia.’ At this time, the patient cannot construct a normal speech and slow
to structure a speech, weak in vocabulary, or completely silent if the damage
is severe. Most patients can speak words, but the pronunciation is unclear and
cannot create a complete sentence—similar to telegraphs, and there are invol-
untary verbal repetitions. French neurosurgeon Paul Broca first discovered this
speech center in 1861, so it is also commonly referred to as the ‘Broca’s Area.’
(2) Language perception (comprehension) center—including a wide Area of the
cerebral cortex of left hemisphere temporal gyrus, temporal lobe posterior, and
parietal lobe. Its main function is to understand language. If the region is dam-
aged, though the patient can speak actively and have normal hearing, he/she
cannot understand the meaning of words, and neither understands their speech.
Since German neuropsychologist Carl Wernicke first discovered this speech
center in 1874, it is commonly referred to as ‘Wernicke’s Area.’
(3) Language reading center—located in the cerebral cortex of the left hemisphere
on top of the rear Wernicke Area (Gyrus region). Its main function is to convert
language into visual information so that people can write down the words they
hear and can convert text information into speech, so that people can read poetry,
and thus establish contact between the visual representation in written language
and oral auditory representation. Therefore, the general ‘dentate gyrus’ is con-
sidered as the ‘bridge’ between written and spoken language. If the ‘dentate
gyrus’ damaged, then the link between visual and auditory representation is
interrupted, the written language cannot be converted into spoken language,
which forms written dyslexia. The characters recognized in the past cannot read
and become a bunch of meaningless symbols. The patient can say the words
heard, but cannot say the words seen. This reading disorder is so-called dyslexia,
so dentate gyrus is considered to be the ‘language reading center.’
(4) Language writing center—located in the middle cerebral cortex in the back
of left hemisphere (i.e., the second frontal gyrus). Its main function is written
expression. Because people write with movements of head, eyes, and hand, this
Area is just located in the motion projection Area of the head, eyes, and hands of
the left hemisphere of the cerebral cortex. If this Area is damaged, it will cause
the patient to suffer writing disorder—causing aphasia. Since both written and
spoken are external expressions of internal speech (except for different forms
9 Hu, M. Y., Language and Linguistics, p. 21, Hubei: Hubei Education Press, 1985.
1.3 Interaction Between Nature and Nurture 7
of expression), there is a close relationship between the writing center and the
expression center (Broca’s Area). When the writing ability has serious obstacles,
some difficulties occur with spoken ability; on the other hand, when the oral
expression shows serious obstacles, the writing ability will be slightly damaged.
In fact, as mentioned above, both the expression center and the writing center are
in the frontal part of the left hemisphere, the former in gyrus frontalis inferior,
the latter in middle frontal gyrus, adjacent to each other. It is not difficult to
understand why when one of the two speech centers is damaged; it will affect
the function of the other center.
The four speech regions correspond to four abilities: speaking, listening, reading,
and writing. It can be seen that Donald Hebb’s view of the human brain ‘has a special
structure of receiving, understanding and generating speech’ has been supported by
brain neuroanatomy, so it is scientific and credible.
The theory of ‘Interaction between nature and nurture’ is proposed by Donald
Hebb, though scientific and widely recognized by the international academic com-
munity; it is rather rough and fails to clarify the process of child language acquisition
scientifically, especially it cannot convincingly explain the questions posed at the
beginning of this book about child language development. The most vital question
is—‘why a child of any nationality at the age of four or five can master the grammar
rules learned all by oneself.’ Although Chomsky’s LAD theory can make a more con-
vincing explanation for this problem, the foundation on which LAD theory is based
is that ‘the brain has a physiological mechanism of innate Universal Grammar’ has
not been confirmed for many years. As a result, people have always held a doubtful
view of LAD. Several other views have their advantages and disadvantages, some
of which are still quite prominent, but cannot explain the core problem; and cannot
be directly used to guide the innovative exploration and practice of second language
teaching. Therefore, we must comprehensively review existing theories, absorb their
benefits, abandon their shortcomings, and combine our research practices, and put
forward a new ‘child’s language development theory’ to explain the critical problems
mentioned above. At the same time, we also hope to use this new theory to guide our
innovation exploration and practice of second language teaching.
1.4 Assessment of the Two Theories of Child Language

Development
Among the theories aforementioned about child language development, two are wor-
thy of in-depth thinking: one is Chomsky LAD (language acquisition device), and
the other is Donald Hebb’s theory of interaction between nature and nurture.
As mentioned above, Chomsky’s LAD theory is by far the only one that offers
a reasonable answer explaining the core question of child language development,
i.e., “why any child of four or five years of age from any nation can master, without
explicit instruction, the spoken native language, which contains countless grammar
rules?”. The concept of language acquisition device emphasized in this theory refers
to the neurophysiological mechanism of the brain (language center), which has the
following two aspects of speech function10 :
(1) Being able to analyze and grasp the Universal Grammar (UG), which involves
various linguistic categories and grammatical rules. The UG has a set of param-
eters to be determined; as soon as the parameters are determined, speech com-
petence is to be demonstrated;
(2) Ability to evaluate language information.
Based on the two aspects of speech function of LAD, Chomsky concluded that the
process of a child acquiring language is to determine the parameters for Universal
Grammar (i.e., the assignment of linguistic categories and grammatical rules). When
a child heard a sentence (i.e., speech input data that can be used to determine the
parameters of UG), the LAD first makes assumptions about the grammatical structure
of the sentence according to the requirements of the general grammar framework.
Then use the evaluation ability to evaluate the hypothesis. If this hypothesis passes
the evaluation, it indicates that the parameters of a general grammatical structure
have been determined by the current input language information (i.e., some grammar
rules have been assigned). Then, this sentence is heard with correct understanding,
showing that the child has the language ability. On the other hand, if the evaluation
failed, that is, some words that child could not hear the sentence clearly or, speech is
misarticulated so that the parameters cannot be set correctly (i.e., Universal Grammar
rules are yet to be appropriately assigned).
Obviously, this theory holds that the child is born with a language center that
analyzes and grasps the Universal Grammar rules. All children need is to only hear
all kinds of sentences in daily life and social communication as verbal input data, and
through the evaluation and validation by LAD, the child can master relevant grammar
rules. Since language learning method is not based on the learning of specific
sentences but based on linguistic category learning and rule learning (categories
and rules are limited), it has high learning efficiency; and LAD is inherited, so
no teacher is needed. This is a more convincing explanation for the above core
questions about children language development. All the other child language
development theories are sentence-based learning because, in any language,
sentences are infinite. It is hard to think of a child in a few years, remember
so many different sentences, so they cannot be instrumental in explaining the
core questions about child language development. But as mentioned above, it is
unfortunate that Chomsky’s LAD theory, which depends on the above two functions,
has not yet been confirmed by brain anatomy (In fact, the following arguments will
show that the above-mentioned speech centers that support the LAD theory have
never been, and have not been in the past and will not be in the future.). So LAD has
always been difficult to be accepted generally by international academic circles.
10 Blumstein, S. E. The Neurobiology of the Sound Structure of Language, in The Cognitive Neuro-
Science, VII Language, M. S. Gazzaniga, Ed. London: The MIT Press, 1995.
1.4 Assessment of the Two Theories … 9
Donald Hebb’s interaction theory also believes that the brain has a special struc-
ture for speech; the language center is sensitive only to the speech signal, receiv-
ing, understanding and generating language signals, conducive to child language
development. He held that the receiving, understanding, and generating functions
of speech in language centers have basically been confirmed by contemporary brain
neuroanatomy. Although there are still some disputes about the precise location and
range of speech centers in the cerebral cortex, there is still some consensus in the
academic community. Because of this, this view can be accepted by most scholars
in the world. Unfortunately, this theory also holds that the mastery of speech ability
is achieved through the study of specific sentences by children. It is still hard to
believe why the child of four or five years of age can learn to speak the native tongue
without instruction, in just a few years, which is such a complicated system. Because
of the complexity, sentence, and grammar of infinite diversity, this theory has four
language centers in the brain corresponding to four language skills, listening, speak-
ing, reading, and writing, which provide physiological basis and function to support
child language learning.
It is obvious that the above two theories have their advantages and disadvantages,
respectively.
1.5 Semantic Perception and Species Evolution
It is generally acknowledged that the history of human language has only thousands
of years; however, verbal speech has a much longer history than written language.
As oral language unlike written language, it can be verified through the records of
the texts, while oral speech cannot leave any traces in history; e.g., not to be found
by archaeologists. Therefore, it is still a puzzle as to when humankind had begun to
speak. Some linguists, based on what anthropologists, archaeologists, and zoologists
have found, proposed that human beings have only mastered the spoken language
since the late Paleolithic period, that is, four or fifty thousand years ago.11 However,
we believe that the history of spoken language began much earlier than this. As stated
above, a central nervous system dedicated ‘language expression’ in the human brain
(also known as Broca’s Area) and ‘language comprehension’ of the central nervous
system (also known as Wernicke’s Area). The language center directly related to
speech and oral language (the two language centers were found in the second half of
the nineteenth century. Since then, with the development of modern brain imaging
techniques, the centers were expanded in scope, and the original positioning was
more accurate, but its core position has not changed). Brain science studies have
shown that the human brain and the chimpanzee brain (the nearest primate brain to
humans) have little difference in weight, but are very similar in structure. The main
difference is that human beings have advanced speech center specialized in spoken
11 Chen,
Y. H., Cognitive Development Psychology, p. 128, Zhejiang: Zhejiang People’s Press,
December, 1996.
language function, but chimpanzees do not have such centers. However, they at most
‘low-level speech central’ for sign language (instead of advanced kind, like Broca’s
Area and Wernicke’s Area). Therefore, advanced speech center for spoken language
is developed solely in the final stages of human development, in the change from
‘ape’ to ‘man.’ It would be impossible to develop a whole new, sophisticated nerve
center in the brain by generations of genetic inheritance without millions of years (or
even millions of years). In the history of human evolution, forty and fifty thousand
years are relatively short, not enough to develop such a complex nerve structure.
According to a recent report (see article of the British Independent on June 22,
2004), scientists at the University of Castle in Spain have made a scientific analysis
of the middle ear bones of five 400,000-year-old skulls found in a cave at the archaeo-
logical site of Tarraco, Spain, in order to determine the most sensitive range of sound
frequencies of these ear bones. It was found that these ear bones are most sensitive to
3–5 kHz sound, which is very close to the range of 2–4 kHz for modern people. This
shows that human beings at that time already had the auditory ear bones necessary to
understand spoken language. Scientists thus assert that the origin of human spoken
language dates back at least 400,000 years. Scientists have further made an analy-
sis, the owners of these five 400,000-year-old skulls belong to Heidelberg, and the
Heidelberg were distant relatives of the ancestors who directly evolved into modern
people. Since Heidelberg is not a branch of our immediate ancestors, the discovery
that this race can understand spoken language is likely to mean that spoken language
has actually evolved from an older common ancestor about 500,000 years ago.
From this report, we can be sure that the history of human being’s spoken language
will never be only forty or fifty thousand years.
If we admit that the high-level speech center of human-oriented oral language is
the product of millions of years of evolution, and the evolution of the species is not
aimless. it must have its own specific purpose, in order to achieve certain functions;
e.g., like the evolution of visual nerve center in order to form ‘light perception’
(referred to as ‘visual perception’) in order to observe the objective world of various
physical forms; the evolution of the auditory nerve center to form ‘sound perception’
(referred to as ‘hearing’). In order to identify the objective world to experience
different sounds, so it is necessary for people to explore further what the ultimate
goal of human evolution of speech is? What the final function does it ultimately have
to achieve? If only in the name of these two centers (center of verbal communication
and center of verbal expression) to answer the question, we can say that in order
to achieve the ‘verbal comprehension’ and ‘verbal expression’ functions. There is
nothing wrong with the answer, though, it just touches the surface phenomenon
without revealing what is the nature of the problem—what is the purpose of the
realization of ‘verbal comprehension’ and ‘verbal expression’?
We believe that the key to the problem is precisely here. This issue demands a clear
answer: comprehension of speech and verbal expression is for the purpose of inter-
personal communication, to communicate with each other to express the meaning, to
identify what others say; that is, to clarify the relationship between the nature of
things, and states and change of states of things. To find out ‘what,’ ‘how,’ ‘who,’
‘how to do,’ and ‘when’ and other semantic relations. In other words, only one
1.5 Semantic Perception and Species Evolution 11
of the ultimate goals of oral comprehension and oral expression is to make clear
the semantic relations of each utterance with spoken language. Of course, seman-
tic relations are embodied through grammatical relations and grammatical rules, and
the same semantic relations can be expressed by several dozens or hundreds, or even
thousands of different kinds of grammatical relations and grammatical rules. Because
of this, humans have thousands of different languages. The languages had different
forms, structures, relations, and rules, but the semantic relations across languages
are the same. This is why a variety of language can be translated into each other
(e.g., Chinese to English or English to Chinese). In a word, there are many languages
in the world. Grammatical relations and grammatical rules vary greatly, but there is
only one kind of semantic relation.
Therefore, the ultimate goal of the evolution of human speech can only be
directed toward the identification of semantic relations, but never toward the
identification of grammatical relations. In other words, the innate mechanism of
language acquisition (i.e., language centers) that evolved through generations should
be the identification of meaning rather than identification of grammar. The funda-
mental flaw in Chomsky’s theory is precisely here—because there exists a ‘Universal
Semantics’ among various nations in the world, and there can never be a ‘Universal
Grammar’ that is used among all nations. According to species evolution, since there
is no Universal Grammar between races, there is no need to evolve a language center
for dealing with Universal Grammar. This indicates that neurophysiological physi-
ology mechanism capable of analyzing and dealing with Universal Grammar, which
may support Chomsky’s LAD, could not exist in the human brain, now or ever.
As mentioned above, the evolution of human visual nerve center is to form visual
perception in order to investigate various physical forms of the objective world; the
evolution of the auditory nerve center is to form hearing, to experience a variety
of sounds of the objective world. Then, according to the brain evolution, we have
reason to deduce that the human brain has evolved to fit into a competent speaker, to
form the sense of meaning (semantic perception), identifying varieties of meaning-
related relations. If this inference holds, then human beings will not have merely five
senses (visual, auditory, taste, olfactory, kinetic), but also one more sense, semantic
perception. We share the first five senses with the other animals, and only the sixth
sense is unique to human beings. Here we will further demonstrate this through the
progress of contemporary brain science research.
Chapter 2
About the Proposition of “Semantic
Perception Is the Sixth Sense of Human
Perception”
Semantic perception is not a concept out of thin air or totally artificially coined,
but it is an objective entity, unique to the humans. The sixth sense of perceptions
is used explicitly for sensing and identifying a variety of semantic relations in oral
language. The emphasis is placed on the semantic relations in spoken language, so
that semantic identification must be carried out based on speech perception and sound
discrimination. In other words, our definition of language involves semantic relations
in speech and also involves the speech sound in spoken language, and first of all,
perceiving and distinguishing speech sounds, which means that the input channel
(i.e., the sensory organs that receive external stimuli) of semantic perception must
be related to the auditory organ (ear).
Since ancient times, people (including scholars) have believed that humans have
only five sense perceptions. As early as 2000 years ago, the ancient Greek philoso-
pher Aristotle divided perception into five types: visual, auditory, taste, smell, and
touch. With the progress of modern brain science research, the division of the human
sensory system has become more and more fine-tuned. For example, some psycholo-
gists propose that there are ten sensory systems, namely vision, hearing, smell, taste,
touch, pain, exercise, temperature, position, and balance1 ; some other psychologists
believe that there are three types of sense perceptions, subdivided into seven groups,
namely visual and auditory (these are ‘distant senses’), taste, smell, skin feel (these
are of ‘close’ senses), muscle movement and balance (these are ‘internal senses).2
However, whether they are divided into ten categories or seven, psychologists con-
sider, from the processor the function of the main sensory organs, they agree with
the division of five categories: ‘eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body.’ The sensory percep-
tion is divided into five, namely visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, and somatic
sensations. In short, researchers at home and abroad (including psychologists, educa-
tionists, philosophers) have not advocated the semantic perception as the sixth sense
of human perception. So we now put forward this proposition. Then, do we have
1 Shen, A. & Lin, Z. Z. Physiologic Psychology. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.
2 Ye, Y. Q. & Zhu, B. L. Psychology. Wuhan: southeast China University Press. 1992.
14 2 About the Proposition of “Semantic Perception …
any scientific basis for this proposition at all? In order to demonstrate this proposi-
tion, we first carry out a careful analysis of the neurophysiological mechanism and
components of sensory perception and sensory system.
2.1 Current Understanding of the Sensory Perception

in Academia
The concept of ‘perception’ is explained under the perception entry (Chinese ency-
clopedia, philosophy): “It is the direct reflection of overall material objects, perceived
in the human brain. The difference between perception and sensory is that perception
reflects not the individual attributes of the object, but the whole of the object and
the interrelations of the object, the synthesis of the senses, which provide the overall
external image of the object that it is likely to grasp as a specific thing. Percep-
tion is the product of analysis, in the brain, the external stimulus of various sensory
organs (e.g., perception of a picture), hearing perception (such as the perception of
music), and so on, depending on the different role of the analyzers. Space perception,
time perception, and movement perception are the most important senses that peo-
ple understand the world. The formation of perception is closely related to practice.
The perception is influenced by practice, and by various factors such as knowledge,
experience, needs, interests, emotions, desires, and attention. Individual attributes of
objects may be the same, but the perception of the same objects may vary widely.”3
The above description of the concept “sensory perception” contains three main
points:
(1) The sensation is the reflection of individual attributes of material objects (i.e.,
objective things) in the human brain, belonging to the category of perceptual
knowledge, which is the basis for the formation of consciousness.
(2) Perception is a reflection of various aspects of objective things and their inter-
relationships by the human brain. It provides a holistic understanding of things
that enable people to grasp objects as things secured. Perception is the product
of synergies of a variety of sensory organs (also known as ‘analyzers’) under the
external stimulus; it is more than a sensory; in addition, perception is subject
to the constraints of objective things, but also subject to the influence of the
internal psychological process of cognition, i.e., interest, desire, emotion, need,
and cognitive structure (knowledge, experience).
(3) Depending on the sensory organs (i.e., analyzers) that play a significant role in
the perceptual process, visual perception, auditory perception, and other per-
ceptual types can be classified.
The first point relates to the definition of sensation. The second relates to the defi-
nition of perception (This definition covers three basic characteristics of perception.
The first one is the reflection of the human brain on the various aspects of objective
3 China encyclopedia (philosophy), China encyclopedia press. 1987.

2.1 Current Understanding of the Sensory … 15
things and their interrelations; the second one is the product of synergies of vari-
ety of sensory organs; that is, a variety of integrated perception. The third one is the
results of the interaction between the external stimulus and the internal psychological
process.) The third point involves the classification of the basis of perception.
From the prevailing view of psychology, the above three points can be consid-
ered as the consensus of most psychologists at home and abroad on perception
(see 4,5,6,7,8,9 ). The psychologists’ definitions of sensory perception, in their mono-
graphs or textbooks, are not the same as the encyclopedia quoted above, though
they all agree on the basic meanings included in the above three points. Of course,
there are a few scholars who have different views on this. For example, Professor
Zhang Houcan, a famous Chinese psychologist, argues against the above approach,
who distinguishes sensation and perceptions as traditional psychological categories,
which modern psychology does not separate the two. Because ‘modern research has
pointed out that it is difficult to demarcate the boundaries between sensation and
perception because some explanations of information begin in the senses and go on
in the brain; both of which belong to a unified processing system’.10 Some scholars
fully support the above three points (such as Wu & Li, 1990).11 Despite the persis-
tence of sensation and perception as two different concepts, one also believes that
sometimes people can refer to it as ‘sensory perception,’ taking into account the close
relationship between the two.
Through the above description, we have learned the basic sense of perception and
perception of the current domestic and foreign academia (reflected in the above three
points). On the whole, we agree with these views, but the third point, which is about
the type of consciousness, will be further elaborated in the second and third sections
below. Besides, considering that there is a natural connection between sensation
and perception, we believe that the views of Zhang (2002) and Wu et al. (1990)
are desirable. So in general, we put sensation and perception together as a sensory
perception; only when it is necessary, we distinguish between the two concepts,
sensation or perception.
4 Shen, Z. & Lin, Z. Z. Physiologic Psychology. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.
5 Ye,Y. Q. & Zhu, B. L. Psychology. Wuhan: southeast China University Press. 1992.
6 Peng, D. L. (ed.). General psychology. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.
7 Wu, T. L. Li, B. S. & Wu, F. Y. Psychology. Beijing: People’s Education Press. 1990.
8 Best, J. B. Cognitive Psychology. (5th ed.). Heinle Publishers. 1999.
9 Wang, S. & Wamg. A. S. Cognitive Psychology. Beijing: People’s Education Press. 1996.
2.2 Analysis of Neurophysiological Mechanism of Sensory

Perception and Its Constituents12
Neuroscience research tells us that all sensory systems have specific sensory organs
that respond to the most appropriate stimuli; through sensory cells (receptors), con-
vert the stimulus properties and intensities into certain nerve impulses. These nerve
impulses are then transmitted to the lower-level center of the cortex by the afferent
nerve (also known as sensory nerve). Moreover, the sensory information from the
brain comes in from the lower-level center of the cortex to the higher-level center of
the cerebral cortex. The nerve impulses from the receptors are analyzed and synthe-
sized at the various levels of the centers. First, the individual attributes of the objective
things are identified and then on the basis of further processing at the higher-level
centers and the integration in the cerebral cortex contact Area (integration of a vari-
ety of sensory information), achieving various aspects of things and grasping their
overall relationships, so as to complete with the current external stimulus to adapt to
the sensory process.
According to those mentioned above general sensory processes of the brain’s phys-
iological mechanisms, some psychologists (especially neuropsychologists) believe
that sensory systems should be formed by three elements: sensory organs (senses),
afferent nerves (also known as sensory nerves), and sensory centers.13 Others advo-
cate four elements, sensory organs, afferent nerve, sensory pathway, and sensory
center.14 As the sensory pathway defined by ’four elements’ refers to the sensory
pathway combined by two sensory centers—the lower one beneath cortex (The sub-
cortical centers in some sensory systems have more than one level) and the higher
one in the cerebral cortex. So in essence, there is no difference between the ‘three ele-
ments’ and ‘four elements,’ with only the latter subdividing sensation center further
into two, three, or even more levels; of course, after such division, it is necessary to
consider the links between the various levels and thus the introduction of the element
of ‘sensory pathway.’ In fact, the introduction of this term is not quite accurate—as
‘sensory pathway’ of sensory system, we cannot ignore the relationship between
the center of sensory organs and perception. However, the four-element view, after
all, made clearer and detailed division, which is favorable for the analysis of the
perception process. Therefore, we may wish to make slight changes on the basis of
the ‘four-element’ view and make it a ‘new four-element.’ That is, believing sensory
system should compose of four elements: sensory organs, incoming nerves, low-level
sensory centers under the cortex (the lower center can be more than one level), and
the cerebral cortex of the high sense of sensory center. In this way, it can be consistent
basically with the ‘three-element’ view (the main part is still sensory organs, sensory
nerves, and sensory centers) and can improve the ‘original four elements,’ which is
inadequate, while receiving its advantages (further subdivision of the most critical
2.2 Analysis of Neurophysiological Mechanism … 17
part of the ‘sensory center’ for), so this may sound more reasonable. At the same
time, we will also rename the ‘sensory center’ as sensory perception center. This
is because, as Professor Zhang Houchen stated, “it is difficult to divide boundaries
between senses and perception. Some information begins in the senses; continues in
the brain, both belonging to a unified processing system….” It is generally believed
that the interpretation of information is a perceptual function, so the information
processing activities carried out in the brain system are not just sensory, but percep-
tual activities, including the perception and the corresponding nerve centers, which
should be rightly renamed as ‘sensory perception center.’ In the following, we will
analyze neurophysiological mechanism and the constituent elements of the five sen-
sory systems of human beings, according to the ‘the new four-element’ viewpoints.

of Elements of Visual–Perceptual System15,16
Visual–perceptual system is generally referred to visual system for short.

The sensory organs of the visual system are the eyes. Appropriate stimulation
of the human eyes is the wavelength ranged from 380 to 780 nm visible light. The
function of the eye has two main functions: one, through the eyeball system in
the retina of the eye, the image of external objects is formed; second, through the
retina, the image of light energy (external stimulated energy) into electrical pulse
forming nerve impulses (i.e., the completion of light energy to energy conversion)
is converted. Retina is a photographic mechanism, which is mainly composed of
three layers of cells: sensory cells layer (the cells of this layer are divided into
pyramidal cells and rod cells according to its shape features), bipolar cell layer, and
ganglion cell layer. When there is light stimulation on the retina, some chemical
substances in the sensory cells (including pyramidal cells and rod cells) will have
a biochemical reaction, leading to changes in the potential of the cell membrane. It
refers to the transduction of visual sensory cells (namely, the conversion from light
energy to electrical energy). The two sensory cells are both acting the transducer
function, though the functions are not the same. The pyramidal cells work under
the middle and strong light irradiation and mainly feel details and color of objects.
However, the rod cells work under the dim light and mainly feel light and shade of
the object. Although the sensory cells can complete the transduction, they produce a
slowly changing biological potential, which is not able to meet the demand of nerve
impulses required by the transmission of visual information. The solution to this
problem depends on the ganglion cells.
Ganglion cells, by using bipolar cells to accept receptor cells, complete the trans-
duction and generate potential changes. (The bipolar cells here only play the role of
15 Sun, J. R. Introduction of Brain Science. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.

16 Ruan, D. Y. & Shou, T. D. Neurophysiology. Beijing: Chinese Science and Technology University
Press. 1996.
information delivery and do not do any information processing.) Since this potential
change is proportional to the logarithm of the relative intensity of the external light
stimulus, it is a slow “level reaction” that cannot form a conductive action potential
(nerve impulses). The function of the ganglion cells is to convert this slow changing
potential to the “all or none” reaction of the nerve impulses (which is also known
as “nerve release”). At the same time, because the ganglion cells have a long axon,
the end of which is the “lateral geniculate body” of the posterior thalamus, it also
completed the afferent of the visual information from the retina to the lower cortex.
The axon of the ganglion cells (which also known as nerve fibers for it is slender)
is the afferent nerve to achieve the introduction of visual information into the nerve,
called as “optic afferent nerve” (also referred to as “optic nerve”).
The lateral geniculate cell receives the optic nerve from the temporal side of the
eye on the one hand and the optic nerve from the nasal side of the eye. However,
the former does not intersect, while the latter does. In other words, the left lateral
geniculate cell receives the optic nerve of the left temporal and the optic nerve of the
right eye, while the right lateral geniculate body receives the optic nerve of the right
temporal and the optic nerve of the left eye. The structure of the lateral geniculate
cell is similar to that of the cerebral cortex and consists of 6 layers of cells, in which
1, 4, 6 layers accept the contralateral cross the incoming optic nerve bundle (from
the nasal side); 2, 3, 5 layers are not associated with the incoming of ipsilateral
optic nerve bundle (from the temporal side). The second grade optic nerve from
the lateral geniculate cell sends the optic nerve to the high-level visual center of
the cerebral cortex, first reaching the visual cortex base zone V1 (in Brodmann 17
region), and then V1 with the visual cortex V2 (in Brodmann 18 Area), the V3 Area
(in Brodmann 19 zone), the V4 Area (also in Brodmann Area 18), and other visual
cortex contact Areas. V1 Area completes the initial visual perception; V2 further
completes with the graphics, contours, and motion perception which relates to the
processing; V3 achieves dynamic shape perception, V4 is the Brodmann 18 Area,
the color perception of the region.
From the above analysis, it shows that the four components of the visual system
are the eye (sensory organs, where the visual receptors for the pyramidal cells and
rod cells), ganglion cells axons (afferent nerve), lateral thalamus (low-level visual
center), the visual cortex of the V1, V2, V3, and V4 regions (advanced visual center).

of Hearing Perception System17,18
Listening perception system is generally referred to as the auditory system. The

sensory organs of the auditory system are ears. The appropriate sound stimulation
Press. 1996.
frequency to the human ear is 16–20,000 Hz. Ear is composed of three parts: outer ear,
middle ear, and inner ear, which performs two functions. Firstly, the sound caused by
air vibration generated by the mechanical energy, through the outer ear and middle
ear, to be amplified; then, after the amplification of mechanical energy, through the
inner ear, nerve impulses turn into electrical pulse (i.e., complete mechanical energy
to power conversion).
The magnification function is rough as follows: the sound waves collected from
the outer ear are passed through the tympanic membrane into the middle ear by the
bone, anvil, stapes, and other three small bones, composed of ‘the small hearing
bone lever system’ so that the air vibrates. Then, through the oval window connected
with the stapes, the stable vibration is transformed into the fluid vibration of the
lymph fluid in the cochlea. In the three vibration forms of the conversion process
(gas–liquid–solid to the tympanic membrane Area), which is much larger than the
oval window Area, plus the ossicles lever system in long and short arms of different
amplification effect, which makes the vibration effect of acoustic wave increased by
about 22 times.
The conversion of mechanical energy to electrical energy is accomplished in the
cochlea of the inner ear. The cochlea is the auditory receptor, a three-layer, parallel
tubular structure (thus the name of the cochlea), which is coiled into a two-and-half
spiral shell. These three parallel tubular tissues are called, respectively, the scala,
tympani, and cochlear duct. In the scala and tympani, the lymph fluid is filled with
lymph, and the two types of lymph vessels are different in chemical composition.
At the top of the cochlea, the scala and lymph nodes are perforated. In the cochlear,
vestibuli is connected with the bottom of oval window (fenestra ovalis), so that it
can complete the gas–solid–liquid three vibration forms and converting vibration
amplification effect, through the middle ear, stapes–oval window, and the incoming
vibration wave is transmitted to perilymph. The drum is connected with the oval
window due to lymph in constant volume, which performs important buffer function.
Cochlear bottom pressure changes in this oval window when the sound wave oval
window presses inward and the oval window presses outward. The time required for
the propagation of sound waves varies from moment to moment, and the pressure
of the lymph nodes in the scala and segments varies from moment to moment. The
position of the cochlear duct is sandwiched between the scala and the scala tympani,
and the pressure difference of the two causes the lymph fluid in the cochlear duct to
fluctuate up and down in the different segments of the basal membrane of the cochlea.
The basal membrane is lined with several hair cells that can sense sonic vibrations.
The base of cilium is fixed to the basement membrane, with a large number of cilia
at the top and covered with a tectorial membrane. The sound wave transmitted by
the lymph gland will cause the vibration between the cap and the cilia, stimulate
the cilium, and generate the sense potential, so as to complete the conversion of
mechanical energy to electrical energy. The cilium in the cochlea (cell) can complete
the energy exchange function, but it also produces feelings of potential which is
slowly changing scale reaction, which cannot meet the requirements of the transfer
of auditory nerve impulses, to solve this problem also depends on the spiral ganglion
cells and directly connected to cilium.
Spiral ganglion cell is a bipolar cell: its centrifugal short axon endings and the
cell fiber synaptic connect, in order to accept the excitement of receptor potential
generated by the cell fiber; and the amount of slowly varying according to level
response potential converted into the ‘all or none’ response to nerve impulses (i.e.,
neural firing). At the same time, the other a long axon of the ganglion cells (central
processes), through the skull, out of the cochlear axis into the medulla “cochlear
nuclei,” thus completes the afferent auditory information from the cochlea to the
subcortical auditory sensor low-level auditory center. It is thus clear that the other
long axon (nerve fiber) of the spiral ganglion is the afferent nerve (the auditory nerve)
that enables auditory information to pass.
The cochlear receives all the auditory nerve fibers from the ipsilateral spiral gan-
glion and sends the second level of auditory nerve fibers upward to the auditory
information. Most of the two fibers intersect with the contralateral upper olive nuclei,
and a small number of non-intersected fibers terminate on the upper olive nuclei on
this side. The olive nuclei located in pons in the ipsilateral and contralateral to the
fiber, after a third level of auditory nerve fibers, upload the information to the inferior
colliculus of midbrain quadrigeminal. To accept the inferior colliculus afferent fibers
after a fourth level of auditory nerve fibers to the medial geniculate body of infor-
mation is uploaded to the thalamus, and then the medial geniculate body issued the
final level of nerve fibers, projecting, the cortical auditory nerve onto higher central
auditory cortex. It will reach the A1 district (Brodmann Area 41) and then A1 will
connect with A2 (Brodmann Area 42) and A3 (Brodmann Area 22) in the auditory
cortex Area. The initial auditory perception was first completed in the A1 region, and
the higher auditory perceptual process was involved in the A2 and A3 Areas. The
nerve fibers from the medial geniculate are generally thought to project primarily
into the A1 region, but some scholars19 believe that some of which are projected into
the auditory cortex (A2 and A3).
It can be seen from the above analysis that the elements of the auditory sys-
tem are ear (sensory organs, including auditory receptors for cilium in the cochlea),
spiral ganglion cells (long-axon afferent), cochlear nuclei, the olive pons nuclei,
midbrain hypothalamus, thalamus, the medial geniculate A1, A2, A3 cortex Areas
are Brodmann 41, 42, 22 Areas (a total of seven higher auditory centers), four of
which belongs to low-level central auditory cortex; according to their brain structure
from low to high (i.e., auditory information transfer order), they are divided into
four levels; namely, cochlear nuclei of medulla oblongata (first level), olive pons
nuclei (second level), the inferior colliculus midbrain (third level), medial geniculate
body (fourth level). Therefore, the subcortical central auditory system is quite com-
plex, and it also suggests that, in considering the composition of perception system,
the ‘four-element’ view is more logical than ‘three-element’ view, which not only
distinguish between the cerebral cortex in the perception of higher center, but also
the lower cortex perception center is further classified. It is of vital importance to
scientific understanding and clarification of nature of perceptions; the process and

demonstration that follow are on the proposition that sense of semantic perception
is the sixth sense.

of Gustatory System20,21
The sensory organ of the gustatory system is the tongue. The human tongue contains
four basic taste cells, such as sweet, sour, bitter, and salty, and the other senses of
taste are of mixture by the four tastes. Many gustatory sensory cells form a taste bud,
and each taste bud contains taste-sensitive cells (averagely of several dozen). Taste
buds are distributed in the cleft of tongue papillae and tongue surface.
The top of the gustation receptor cells has cilia (usually called “gustatory cilium”),
which faces the tongue surface in order to directly experience the dissolution of
chemical molecules (e.g., the sour taste comes from the stimulation of hydrogen ion,
while the salty taste comes from sodium chloride). The other end of taste sensory
cells is connected with gustatory afferent neuron that can produce nerve impulse, so
that the taste information can be delivered into the gustatory center. There are three
pairs of the cranial nerve involved in the introduction of gustation which are facial
nerve (the 7th couple cranial nerve), the glossopharyngeal nerve (the 9th couple),
and the vagus nerve (the 10th couple). The 2/3 gustation of the front of the tongue
is introduced by geniculate ganglion of the facial nerve, the petrosal ganglia of
glossopharyngeal nerve introduce the 1/3 gustation of back of the tongue, and the
gustation of the epiglottis and pharyngeal is introduced by ganglia nodosum of the
vagus nerve.
Facial nerve, glossopharyngeal nerve, and vagus nerve take the gustatory infor-
mation into the nucleus of solitary tract of medulla oblongata, and then the nucleus of
solitary tract issued by the second-level gustation nerve fiber from nucleus of solitary
tract brings information into the thalamus of the posterior medial nucleus. Then, the
third-grade fiber issued by it is then projected onto the center of the cerebral cortex
and back to the anterior insula.
Therefore, the gustatory system has five elements: the tongue (sensory organs,
taste receptors, which are taste buds, taste receptor cells), facial nerve, glossopharyn-
geal nerve and vagus nerve (gustatory afferent nerve), nucleus of the solitary tract
(the medulla cortex under the first level of the central thalamus), ventral postero-
medial nucleus (second the level of the central cortex), and cerebral cortex of the
postcentral gyrus and anterior insula (higher taste center). Among them, there are
two subcortical low taste centers, which are the first level (the nucleus of solitary
tract) and the second level (ventral posteromedial nucleus).

21 Li, D. X. et al. Concise Neurology. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House. 1996.

of Olfactory System22,23
The sense organ of the olfactory system is the nose. Olfactory receptors are olfactory
sensory cells located in the olfactory epithelium of the upper nasal cavity. Olfactory
receptor cells are bipolar cells—its prominent pole is called dendritic, the end round
(called ‘olfactory vesicle’), and many olfactory cilia to the olfactory epithelium in
the mucus; each olfactory vesicle is about 10–30 cilia; these cilia are sensitive parts
of taste and taste receptor interactions. The other part of the sensory cell is a rather
longer axon (central protuberance), multiple pivots of sensory cells protrude into a
thick olfactory nerve bundle (also known as olfactory silk), and then the olfactory
nerve beam goes through the sieve plate on the sieve into the cranial cavity and stops
as a low-level olfactory bulb. This completes the process of introducing the signal
from the sensory into the lower trochanter.
A part of the second level of olfactory nerve fibers issued from the olfactory
bulb directly projected the olfactory signal to the cerebral cortex of the hippocampus
ditch (higher olfactory center) through the outer olfactory pattern; the other part first
delivers the information to precibarium through the olfactory pattern. And then the
precibarium sends next-level fiber and transmits the olfactory signal to the prepir-
iform Area and medial amygdala at the edge of the system, to complete the body
viscera olfactory reflex.
Therefore, the elements of the olfactory system are nose (sensory organs, the
olfactory receptors within the olfactory epithelium olfactory receptor cells), olfac-
tory receptor neurons with long axons that olfactory filament (olfactory afferent
nerve), olfactory bulb (subcortical primary center), the anterior perforated substance
(second-level central cortex the hippocampus of the limbic system), back hook, ante-
rior piriform cortex, and medial amygdala region (Advanced olfactory center).

of Somatosensory System
As pointed out by Professor Shen Zheng,24 somatosensory mode can be divided

into three levels, the superficial feeling, deep feeling, visceral sensation, from the
outside to the inside. Superficial sensations include touch, pain, temperature sensa-
tion, vibration sensation. The feeling of superficial sensory cells located in the skin
of the body, the deep feeling is the feeling in joint and limb position, with motion
and force, and the feel cells distribute in joints, muscle, and tendon tissue. Visceral
Press. 1996.
23 Li,D. X. et al. Concise Neurology. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House. 1996.
sensory and other senses are different in that visceral sensory receptors distribute
in various organs and the walls of the blood vessels, controlled by the autonomic
nervous system that has nothing to do with the senior nerve center in the cerebral
cortex, so their activities are often not controlled by the brain consciousness and
automatic work. Since the perceptual systems involved in this book are all related to
the higher nervous system, we will not consider visceral sensations in the following
discussion.
Depending on the different stimuli inside and outside the body, different sensory
cells will be excited. Sensory cells of different sensory modes (including deep and
superficial sensory cells) are distributed in the same surface Area, which completes
energy conversion in this Area, turning the stimulus into a nerve impulse. And along
the same body sensory nerve (i.e., the corresponding segment of the spinal ganglion
cells axons) was introduced into the corresponding segment of the spinal cord senso-
rium (the first sensory center of the cortex). If it is superficial sensory information, the
secondary nerve fiber from the first sensory cortex will upload the superficial sensory
information such as tactile sense, algesia, and temperature sensation to the thalamic
ventral lateral nucleus and abdomen after nuclear. And then there is a third level of
fiber that is going to send the postcentral gyrus of Brodmann Area 3. If the body
sensory nerve receives deep sensory information, the secondary nerve fiber from the
first sensory cortex in the subcortical will upload the body movement, position, and
joint and other deep sensory information to the posterior nucleus of the thalamus.
Then, there is the third level of fiber that is going to send the postcentral gyrus of
Brodmann Area 2.
So it can be seen that the components of somatosensory system include the whole
body skin, joints, muscles, and tendons (sensory organs), the corresponding segment
of the spinal ganglion axon (afferent nerve), the corresponding segment of the spinal
cord sensorium (the first-level central subcortical), thalamic ventral lateral nucleus
and abdomen after nuclear (the second subcortical center), Brodmann Areas 2 and
3 (advanced somatic center) in the central cortex of the cerebral cortex.
2.3 Objective Criteria for the Proper Classification

of Sensory Perception Systems
The above analysis shows that all perception systems involved in the cerebral cortex
of higher nerve centers (not including visceral sensory systems) are composed of
four different elements of sensory organs, afferent lower center and cerebral cortex,
subcortical brain, etc. (including higher center and lower cortical-subcortical centers
in the perception system). They may be of more than one level, being two or more
levels). Each element has different roles and functions.
The sensory organs mainly complete the role of energy conversion and convert the
external stimulus (light energy, mechanical energy, or chemical energy), through the
changes of potential, into electrical energy in proportion (with the external stimulus
intensity) into different sensory information.
The afferent nerve mainly completes the analog-to-digital conversion, with the
effect to slow change potential according to the response level (analog signal), con-
verting nerve impulses (digital signal) to an ‘all or none’ response, so that the incom-
ing sensory information gets further processing in the central nervous system.
The lower subcortical center completes primary sensory processing, taking the
visual system as an example; through the retina (sensory organs) on the sensor cell,
transduction can obtain a variety of sensory information including spectral composi-
tion, binocular disparity, speed, and range. The formation of this sensory information
for visual perception of color, depth, shape, and movement is essential, for exam-
ple, the formation of spectral components involved in color perception, binocular
involved in depth perception, position information involved in shape perception, and
the speed of information involved in the perception of movement. Not only that,
the formation of every kind of sensation even participates in a variety of perceptual
information, such as the formation of binocular disparity in depth perception. It is
also involved in the formation of shape and motion perception; orientation infor-
mation in addition to the formation of direct participation in the shape and depth
perception, but also indirectly involved in the formation of motion perception. In
addition to be directly involved in the formation of color perception, the spectral
components can also be indirectly involved in the formation of movement, shape
and depth perception. This suggests that the formation of visual perception is not
only related to the sensory information directly acquired on the retina, but also to the
integration and further processing of these sensory information. Moreover, this kind
of conformity and further processing must depend on the subcortical lower center
and the cerebral cortex’s high-level center to complete gradually. Take the visual
system, the lower center of which is lateral geniculate as an example. The study of
cerebral neurophysiology shows that there are six layers of the lateral geniculate cell
in primates. The two layers are composed of large cells, respectively, to accept the
right and retinal ganglion cells of left eyes (input primate ganglion cells, according
to the shape, can be divided into two categories; the other four layers are composed
of small cells’ input, received respectively from right- and left-eye retinal ganglion
cells. After processing the integration of the lateral geniculate cell, nerve fibers in
the output layer of the cell carrying mainly target information related to sports and
flashing; the output of the small cell layer is mainly related to carry information of the
color texture shape and parallax. The information also needs to be further integrated
by the higher centers to form complex visual perception.
Higher cortical centers complete higher sensory processing. The visual system,
parallel processing by the visual cortex V1, V2 Areas associated with the string,
color, shape, depth, and motion perception of visual information, has been gradually
separated. However, according to M. S. Livingstone, D. H. Hubel (1987),25 Van Essen
(1998)26 et al., to form the corresponding color, shape, depth, and motion perception,
25 Livingstone. M. S. & Hubel, D. H. Neuroscience. 7: p. 3416. 1987.

26 Yoe, E. A. & Essen, D. C. TINS, 11: p. 219. 1998.
2.3 Objective Criteria for the Proper … 25
contact effect is also involved in processing in V3 and V4 and even other cortical
Areas. Different visual perceptions have different Areas of perceptual processing in
the visual cortex (such as color perception mainly in the V4 region, shape perception
mainly in the V3 region).
Obviously, among the four components of the perceptual system, sensory organs
are vital (for they provide input information reflecting the external stimulus), but
it only provides sensory information. The afferent nerve can only change the input
information form (for transmission in the central nervous system) instead of pro-
cessing input information. The neural physiological mechanisms that integrate and
process sensory information into sensations, that is, to complete the overall under-
standing of the various aspects of objective things and their relations are the latter
two elements, namely subcortical lower centers and advanced center of the cerebral
cortex. It can be seen that if we discuss the sensory system, it is reasonable and
scientific to use the sensory organs as the basis or criteria for the classification of the
senses. Since each sensory organ does have only one of the most appropriate exter-
nal stimuli, it is reasonable to make a clear distinction between different sensory
systems based on sensory organs. However, if we are talking about the perceptual
system, which will not only consider sensation but also take the relevant perception
into account (in fact, the understanding of objects may not depend on the sensation
that reflects the individual properties, but make an overall grasp of the object through
the perception), it is impossible to truly reflect the essential characteristics of differ-
ent perceptual processing process if the classification standard is still sensory and it
will lead to unreasonable and unscientific classification. The reason is that the main
mechanism depends on the latter two elements rather than the first element (sensory).
Thus, in order to ensure the scientific nature of the classification of sensory per-
ception system, the objective basis of sensory perception system classification should
be the lower central cortex and the higher central cortex, not sensory organs. Is the
objective basis of classification standard applicable to general perceptual classifica-
tion? Take visual perception as an example again; for this type of perception as color,
shape, depth, and motion, the formation of afferent sensory organs, lower central ner-
vous, and cortex is the same (i.e., in the four elements of perception system, the first
three elements are the same), but high central cerebral cortex exists some differences.
However, as mentioned above, the visual cortex V1, V2, V3, and V4 in Brodmann
Area is of Areas 17, 18, 19, the three Areas being in the occipital lobe near each
other and one piece, so the generally Brodmann Areas 17, 18, 19 are called ‘visual
cortex.’ So, if you divide the region of the cortex with detailed perspectives, V1, V2,
V3, and V4 into different perceptual processing Areas, and if you divide the cortex
with coarse division, they also can be regarded as in the same large visual cortex
Area. For this reason, this kind of perception as color, shape, depth, and motion is
usually classified into visual perception system (i.e., color perception, shape percep-
tion, depth perception, and motion perception as a part of visual perception). This
shows that the new classification criteria we propose (based on whether their lower
centers and higher centers are the same) are applicable to general visual perception.
Here, we use this objective classification system to do a serious investigation on

semantic perception, considering the essential difference between it and the fifth
perception (especially with auditory), and thus ultimately determine whether it is
entirely independent of the fifth sense or a unique sixth sense of human beings. For
this reason, we should first understand the neurophysiological mechanisms of the
sensory system of language, because the neurophysiological mechanism determines
the component of any sensory system.
2.4 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis

of the Semantic Perception
As we already know, ‘semantic perception’ refers to the sense of perception that

exists objectively and uniquely for the human brain and is used for the perception and
recognition of various semantic relations in spoken language. Because of semantics
involved spoken language, we must first sense and discriminate speech sounds, so the
semantic input channel must be related to the auditory input channel (even coincide).
However, as noted above, perception process (process of various sensory information
integration and explain its meaning) is mainly composed of higher centers and lower
cortical–subcortical sensory organs, providing materials for perceptual processing
(i.e., various sensory information input), and does not necessarily lead to the semantic
perception and auditory (hearing perception system) system of coincidence.
Since semantic perception is an entirely new concept, it should be said that so
far, almost no scholars have discussed its neurophysiological mechanism and its
components. However, according to traditional concepts, verbal language is classified
into the auditory system, so there should be some experts and scholars who made
a thorough study on neural physiological mechanism and elements of “auditory
system” (in our view, this is equivalent to the physiological mechanism of semantic
perception and its elements). Their results can serve as a reference for us to analyze
the semantic perception system.
2.4.1 Neurophysiological Mechanism of Speech–Hearing

System
At present, there are three main opinions about the neurophysiological mechanism
of speech–hearing system.
The first is represented by Gazzaniga, who was the student of Nobel Prize winner
in medicine R. W. Sperry, who worked for Sperry’s great discovery “about the brain
has two separate consciousness system,” and designed experiment device, who is the
2.4 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis … 27
founder of ‘cognitive science.’ In his book entitled Cognitive Neuroscience,27 pub-

lished in 1998, Gazzaniga describes a model of speech comprehension and speech
production and analyzes the neural mechanism of the model. He pointed out that “in
the speech–hearing system, information flows in the following ways: voice input in
the auditory system is transformed into auditory information, the auditory system
then passes this information to the parietal–temporal–occipital cortex, which is then
transmitted to Wernick Area. In this Area, phonemic representations of words can
be accessed by phonemic information. Information about lexical representation can
be accessed through phonological information and then transferred to the Area of
arcuate fasciculus from Wernicke’s Area to Broca’s Area. In this Area, the storage
has grammatical properties and features, and phrase structure can be formed. The
representation of word information and the related concepts stored in the conceptual
center are activated, and then, the understanding of speech and hearing occurs. In the
speech production process, there will be something similar. First, some central con-
cept is activated and the concept (vocabulary) information sends to Wernicke’s Area,
phonological representation generates related vocabulary in this Area, and then, the
information is transmitted to the phonological representation of Broca’s Area, in this
region, generated sounds of speech control the organ movement instructions based
on phoneme information.” Here, Gazzaniga briefly describes the process of speech
understanding and speech production, as well as the cortical Areas (higher centers)
involved in the process. He believes that verbal comprehension and speech formation
involve the same physiological mechanism, associated with the three speeches, and
these three speech centers: Wernicke Area (in the left hemisphere of Brodmann Areas
39 and 40), Broca’s Area (left-hemisphere Brodmann Area 44), and the concept cen-
ter. According to the research results of Gazzaniga, the concept center locates near
the supramarginal gyrus and angular gyrus.
In his speech model, Gazzaniga mentioned another cortex—the projected
information subcortical auditory system directly received from ‘parietal–temporal–
occipital cortex.’ But because of the ‘parietal–temporal–occipital cortex’ in Brod-
mann Areas 39 and 40, which belongs to the traditional Wernicke Area, so we
think that the advanced speech involved in Gazzaniga speech model is actually
three Areas (namely Wernicke ‘voice analysis’—continuous speech on phonemic
feature is divided into one word composed of bundles. Gazzaniga believes that in
Wernicke Area, there is ‘lexical phonological representation’. Therefore, the input
phonetic chunk can get access to phonological representation database to compare
and match in order to complete the vocabulary division through the phonological
information involved in each vocabulary.), Broca’s Area (grammar analysis, form-
ing phrase structures, completion of syntactic parsing) and the concept center (near
to the supramarginal gyrus and angular gyrus, also called ‘mental lexicon,’ serving as
semantic recognition—semantic identification and speech comprehension). It should
be noted that the three speech centers determined in Gazzaniga, two having the same
name as traditional speech (Broca’s and Wernicke Areas), but Gazzaniga has given
27 Gazzaniga, M. S., Lury, R. B. & Mangun, G. R. Cognitive Neuroscience. New York: W.W. Norton
& Company, Inc. 1998.

new meanings for the two central functions: Wernicke Area for voice analysis and
Broca’s Area for grammatical analysis and the control organs of speech. Of course,
whether the previous view is in line with the reality remains to be confirmed by
brain science research. In addition to the three centers, Gazzaniga, in one section of
the monograph Language of Neurophysiology, uses positron emission tomography
(PET) and the measurement results of patients with aphasia confirmed Brodmann
Area 22 also involves in language processing activities. As mentioned earlier, Brod-
mann Area 22 involves in the more complex auditory perceptual process of the
auditory cortex, A3 Area. It now appears that A3 Area is not only related to a variety
of complex sound perception processes, but also to speech perception processes. In
other words, A3 Area also functions as a liaison between the high-level auditory
center and the advanced speech center. This finding of Gazzaniga’s is essential that
speech and hearing centers are two different centers, but there is a closer relationship
between each other; for oral English, it not only makes sense and the inevitable result
of the development. However, it is regrettable that Gazzaniga failed to make correla-
tion analysis of subcortical low-level speech (just mentioned input information from
parietal–temporal–occipital cortex comes from the auditory cortex of the system,
but not making necessary explanations on the system in the case of the speech input
neural machine) while elaborating the role of the high-level speech center and A3
Areas of auditory contact cortex in the cerebral cortex. In other words, in the speech
processing model of Gazzaniga, in the end, what relates to subcortical low central
nervous system is not clear. It seems that Gazzaniga is likely to ignored or evaded
this problem—it should not be the case, because clarifying subcortical low central
nervous system has a significant meaning to distinguish speech auditory system and
general auditory system. Perhaps he also, like many psychologists, admits that lower
central auditory system default speech cortex and lower centers the auditory system
are of complete the same general—if so, it would be wrong, because this view, as
described below, is entirely inconsistent with the actual situation.
The second point is represented by Nobuo Suga, Professor at the University of
Washington, who has been engaged in the study of the vertebrate auditory system
and human auditory system for a long time. The research focus is on the auditory
cortex and less involved in the cerebral cortex of the speech and hearing advanced
center and thus complementary to Gazzaniga research.
Norbu Suga believed that spectrogram of human speech sounds contains three
basic components28 : constant frequency (constant frequency, referred to as CF),
frequency modulation (frequency modulated, referred to as FM), and noise burst
(NB). NB refers to the energy spread in many frequency sounds. For example, vowel
sonogram usually consists of several resonance peaks with the lowest level, the first
formant (F1), secondary lowest called second formant (F2), and so on. The vowel
sounds can be identified by a combination of F1, F2, and F3. When the two phonemes
are combined into a single syllable word, there will be some new components called
the transition sound; these new components belong to FM; these components are
crucial for word consonant discrimination; for example, explosives t, k, p, g, d, and b
28 Suga, N. processing of auditory information carried by species-specific complex sounds. In The
Cognitive Neurosciences, III Sensory Systems, Gazzaniga, M. S. (ed.) London: MIT Press. 1995.
are the transition sound before a vowel F1 and F2 (FM) to identify the. The consonants
s and sh are to be identified by the noise string (NB), which is distributed over 2–
3 kHz and over 4.4 kHz. Human speech has only two kinds of vowels and consonants,
which is composed of the above three basic elements. Norbu Suga called the three
components as information carrier elements of human speech (information-bearing
elements—IBE).
The speech–hearing system, like sensory organs of the general auditory system,
is cochlea, as has been mentioned before, and a large number of cilia that can expe-
rience sonic vibrations is distributed on the basal membrane of the cochlea. Norbu
Suga considers this cilium as a filter arranged along the frequency axis of the base-
ment membrane, and the role is to analyze the frequency of the sound signal. The
subsequent spiral ganglion encodes the output: stronger vibrations produce a higher
frequency of nerve impulses (pulses). Thus, in the periphery of the auditory system,
the frequency of the acoustic signal is expressed by the location of the activated hair
cell, and the frequency of the firing pulse expresses the amplitude of the sound. How-
ever, peripheral neurons not only reflect a particular feature of audio signal but to
be able to fully reflect the various features of the sound signal through all peripheral
neurons overall activities of space–time mode.
As mentioned before, the afferent nerve (spiral ganglion cells long axon to the
brain) transmits nerve impulses, through the cortex of four lower orders, finally to the
advanced center of the cerebral cortex. The four lower auditory centers are cochlear
nuclei → upper olive nuclei → inferior colliculus → medial geniculate nuclei. This
means that when all auditory input information is converted into neural impulses,
almost the same auditory pathway (i.e., through four lower centers) can be projected
into the cerebral cortex, which is not the same as the traditional concept. Noble
Suga believes that at the four levels, the lower center of each stage is composed of
several partitions, and each partition has a frequency axis. Auditory afferent fibers
have divergent projections at each level, resulting in multiple expressions of sensory
signals at each level. The divergence projection of nerve fibers at different levels is
combined with the polymerization of the two and also produces some new informa-
tion features of neurons at all levels. For example, in some central nervous system
such neurons can form—they can selectively react on the information carrier element
(IBE) three types (CF type, FM type, or NB type) and were called CF, FM, or NB
types of specialized neurons. In order to cope with the need for complex sounds such
as speech, the auditory central nervous system must extract different types of audi-
tory information from various combinations of IBE in order to discriminate between
vowels and consonants. This is the objective need of the above three types of spe-
cialized neurons to be able to form, which is also neural and physiological basis of
lower human auditory centers to analyze the speech spectrum.
We believe that Nobuo Suga’s spectrum of speech analysis theory based on IBE
is innovative. It has not only made it clear that the human auditory system is the
neural mechanism of spectrogram analysis of speech, but also correctly pointed
out that auditory low-level center system of information flow, unlike that of the
traditional theory, along cochlear nuclei → upper olive nuclei → inferior colliculus
lower → medial geniculate nuclei of a single-channel projection to the brain’s higher
auditory cortex. However, gradual differentiation phenomenon in this process (each

level consists of several components, the beginning differentiation is small in level
one or level two partition) to the next levels of three or four gradually increased;
finally, selective specialized neurons are formed to complete the analysis of different
speech features. Evidently, according to Nubuo Suga, speech is not only four central
auditory channels, but there are several groups (each group four); in the first, second
groups in the Area may not be obvious, but to the last level it must be partitioned.
Nobuo Suga is very far-sighted. Yet it is regrettable that she only pointed out that
there are various low-level auditory central partitions and the development trend of
partition, but she failed to tell us how the partition is divided at all levels of the central
systems (especially in the centers of the last two levels), namely, she did not clearly
point out the physiological mechanism of the new partition. To answer this question,
there is a third point of view.
The third view is represented by general physiologists. As we know, differences of
neurophysiologists and neuropsychologists or cognitive psychologists are that they
understand the physiological mechanism of the human nervous system and its func-
tion mainly through anatomy and physiology; they do not study cognition or mental
models of speech. However, their research findings and theoretical perspectives may
provide strong support for the neurophysiological mechanisms proposed by psy-
chologists or cognitive psychologists. Let us see the use of a contemporary point of
view of several influential Chinese neurophysiologists, to see whether Nobuo Suga’s
questions can be answered.
The first neurophysiologist is Professor Shou Tiande from Fudan University. He
further divided the last stage of the subcortical center of the auditory system (the
medial geniculate body) into three nuclei including the ventral nucleus, the dorsal
nucleus, and the medial nucleus.29 It was pointed out that the ventral nucleus of the
medial geniculate nuclei receives the upward fiber of lower colliculus (third lower
centers) and then issues fourth upward fiber and projects to the ‘primary auditory
cortex’; Dorsal nucleus of the medial geniculate nuclei is mainly from the upward
fiber of the midbrain tegmentum (the third lower centers), and then issues fourth
ascending fibers and projects to the ‘non-primary auditory cortex’ (As the afferent
and efferent nerve fibers in the medial nucleus of medial geniculate body are only
related with somatosensory and have nothing to do with auditory system, it will not
be discussed here). Professor Shou Tiande stated that the primary auditory cortex
is the core parts of the auditory cortex of the brain in here, the equivalent often-
said basic auditory cortex A1 Area; he stated the non-primary auditory cortex is
the primary auditory cortex equivalent of the surrounding Area, usually said that
the auditory cortex Areas of A2 and A3. Therefore, for the auditory system, Shou
Tiande not only determined the two partitions of fourth lower center (i.e., medial
geniculate body ‘ventral nucleus and dorsal nucleus’), also identified two partitions
of third lower central (i.e., midbrain ‘lower colliculus’ and ‘midbrain tegmentum,’
both belong to the midbrain and adjacent to each other though, they are not in the
same Area).
29 Zhang, P. L. Neuro-anatomy. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House. 1998.

The other neurophysiologist is Professor Sun Jiurong from Peking University.

According to his evidence from contemporary brain anatomy and physiology, he
points out30 that Wernicke Area directly receives projection from the cortex of the
pulvinar, including the top–temporal–occipital cortex (Professor Zhang Peilin’s
award-winning textbook Neuroanatomy also confirmed the fact31 ). The afferent fibers
of the thalamus are also derived from the inferior colliculus, the thalamus, the occip-
ital and the medial geniculate nuclei, which can be regarded as two distinct divisions
of the fourth lower centers of the speech, hearing, and general auditory systems.32
In other words, the fourth lower centers of the speech–hearing system are pulvinar
(because it is projected to produce uplink fiber speech by Vernice District), and fourth
lower central auditory system is the medial geniculate nuclei (because it generated
by projecting to the auditory centers of Areas of A1, A2, A3 in uplink fiber). As
Shou Tiande pointed out, the medial geniculate nuclei can be further divided into the
ventral nucleus and dorsal nucleus of the two smaller partitions or sub-areas. The
neural facts of anatomy provided by Sun Jiurong and Zhang Peilin not only solved
the problem proposed by Norboe Suga of speech processing model but also supple-
mented the defects of this theory significantly, ignored or avoided, with subcortical
neural mechanisms.
2.4.2 Components of Speech–Hearing System (Elements

of Semantic Perception)
It has been pointed out that the speech–hearing system is equivalent to what we call
semantic perception.
As mentioned above, any sensory perception system consists of four compo-
nents, sensory organs, afferent nerves, lower sensory centers in the cortex, and the
advanced sensory center of the cerebral cortex. The general elements of the auditory
system is ear (sensory organs, hair cells in the cochlear auditory receptors), spiral
ganglion long axon (afferent), subcortical auditory lower centers were four: cochlear
nuclei → olive nuclei → nuclei of hypothalamic → medial geniculate body, cere-
bral cortex; advanced central auditory includes basic auditory cortex A1 (Brodmann
Area 41) and auditory cortex Areas of A2 and A3 (Brodmann Areas of 42 and 22).
However, considering the views of Professor Shou Tiande, subcortical third lower
centers should be changed to ‘lower colliculus and tegmentum.’
The speech–hearing system, like other sensory systems, consists of the four ele-
ments: sensory organs, afferent nerves, subcortical lower centers, and high-level
centers of the cerebral cortex. Two of these elements of sensory organs and nerve are
the same as the auditory system. But as Nobuo Suga confirmed that neural anatomy,

31 Zhang, P. L. Neuro-anatomy. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House. 1998.
Press. 1996.
from the beginning of the auditory cortex, lower centers, differentiation gradually
occur, beginning from Level One or Level Two (i.e., from nuclear complex—cochlear
nuclei—olive nuclei differentiation is little), or not fully differentiated, but with the
following two levels, differentiation is bigger and bigger. As mentioned above, the
third level has been divided by the original one Area into two Areas of ‘inferior
colliculus’ and ‘tegmentum’; the fourth level is divided into two Areas of ‘medial
geniculate body’ and ‘pulvinar’ (the former can be further divided into two sub-areas:
the ventral nucleus and dorsal nucleus). This shows that speech perception channel
and sound perception channel of the oral language, in the beginning, coincide. How-
ever, with the deepening of the perceptual process, they gradually separate from
each other. From the third lower centers, the verbal auditory channel is completely
separated from the general auditory channel.
The speech auditory system is highly different from the general auditory cortex in
the higher cortex of the cerebral cortex. As Gazzaniga pointed out that a senior central
auditory system has three Areas, namely Wernicke Area (in the left hemisphere of
Brodmann Areas 39 and 40), Broca’s Area (left-hemisphere Brodmann Area 44), and
central concept (also called ‘mental lexicon’ in the supramarginal gyrus and angular
gyrus); this shows that advanced speech–hearing and advanced speech centers do
not overlie.
The above analysis shows that the elements of speech–hearing system are ears
(sensory organs, auditory receptors are hair cells in the cochlea) → long axon of
the spiral ganglion (cochlear afferent nerve) → cochlear nuclei (first level of central
cortex nuclei) → upper olive nuclei (second level of olive complex nucleus cortex
central level) → inferior colliculus (third level of central subcortical) → pulvinar
(the fourth level of pulvinar cortex central) → cerebral cortex Wernicke Area, district
and central concept also known as mental lexicon (advanced speech, it contains
three sub-centers). In the following section, we will prove that the components of
the speech–hearing system mentioned here are exactly the components of semantic
perception we have defined.
2.5 Semantic Perception: Criteria of Perception

Classification
As mentioned, in order to ensure scientific classification, the classification of percep-

tion system must be based on the main neural mechanism of perceptual processing.
That is, the classification depends on the lower center of the cortex and the higher
center of the cerebral cortex, rather than sensory organs. Eyes, ears, nose, tongue,
body can only be used to divide these sensory systems and is not suitable for the
division of the perceptual system (because it will not do without sensory perception,
the main processing mechanism is not in the peripheral senses, but in the central
nervous system).
Since main subcortical lower centers and high cerebral cortex both relate to central
auditory system, but do not overlap each other, which indicates that the perceptual
2.5 Semantic Perception: Criteria of Perception … 33
processing methods of the two are not the same (commonality is only reflected in
the voice and speech perception, but sound perception and speech perception of
the two has significant differences). Therefore, following the demonstration earlier
of the perceptual system on scientific and objective basis or standards, we should
obviously not continue to classify verbal auditory system into the general auditory
system (for speech, discussion of sensory is of no significance, and the academic
circles at home and abroad have only discussed speech perception). But it should be
divided as an independent perceptual system—since the two features of perception
are very different, so the speech perception system from the general sound perception
(i.e., listening perception) system should be separated, which is logical, and it would
be absurd and illogical like what has been done, putting the two properties that are
not the same together.
What is the most appropriate name for the speech perceptual system, after being
separated from the general sound sense perception (auditory) system? Of course, one
can use the phrase ‘sense of speech perception’ as a common term. However, for the
following reasons, we think it is more precise to adopt the name ‘sense of language’
(or ‘sense of speech’).
‘Speech’ here refers to the use of language, which involves phonetics, grammar,
and semantics. As we will demonstrate, the baby has a natural genetic, phonetic, and
semantic perception and recognition ability, but the grammar (including lexical and
syntactic) identification ability is acquired through learning. Each sensory system
of human beings has a corresponding central nervous system and has an objective
neurophysiological basis, so each sense of perception should be natural and heritable.
As discussed in the first part of this article, human speech ability is neither entirely
innate nor entirely acquired, but has both innate, genetic components and acquired
learning factors. Because the language involves grammar, grammar rules and varies
between languages (there are tens of thousands of languages in the world, and there
are tens of thousands of corresponding rules of grammar), which cannot rely on
genetics to gain; semantics is different, and it varies between languages (all ethnic
groups have different languages, but their semantic expression is the same). The
ability to identify semantics can be born with. It can be seen that if the term semantic
perception is used, it will not guarantee the innate genetic attributes of these sensory
perception abilities. If there is ‘sense of semantic perception,’ there will be no such
a problem.
Based on the above considerations, in the future, we will formally separate this
new system from the traditional auditory system and into ‘semantic sense perception’
system, referred to as the speech perceptual system.
Through the above analysis, we have been able to confirm that the sense of seman-
tic perception has its specific elements (especially higher central cortex and cerebral
cortex in the lower center and its function are different from other perception sys-
tems) to provide anatomical neural base, so it is independent perception of objective
existence in the human brain. However, one might ask whether such perceptual sys-
tems can be found in the auditory system or in other sensory (visual) systems? What
sensory perception system should spatial perception and temporal perception go,
which are essential concepts in psychology and philosophy?
In the auditory system, people are most likely to put forward a sense of musical
perception in comparison with semantic perception. Some scholars have openly ques-
tioned: “if semantic perception or sense of language is a perceptual system indepen-
dent of hearing, should musical perception be treated equally?” The question seems
plausible, but in fact, it does not hold water. Because so far, the research progress of
brain science (including new findings using modern positron emission tomography
and magnetic resonance imaging and non-destructive measurement techniques) has
only confirmed the existence of independence of the auditory cortex of advanced
language centers but failed to confirm the independence of the auditory cortex of
advanced music center. Of course, some scholars, such as Moore Faith (1979), have
proved by experiments33 ; 4–6 weeks of newborns have shown the right brain tends to
respond to music, on the left ear of music, has more obvious reaction (human trans-
mission of auditory stimuli with nerve intersection), and seems to be in the Area of
brain cortex ‘music center.’ But this is only a speculation: the brain cortex may have
Area more sensitive to music, but it is the only estimation; this Area is likely to be in
the auditory cortex of the contact Area (i.e., in Areas of A2 or A3), or A2, A3, and
adjacent Areas and is unlikely to be completely independent in auditory cortex. As
for the lower cortex, there is no anatomical evidence or relevant reports that lower
center of musical perception exists.
Let us look at the visual system. In the visual system, there are usually statements
of color perception, shape perception, depth perception, motion perception, etc. As
mentioned earlier, the perception in the cortex under the lower center is all the same
as each other, and they at the advanced center of cerebral cortex not only relate to the
basic visual cortex Area V1, but also involve in visual cortex contact Areas of V2, V3,
and V4 (the main color perception in Area V4, mainly in Area V3 shape perception).
However, all of these perception higher centers, as far as we know, basically all are in
Areas of V1, V2, V3, and V4, or in the adjacent Area that connected, that they have
failed to separate from the visual cortex. It is usually put several perceptions together,
called ‘visual perception’; they still belong to the category of visual perception; no
one ever tried to separate them from the visual system. We think this is scientific and
true. ‘Sense of semantic perception’ not only is in the cerebral cortex, completely
independent, in other words, as a higher perception cortex center, but also wholly
belongs to their own in the low-level center in the cortex, and the other perception
channels do not intersect. This makes the ‘musical perception’ and the above ‘visual
perception’ incomparable.
As for the perception of space and time, they originally belong to another class of
perceptual category according to features of perception (as discussed above belong
to perceptual categories according to the features of perception channels). However,
because of the perception of space can be seen as the shape, size, depth, range, and
perception of a host of concepts, the former includes the latter, so we can put it into
the category of visual perception. While the time perception is actually results of
a variety of perceptual activities joining forces, we cannot perceive past time, can
33 Cited in Chen, Y. H. Cognitive development psychology. Zhejiang: Zhejiang People’s Publishing
House. 1996.
2.5 Semantic Perception: Criteria of Perception … 35
only perceive what existed or happened; in other words, people can only perceive
time continuity and sequence of perceptual objects or events, so visual, auditory,
somatic sensation are likely to be involved in34 analysis time series; time perception
is a comprehensive variety of perception and generally does not go into a single
perceptual channel.
In conclusion, considering the current progress in the study of brain science, no
other sensory system has been found in the human brain, apart from the sense of
semantic perception, which can be independently divided from the original sensory
system. This shows that the speech sense system is not only different from the original
five sensory–perceptual systems, but also the only alternative system. This is the
reason why we call it the sixth sense perception system. The perception system is
closely related to human language (spoken language). Additionally, verbal language,
the unique function of the human brain, is the fundamental symbol of the difference
between human and animal. In conclusion, through the above step-by-step strict
proof, we finally find that the sense of semantic perception is indeed the sixth kind
of objective and unique for human perception. Thus, the bold propositions we have
risen but doubted by many people had been proven.
For the understanding of the concept of sense of semantic perception, its physio-
logical mechanism, and components, we will further clarify in the next chapter and
then gradually construct a new language development theory for children.

Chapter 3
Physiological Basis and Innateness
of Semantic Perception
3.1 Function of Semantic Perception
Semantic perception, as mentioned in the previous chapter, is the sixth sense of

perception unique to the human brain, which is specially used to perceive and identify
various semantic relationships in spoken language. Because it involves speech, the
corresponding semantic recognition can only be carried out on the basis of speech
perception and discrimination, so semantic perception actually has two functions:
perception and discrimination of speech and analysis and recognition of semantics.
3.1.1 Perception and Differentiation of Phonetics
Perception and differentiation of phonetics include two fragments: speech perception

and speech discrimination.
Speech perception refers to the process of perceiving current speech input and
completing the corresponding spectrum analysis. That is to say, the mechanical
energy of air vibration caused by sound waves is amplified by the external ear and
then converted into nerve impulses in the form of electric impulses by the inner
ear, and the nerve impulses reflecting the speech information are transmitted to the
lower central part of the cortex by the long axons of the spiral ganglion cells. Level
processing: From level 1 (cochlear nuclei) → Level 2 (upper olive nuclei) → Level
3 (inferior colliculus) → to Level 4 (thalamic occipital) to complete the process of
perception and spectral analysis of the current input speech.
As mentioned in Sect. 2.4 of the previous chapter, with the improvement of the
processing level, three types of “specialization neurons” (called CF-, FM-, or NB-
type specialization neurons) with selective response to different spectral components
will eventually be formed in the lower cortical centers in the process of progressive
processing of speech information. These three types of specialized neurons will

38 3 Physiological Basis and Innateness of Semantic …
analyze the constant frequency, modulation frequency, and noise string in the spec-
trogram, respectively. As Nobuo Suga pointed out, all human speech sounds (no
matter which language) consist of these three components. And through the analysis
of these three components, vowels and consonants can be identified (human speech
sounds have only two types: vowels and consonants). It can be seen that through the
spectral analysis of the above speech perception process, human beings can clearly
distinguish the current input speech information from non-speech information. That
is why people can still talk to each other with noises of machines.
Speech discrimination refers to the process of distinguishing words from the cur-
rent input speech string. It is well known that the smallest unit of a language (that
can distinguish the meaning of a word) is called a phoneme. Therefore, in order to
identify and select a word from the input speech string, that is, to complete the speech
discrimination process, the support of phonological lexicon stored in the speech cen-
ter is needed. The phonological lexicon consists of a certain number of phonemes,
which are different from one another. Each phoneme contains a set of distinctive fea-
tures, and the combination of different distinctive features represents phonemes of
different words. Gazzaniga once pointed out that there is such a phonemic lexicon in
Wernicke Area (the lexical phonological representation mentioned above). In speech
discrimination, as described in the Sect. 2.5 of previous chapter, information strings
reflecting input speech obtained through the analysis and synthesis of the subcortical
multilevel centers, finally projected to the Wernicke region of the cerebral cortex
by the fifth-level nerve fibers from subcortical terminal center (thalamic occipital).
Since the information string reflecting speech input is composed of the information
of each word, which contains their phonemic features, and the phonemic features of
speech input strings can be compared with the phonologic lexicon of the Wernicke
Area to identify and distinguish one word from another, thus completing the phono-
logical identification process. Because such a process of word discrimination and
differentiation is only based on the comparison and matching of phonemic feature
information in the input speech string with the phonological lexicon of speech center,
which does not involve the understanding of word meaning (i.e., concept). In fact, it
only converts continuous input speech string into a set of phonemic unit sequences
arranged according to phonemic characteristics, and its processing method belongs
to the category of speech processing. Although the identified object is a word in form,
it should still be called ‘speech discrimination’ process. Never confuse this process
with the process of word recognition in grammatical analysis.
3.1.2 Semantic Analysis and Recognition
Semantic analysis and recognition is to analyze and identify the actual meaning of
each sentence in the input speech, which means to clarify the semantic relations of
‘what,’ ‘how,’ ‘who does,’ ‘what does,’ ‘how to do,’ and ‘when to do.’ At present, there
are many formal methods for describing semantic relations in computer systems,
3.1 Function of Semantic Perception 39
such as semantic network representation, case relationship representation, possibil-

ity semantic representation, CD (concept dependency) representation, and situational
semantic representation. Among them, ‘case grammar’ is commonly used and effec-
tive, that is, the use of various case relations to express the corresponding semantic
relations.
The use of case relations to express the semantic relations of sentences was first
proposed by C. J. Fillmore, a famous linguist. There are eight kinds of case relations
initially defined by Fillmore which were later been revised or supplemented by
different linguists. Here are some definitions of case relations that we think are quite
reasonable:
Subject or Agentive (A for short): the subject expressing the originator of action or
behavior or the change of state, usually of human or animal;
Object or Patient Case (Object, O for short): indicates anything that is directly
controlled or directly affected by an action, behavior, or state change;
Dative (D for short): an object indirectly affected by action, behavior, or state
changes, usually of human or animal;
Result (R for short): represents the result of a change in action, behavior, or state. The
result can be either a living object or an inanimate object, but it must be generated
after the change in action, behavior, or state (which did not exist before);
Cause (C for short): means a factor or cause that causes a change in action, behavior,
or state;
Instrument (I for short): a tool or means to express an accompanying action or
behavior;
Location (L for short): denotes the location and orientation of action, behavior, or
state change (or state existence);
Time (T for short): the time (a time or period) when an action, behavior, or state
changes (or states exist).
It can be seen that the actual meaning of a sentence can be clearly expressed by
using the above eight case relations, in other words, it can reflect various semantic
relations such as ‘what’, ‘how’, ‘who does’, ‘what does’, ‘how to do’ and ‘when to
do’.
In fact, many intelligent computer systems with natural language recognition
ability at present are implemented by using the case relation representations and cor-
responding case relation analysis software. According to the information processing
theory of cognitive psychology, there are many similarities between human brain
and computer, when it comes to analyze and process input information. The same
is true for the analysis and identification of sentence semantics. Therefore, in order
to understand how the speech center of the human brain analyzes and identifies the
semantic relationship of sentences, in Sect. 3.4, we will use case relations in computer
system for semantic analysis and identification.
Of course, the actual process of analyzing sentences by the brain speech center
cannot be exactly the same as that of using case relations (or other formal semantic
representations) to analyze sentences in computer systems. But the brain speech
center can grasp the actual meaning of the whole sentence only by analyzing and
identifying various semantic relations in sentences, which is certain. This is the reason
why we can use case relation representation method and case relation analysis method
in computer system to illustrate the concept and function of semantic perception.
3.2 Criteria for Determining Innateness (or Congeniality

Capacity)
The determining innateness of semantic perception refers to the above functions of it

(including the two aspects of ‘perception and discrimination of speech’ and ‘analysis
and recognition of semantics’), which are inherited and born. In fact, the function
of any perceptual system is innate and can be obtained by heredity. Since semantic
perception is the sixth perceptual system of human beings, its function should also
be innate and can be obtained through inheritance. As for whether a certain function
or ability has congeniality, different scholars have different explanations, and they
put forward their own criteria for judging congeniality. For example, in the first
chapter, we have mentioned the famous linguist Lenneberg’s Six Criteria of Judgment
of Innate Ability and the neuropsychologist Karin Stromswold’s Four Criteria of
Judgment of Innate Ability.1 Scholars have different perspectives to consider this
issue; however, some scholars may not be able to hit the key point in their analysis
of the problem. For example, Lennerberg’s ‘Six Criteria’ (see Sect. 1.2, Chap. 1),
if carefully scrutinized, the first, second, and third of which are not necessarily
suitable as criteria for judging innateness, although they are also related to innateness.
‘Criteria’ must reflect the nature of the problem and be very clear. For this reason, we
must analyze and synthesize different criteria, and extract the essential characteristics
from them to be for the judgment basis. After such analysis, comparison, and careful
study, we believe that the following four characteristics can be used to distinguish
whether a certain human ability or a certain human body function is innateness or not.
The first two characteristics are mainly based on Stranswald’s criteria (the second
one refers to the 4th and 5th criteria of Lennerberg’s, too), the third one is based on
Lennerberg’s criterion 6, and the fourth one is based on our own research conclusions.
(1) If this ability (or function) is innate, it should be shown in all normal individuals.
(2) If such abilities (or functions) are innate, the acquisition of such abilities (or
functions) by individuals of the same age-group will tend to be consistent and
automated without special teaching.
(3) If this ability (or function) is innate, there is a critical period for the acquisition of
this ability (or function), and it is very difficult to obtain this ability (or function)
after that.
(4) If this ability (or function) is innate, it must be supported by a specific neurophys-
iological mechanism; that is, the brain has a specific nerve center corresponding
to this function in order to provide a neurophysiological basis for this function.
1 Stromswold, K. The Cognitive and Neural Baes of Language Acquisition, in The Cognitive Neuro-
Science, VII Language, M. S. Gazzaniga (ed.) London: the MIT Press. 1995.
3.2 Criteria for Determining Innateness … 41
For the function of semantic perception, the fourth feature (supported by specific
neurophysiological mechanisms) has been analyzed in detail in Sect. 2.4, Chap. 2.
The results show that there are four subcortical low-level centers and three high-level
speech centers in the cerebral cortex, which provide neurophysiological support for
the above two functions of semantic perception. Therefore, as for semantic percep-
tion, the characteristics of fourth have been demonstrated in detail before, will not be
repeated in this chapter. As for the other three characteristics, they can be summed
up as a comprehensive feature to express, “if this ability (or function) is innate, all
normal individuals can acquire it automatically in a consistent way (without special
teaching) in a certain critical period.” Therefore, we will focus on such a compre-
hensive feature, respectively, to demonstrate the innateness function of semantic
perception in the above two aspects.
3.3 Physiological Basis and Innateness of Function

of Speech Perception and Discrimination
3.3.1 Neurophysiological Basis of Function of Speech

Perception and Discrimination
Stranswald have pointed out,2 “Anatomical analysis of the fetal brain shows that the
left temporal lobe is larger than the right temporal lobe” (Wada, Clarke, & Hamm,
1975). Moreover, the development of the cortex related to speech function in the left
hemisphere has been lagging behind the same cortex in the right hemisphere: the
right temporal lobe appears at 30th week of pregnancy, while the left temporal lobe
begins to appear 7–10 days later; and the development of dendrites in the left Broca
Area is also lagging behind that in the same Area on the right (The more advanced and
complex part of the phylogenetic evolution and individual growth and development
process, the later it develops. For example, the new cortex of the brain develops later
than the old one.). Event-related potential test and binaural tests show that the left
hemisphere of a baby has special sensitivity to speech from birth. The reason why the
left temporal lobe is larger than the right temporal lobe is that it contains such high-
level speech centers as Wernicke and Broca. They are the innate neurophysiological
basis of speech perception function and the innate neurophysiological basis of speech
discrimination function.
As mentioned above, speech perception and discrimination includes two parts:
speech perception and speech discrimination. Speech perception mainly refers to
the process of spectrum analysis of the current input speech (sounds), while speech
discrimination mainly refers to the process of transforming current continuous input
speech string into a set of phonetic unit sequences (i.e., word sequences) arranged and
2 Stromswold, K. The Cognitive and Neural Baes of Language Acquisition, in The Cognitive Neuro-
Science, VII Language, M. S. Gazzaniga (ed.) London: the MIT Press. 1995.
combined according to the phonemic characteristics by comparison and matching

of phonemic features. Therefore, we will discuss its innateness features from the
aspects of speech perception and speech recognition.
3.3.2 Innateness of Speech Perception
The innateness nature of speech perception can be demonstrated by the following

facts:
(1) Neonates can neither listen nor speak. How can we observe that they have innate
speech perception? Scientists specializing in child language development have
devised various ingenious experimental methods, one of which is an artificial
pacifier with a record of infant sucking rate. De Casper and Spence have done
an experiment3 in which pregnant women six weeks before delivery read the
passages in the story written by Dr. Seuss twice a day. The experimenters mea-
sured their sucking rates with artificial pacifiers in two groups of babies just
a few days after birth. Babies wore headphones, and one group of babies lis-
tened to passages that their mothers have read before (the story written by Dr.
Seuss), and the other listened to new stories. The results showed that babies
who heard Dr. Seuss’s story in the womb sucked faster, while the other group
did not respond. This indicates that not only newborns, but also fetuses have the
ability to perceive and remember speech sounds.
(2) Mehler and Christophe pointed out through years of experimental observation of
newborns that four-day babies can easily distinguish two unfamiliar languages.
Studies have shown that infants pay attention to the main characteristics of
the components in sound spectrum that are less than 400 Hz. In fact, babies
only respond to speech components below 400 Hz after filtering, but they do
not respond to language changes after inversion of speech order. The results
of Mehler et al. show that newborns do have the ability to analyze speech and
sound spectra. They can perceive the main characteristics of the components
below 400 Hz (the main component of human speech spectra is in this low
frequency band). If the order of speech is reversed to make them meaningless
voice strings, newborns will not respond (i.e., no sound perception occurs).
(3) Professor Gui Shichun,4 a psycholinguist in China, pointed out that ‘speech
sound is more likely to attract infants’ interest and lasting attention than non-
speech sounds, and a 4-month-old infant tends to listen to women’s voice rather
than white noise or silence.’ Gui further analyzed the reason why babies are
easy to perceive human voice, because in the last three months of pregnancy,
the fetal auditory system began to operate. The wall of the mother’s uterus can
3 De Casper, A. & Spence, Prenatal Maternal Speech Influences Newborns Perception Of Speech
Sounds. Infant Behavior And Development, 9. 1986.
4 Gui, S. (ed.) A New Psycholinguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
2001.
3.3 Physiological Basis and Innateness … 43
attenuate sound signals and filter them at low frequencies, so the best sound
to be transmitted to the uterus is the mother’s voice. Mother’s speech produces
much greater intensity than the sound of the external environment, and the result
is that mother’s speech form, especially its prosodic features, makes the baby
familiar from the fetal period. We believe that this is one of the reasons why
babies give priority to human voice and are easy to perceive speech, but not
the main reason. The most important reason or basis for this is the presence
of a high-level speech center in the left temporal lobe, which is supported by
brain-nerve mechanisms, as described in the first part of this section.
3.3.3 Innateness of Speech Differentiation
As mentioned above, speech discrimination refers to the process of converting a

continuous speech input string into a set of phonetic unit sequences (word sequences)
arranged and combined according to phonemic features through comparison and
matching of phonemic features. It can be seen that the key to speech discrimination is
the analysis and identification of phonemic features. Professor Hu Yushu,5 a linguist,
pointed out that ‘in fact, most of the phones obtained by analyzing a phonetic system
are the result of inductive analysis based on phonological theory. In this sense, a
phone is a phoneme.’ In linguistics, it is generally believed that phoneme and phone
are two different concepts, but Professor Hu Yushu advocated no distinction between
them. Should the two be distinguished? In fact, in the majority of cases, a phoneme
is a phone; however, there are certain situations (e.g., when a ‘phonemic variant’
occurs) where a phonemes can be equivalent to several phones. Nevertheless, there
are few chances for this to happen, so we basically agree with Professor Hu. In the
following discussion, if not specifically stated, phones are regarded as phonemes.
In this way, the problem of speech discrimination is reduced to the analysis and
recognition of phones or phonemes.
As for the innateness of speech discrimination, besides the strong evidence that
the high-level speech centers such as Wernicke and Broca in the left temporal lobe
are the neurophysiological basis of innate speech discrimination function mentioned
above, the following examples can also be provided from the perspective of phonemic
(phone) analysis.
(1) Christophe et al.6 designed a special experiment in 1994 to test whether babies
are born with the ability of segmenting continuous speech into word-level
units through phonemic discrimination. Experiments showed that French babies
born four days could not only distinguish specific phonemic feature combi-
nations from continuous speech strings, for example, distinguish MATI with
5 Hu,
Y. Modern Mandarin Chinese. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Publishing House. 1995.
6 Mehler,J. & Christophe, A. Maturation and learning of language in the first year of life, in The
Cognitive Neurosciences, VII Language, M.S. Gazzaniga (Ed.) London: the MIT Press. 1995.
‘consonant-vowel-consonant-vowel’ phonemic feature combinations (abbrevi-

ated as CVCVCV combinations) from mathematician. But also identify whether
specific phonemic combinations come from one word or from the intersec-
tion of two-word phrases, for example, identified whether MATI from Tibetan
Panorama or from mathematician.
(2) Other linguists have also found that newborn babies soon showed the ability to
discriminate multiple phonemes. For example, Eimas et al. (P. et al.),7,8 discov-
ered in 1971 that a month-old baby could distinguish between clear and voiced
consonants: [ba] and [pa]; by fourth month, it could distinguish male voice and
female voice; by sixth months, babies began to pay attention to intonation and
rhythm in speech. In 1973, Shvachkin, the former Soviet Union’s psychologist,
had found that infants automatically learned to recognize Russian phonemes in
a certain order. First, they learned to distinguish vowels, then they learned to
distinguish frontal vowels, post vowels, high vowels, and low vowels, then they
learned to distinguish explosive, fricative, nasal, liquid, and gliding sounds, and
finally they learned to distinguish between clear and voiced consonants. Not only
can babies quickly learn to distinguish phonemes like vowels and consonants,
but also those related to intonation. In Morse’s 1972 experiment,9 seven-week
babies were able to distinguish between rising and falling tones, such as [ba↑]
and [ba↓]. It’s also won’t be late to discriminate stress, “because psychologists
have found that children aged 1–3 seldom mispronounce the main stress in their
spontaneous speech.”10
(3) Trehub found in 1976 that it was very difficult for adults whose mother tongue
was English to recognize some of the Czech phonemes, while babies could
easily accomplish this task, even though their parents spoke English. Lasky
and Werker and others11 have found a similar condition: infants could identify
certain phonemes in non-native languages, but their parents couldn’t.
(4) According to the experimental results of Christophe in example (1), Mehler and
others inferred that French infants had the ability to distinguish potential word
boundary cues in French.12 Mehler pointed out that French babies were able
to make this distinction on the basis of the significant lengthening of vowels at
the end of French words (a ‘phonemic variant’ phenomenon13 ); in other words,
French babies used the characteristics of phonemic variants as clues or signs of
7 Eimas, P. et al. Speech Perception in Infants. Science, 171: pp. 303–306. 1971.
2001.
9 Morse, P. The Discrimination of Speech And Nonspeech Stimuli In Early Infancy, Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 14: pp. 477–492. 1972.

2001.
11 Chen, Y. H. Cognitive Development Psychology. Zhejiang: Zhejiang People’S Publishing House.
1996.
12 Mehler, J. & Christophe, A. Maturation and learning of language in the first year of life, in The
Cognitive Neurosciences, VII Language, M.S. Gazzaniga (Ed.) London: the MIT Press. 1995.
13 Huang, B. R. & Liao, X. D. Modern Mandarin Chinese. Beijing: Higher Education Press. 1999.
word boundaries. Because this kind of phonemic variant exists in all languages
(only the forms of phonemic variants are not identical, for example, in English,
Dutch, Czech, Estonian, Swedish, and Italian, it often appears that the initial
vowel (rather than the final vowel) of a word is significantly prolonged; more-
over, the phonemic variant is not only expressed as a vowel prolongation, but
also various changes in pronunciation), Mehler et al. asserted ‘for all languages
in the world, although different languages may use different word boundary
cues, the fact that all babies are sensitive to word boundary cues should be true.’
On this basis, Mehler et al. further cited the research results and observations
of Jusczyk, Fisher, Tokura, and Gerken, and other contemporary children lin-
guists. Finally, they pointed out that “these results enable us to conclude that
from an early age, infants can understand sentences as strings of clauses—this
is true for all languages in the world, moreover, they don’t need any adjustment
or adaptation.”
To sum up, it can be seen that for the newborns of any nationality, the input
sentences (phonetic strings) can be divided into word strings without being taught
or any adjustment process. That is, babies are born with the ability of phonetic
discrimination, which has been confirmed by more and more achievements in the
study of child’s language development, and has become the basic consensus of many
children linguists.
3.4 Physiological Basis and Innateness of Function

of Semantic Analysis and Recognition
3.4.1 Neurophysiological Basis of Function of Semantic

Analysis and Recognition
The main speech centers of human beings (Broca and Wernicke), as mentioned
earlier, have been discovered more than a hundred years ago. For a long time, it
has been believed that Broca Area (as mentioned above, this Area is mainly in
the anterior inferior frontal gyrus of the left hemisphere) is responsible for speech
generation and expression, while Wernicke Area (as mentioned above, this Area
mainly includes posterior superior temporal gyrus, posterior temporal lobe, and the
parietal lobe) is responsible for speech perception and understanding. Some people
even simply classified this function as ‘front-expression’ and ‘back-comprehension’
and called it ‘dichotomy.’14 However, new advances since the 1990s have shown
that dichotomy has not been supported by neuroanatomy of the brain. Sheila E.
Blumstein of Brown University, USA, suggested that the speech expression system
extended not only in the anterior inferior frontal gyrus of the left hemisphere, but also
14 Blumstein,S.E. The neurobiology of the sound structure of language, in The Cognitive Neuro-
Science, VII Language, M. S. Gazzaniga (ed.). London: The MIT Press. 1995.
in the temporal and parietal lobes of the posterior hemisphere (including Wernicke
Area). Similarly, the speech perception and understanding system extended not only
in the posterior temporal and parietal lobes, but also in the anterior frontal lobes
(including Broca Area). According to Blumstein’s view, the original two speech
centers should not be divided into two parts, but should be combined into one. After
the merger, the speech center is responsible for the two aspects of speech perception,
comprehension and speech generation, expression. Since these two aspects cover all
the functions of spoken language, it is advisable to call the merged center ‘spoken
language center.’ In addition, according to Gazzaniga’s view in Sect. 2.4 of Chap. 2,
speech comprehension and speech generation involve not only Wernicke and Broca
Areas, but also conceptual centers (near the supramarginal gyrus and angular gyrus),
i.e., three speech centers. In this way, the spoken language center should include these
three speech centers. Therefore, if no special statement is made, the spoken language
centers mentioned below all include Broca, Wernicke, and conceptual centers, as well
as newly discovered Areas related to speech comprehension and expression in recent
years.
It should be noted that although Blumstein put forward new ideas, in terms of
main functions, it is still the basic consensus of linguistic circles at home and abroad
that Broca mainly involves speech expression and Wernicke mainly involves speech
comprehension.
As for the traditional concept of spoken language center, besides the tendency
of simplification (dichotomy) in functional division pointed out by Blumstein, we
believe that there is a more serious one-sided tendency, which emphasizes only the
function of its grammatical category but neglects its semantic category. Up to now,
whether the study of Broca Area or Wernicke Area is always based on phonetics,
vocabulary, and syntax, but seldom (or not) on semantics, we believe that this is
putting the cart before the horse. The result of doing so is inevitably ‘fail to see the
wood for the trees’ and fail to grasp the key and essence of the problem. The reason
why Donald Hebb’s theory of innate-acquired interaction fails to answer the core
question of child’s language development raised at the beginning of the first chapter
of this book lies in this.
In fact, for the spoken language center (as mentioned above, it includes Broca
Area, Wernicke Area, conceptual centers, and the newly discovered cortex related
to speech comprehension and expression), it has only two functions which can be
obtained hereditarily: speech perception and discrimination and semantic analysis
and recognition (the two functions are manifested in human beings as semantic sen-
sation and perception, or ‘semantic perception’), while other linguistic functions
(such as word recognition, phrase composition analysis, and syntactic analysis) can
only be acquired through learning, and it is possible to acquire other linguistic func-
tions smoothly only on the basis of innate semantic perception. Next, we will use
case relation analysis to explain the function of semantic analysis and recognition of
the spoken language center (the following cases are all cited from Professor Wang
Dechun’s Neurology15 ).
15 Wang, D. C. Child Language Development. Wuhan: Central China University Press. 1995.
Professor Wang Dechun noted although patients with parietal-temporal-occipital

cortex injury can recognize words in sentences and understand the meaning of indi-
vidual words, they cannot integrate them, and so they cannot form a multidimensional
semantic schema, that is, the semantic relationship system presented as a whole.
Professor Wang’s ‘parietal-temporal-occipital cortex’ here belongs to the traditional
Warwick Area. He asserted that the brain damage would make the patient unable to
process the whole sentence in integrative manner and thus lose the ability to identify
and establish the whole sentence ‘semantic relation system.’ Professor Wang also
gave a number of examples of errors often made by such patients:
Example 1. The patient could not judge which of the following sentence was correct,
‘Spring is before Summer’ or ‘Summer is before Spring’—indicating that the patient
had lost the ability to recognize such semantic relations as ‘time case.’
Example 2. The patient could not find out how ‘circle below the square’ differed from
‘square below the circle’—indicating that the patient had lost the ability to recognize
such semantic relations as ‘place case.’
Example 3. The patient could not find out the relationship between the ‘bird’s nest’
and the ‘tree branch’ in the sentence ‘the bird’s nest is built on the branch’—indicating
that the patient had lost the ability to recognize the semantic relations between ‘patient
case’ and ‘location case.’
It is generally believed that Broca Area damage is only manifested by speech
disorder, but Professor Wang Dechun suggested that according to new research find-
ings, patients with Broca Area damaged also have an impact on the understanding
of sentence semantic relations. For example:
Example 4. The patient could not judge whether the sentence is right or wrong, ‘there
is a person walking on the road by car’—indicating that the patient had lost the ability
to recognize the semantic relationship between ‘agentive case’ and ‘instrumental
case.’
Example 5. If the patient was asked to repeat the sentence ‘Boys beat dogs,’ and he
or she repeated it as ‘Boys… ‘Dog’—Because of the loss of verbs, patients would
not be able to identify such semantic relationships as ‘agent case’ and ‘patient case.’
Example 6. Let the patient narrate something that he or she experienced. At this
time, the patient could only speak independent words instead of a coherent sentence,
and most of the verbs are lost (similar to Example 5). Even if he (or she) used the
verbs occasionally, there was no morphological change, they just used the infinitive
form directly (the original is Russian). For example, if a patient told the story of his
injury (the patient is a soldier), he would say “This is not… Front line… Soldiers…
March… Soldiers… Shooting… This is not… Head… Hurt… So the hospital…
So….” Because most of the verbs and other related words were lost in the narrative
process, this narrative became the ‘telegraph language’ often spoken by children
around two years old. Patient would not able to recognize the majority of the agen-
tive case, patient case, and dative case in this discourse. In short, they could only
identify part of the semantic relationship in the utterance, but not all of its semantic
relationship.
The above cases show that the spoken language centers (including the traditional
Wernicke, Broca, and conceptual centers, as well as the newly discovered cortical
Areas related to speech comprehension and expression) can analyze and recognize
semantic relations in sentences (because once the spoken language centers are dam-
aged, they will partly or completely lose the function of identifying the semantic
relations), so they are neurophysiological basis of semantic perception (semantic
sensation and perception) for humans. Next, we will further confirm the innate func-
tion of semantic analysis and semantic recognition through some achievements of
contemporary children’s language development research.
3.4.2 Innateness of Function of Semantic Analysis

and Recognition
It is extremely difficult to determine whether human beings have innate and geneti-
cally acquired abilities of semantic analysis and recognition, because, as the famous
linguist R. Brown said, only by examining the situation of those born in a human soci-
ety without language can we answer the question whether human language ability is
inherent. However, we cannot find such a society on the earth, nor can we find such
a person. The solution to this problem seems to be at a dead end. Fortunately, in the
1970s, unexpected discoveries have been made in the study of children’s language
development. In 1977, Susan Goldin-Meadow and Heidi Feldman,16 researchers
in the University of Pennsylvania, recorded and studied six cases of deaf children
inventing sign language by themselves. Two of them were girls and four were boys,
aged from 17 to 49 months (about 1.5–4 years old). All the parents of these children
had normal hearing, and they did not know sign language. Therefore, the sign lan-
guage of these deaf children was not taught by their parents, nor taught by teachers,
but developed by themselves. Although the sign language created by these six deaf
children is different, they experienced the same development route from content to
structure. Moreover, the development stages of sign language experienced by the six
deaf children were identical to those experienced by the normal children in terms of
voiced language and the deaf-mute children in terms of learning American Sign Lan-
guage. First one-word sentences, then two-word sentences, telegraph sentences, and
finally complete sentences and more complex sentences; that is, they could connect
more than two gesture symbols into phrases and sentences to express various seman-
tic relations. Normal children complete these stages of development in the following
age-groups: one-word sentences—10 months to 1 and a half years old; two-word
sentences—1 and a half to 2 years old; telegraphic sentences—2 to 2 and a half years
old; complete sentences—after 2 and a half years old. The six deaf children also
reached the same stage of development in similar age-groups (as mentioned above,
the six deaf children in this case are about 1.5–4 years old). What was difference was
16 Goldin-Meadow, S. & Feldman, H. The development of language-like communication without a

language model. Science, 197: pp. 401–403. 1977.
that the former ones used voice while the latter ones used gestures. While the actual
meaning they wanted to express, in other words, the semantic relationship in each
sentence was exactly the same.
For example, a deaf child would point to a shoe firstly and then to a table, which
means ‘put the shoes on the table.’ Or a deaf child would open his palm first, which
imply others to ‘give,’ and then point his finger at something before pointing to his
chest, which means ‘give me that thing.’ Like normal children, what they talk about
first is about movement and orientation, then about attributes, and finally about the
receiver and means of action. Susan and Heidi pointed out that the semantic relations
expressed by such deaf children in these sign languages could actually be described
by case relations in case grammar. For example, the semantic relationship between
the two gestures introduced above could be clearly reflected by the following case
relations (the following two examples involve several different types of ‘case chunks’
which are used to represent different case relations, namely semantic relations).
Example 1. Put your shoes on the table.
Location case
Predicate Patient case
chunk
(put) chunk (shoes)
(on the table)
Example 2. Give me that thing.
Dative case
Predicate Patient case
chunk
(give) chunk (that thing)
(me)
Other gesture languages, including complex gesture languages involving more

gesture symbols (such as gesture languages involving not only predicate and patient
but also semantic relations such as agent, tool, reason, time and result), can be
reflected one by one through the eight case relations defined by Fillmore mentioned
above.
Since all the six deaf children had created their own sign language to communicate
with their parents or others without being taught (their parents had to learn the sign
language from their children, and the vocabulary used by parents in sign language was
much less and the structure was much simpler than that of their children. According to
Susan and Heidi’s case studies, children have a natural tendency and ability to develop
a structured communication system even in a disadvantageous environment (such as
deafness) in order to express and communicate with each other. Susan and Heidi also
compared the six deaf children’s development of sign language with the chimpanzee’s
mastery of sign language, pointing out that the two were essentially different: deaf
children’s sign language are self-created and self-invented, while chimpanzees rely
on human teachers for years of training and teaching. In addition, the sign language
of deaf children is open—gestures, phrases, and sentences composed of signs can
be expanded and generated independently; while the sign language of chimpanzees
is closed—at most hundreds of gestures can be learned with fewer phrases, and its
structure is simple, which is different from the richness and complexity of human
sign language. Since Susan and Heidi have found that this tendency of speech ability
is innate and self-taught, and that any person with normal intelligence (even if he
has lost his hearing) can acquire it automatically within a certain age (i.e., during
a critical period). This ability should be innate according to the criteria of innate
ability proposed in Sect. 3.2, in this chapter. In addition, the communicative system
developed by this ability is to express and communicate each other’s meanings. As
mentioned above, these meanings can be described by case relations (i.e., semantic
relations) of case grammar. So this ability is a kind of ability to analyze and recognize
semantics.
In addition to the above-mentioned cases of six deaf children creating different
sign languages independently, which can illustrate the innate ability of semantic
analysis and recognition, the following relatively new report is also a strong proof
of this innateness ability.
On February 19, 2010, the weekly website twenty-first century Trends in
Argentina reported a new study conducted by scientists at the York University,
Canada. The study showed that six-month-old babies were able to understand the
intention of adults—they could distinguish whether adults were playing tricks on
them, and because they didn’t like to be teased, they would express their dissatisfac-
tion or reacted in other way. Testers in this study were all infants aged 6–9 month
as the University of York announced. During the experiment, experimenters played
games with 40 babies of different sexes, they sometimes showed as incompetence and
sometimes as reluctantly. But the result suggested that six-month-old babies were
able to distinguish between the above two situations—if the experimenter cannot
share toys with them (baby) because of uncontrollable reasons, they would accepted
the reality calmly; if the experimenter were just unwilling to share their toys with
them, they would be restless. Heidi Marsh, a Ph.D. student at the Children’s Research
Center at York University, who participate in the study, believed that babies could tell
if adults are joking with them and responded accordingly. The results of the above
experiments proved for the first time that a six-month-old baby could indeed under-
stand the intention of adults’; moreover, they could not only react restlessly through
physical movements such as swing their fists, but also could respond to adults’ smiles,
refusal of eyes, sadness, and voice. This is precisely because any child (including
deaf-mute children) is born with the ability of semantic analysis and recognition that
enable them to master native language without a teacher in a few years (from birth to
four or five years old), which contains innumerable grammatical rules. Even in the
extreme disadvantage of hearing loss and inability to master the spoken language,
they could also master the common social gestures in a short time. Moreover, when
they have no chance to obtain the social gesture language, in order to express and
communicate their needs, they could even create their own gesture language that
can reflect various complex semantic relations. The six real cases of deaf children
discovered and carefully studied by Susan and Heidi are the clearest explanations of
this view and the most vivid and powerful evidence that children are born with the
ability of semantic analysis and recognition. This ability of semantic identification
is a great achievement of species evolution and a unique function of human brain.

However, although this ability is innate, there is still a certain condition for it—that
is, the role of the environment. As Professor Gui17 pointed out that “It is the same
as chickens when they hatch. The pecking ability is hereditary, but conditions are
also necessary for developing the ability, that is, to have light in order to cause the
pecking response.”
2001.
Chapter 4
Child Language Development Based
on Semantic Perception Theory
4.1 General Models of Speech Comprehension and Speech

Production
The role of language is communication, and verbal communication includes both

listening and speaking: ‘speaking’ is the process of expressing discourse, also known
as speech production process; ‘listening’ is to accept the process of discourse, also
known as speech understanding process. Many neuropsychologists and linguists
have studied the neural mechanisms and psychological processing methods of speech
comprehension and production process and put forward the corresponding theoretical
model. In these models are more representative of the following three.
4.1.1 The Blumstein Model1
Blumstein’s speech comprehension and speech production model is shown in Fig. 4.1.
The model assumes that the mechanism of speech production and speech compre-
hension shares a lexicon; that is, the generated words and the words that are received
are ultimately associated with public representation. The essence of this representa-
tion is to characterize vocabularies, phonetic features, and their combination rules,
which are unique to the structure of speech. As shown in Fig. 4.1, all auditory speech
input in the process of verbal understanding will eventually visit the lexicon. As
described in the figure, there is no separate matching mechanism for the non-sense
syllables that are not included in the lexicon. There are similar assumptions in speech
production. In short, in order to achieve the decoding and encoding of speech, there
must be different physiological mechanisms to support. The former is related to the
auditory system, and the latter is related to the sound organs. It is for this reason that
1 Blumstein, S. E. the neurobiology of the sound structure of language, in the Cognitive Neuro-
Science. VII Language, M. S. Gazzaniga, (ed.). London: The MIT Press 1995.
54 4 Child Language Development Based on Semantic …
Fig. 4.1 Blumstein model
the interface between the common lexicon and the speech production system, and
the interface between the common lexicon and the speech comprehension system,
need some unique operation.
4.1.2 Levelt’s Model2
Levelt’s model of language comprehension and production is shown in Fig. 4.2. In

the speech production mode, the initial information is generated from the language
to express the concept. In the early stages of the first to produce an intention—in the
‘concept forming’ box to complete. The ‘front language information’ of the box is
sent to the ‘constructor.’ The constructor consists of two components: the first is the
‘grammar encoder’ used to form the sentence surface structure, and the second is the
‘speech encoder’ used to implement the pronunciation planning. In his model, Levelt
calls the grammar and semantic information contained in the vocabulary as ‘word
annotations.’ Each ‘word annotations’ includes the meaning of the corresponding
vocabulary and the syntactic knowledge used to generate the phrase structure (e.g.,
2 Gui, S. The New Psycholinguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai foreign language education Press. 2001.
4.1 General Models of Speech Comprehension … 55
Fig. 4.2 Levelt’s model
‘sparrow,’ its word annotation includes both the meaning of the word—the swallow,
and also indicates that it is a countable noun—‘give’ in addition to the meaning of
words—to give, but also that it can be accompanied by a direct object and indirect
object of the verb). The grammar encoder uses the word annotations to produce a set
of word permutations (phrases) that conform to the verbal expression specification,
which is the surface structure of the sentence. Levelt also refers to the form and voice
information contained in a vocabulary as ‘form’ (e.g., ‘dangerous’ is composed of
the word ‘danger’ and the suffix ‘ous,’ which has three syllables, its accent is on the
first syllable, and the first phoneme is/d/). The speech encoder uses the information
provided by the word form to complete the pronunciation planning of the sentence
surface structure, and accordingly plans to the sound organs (oral, vocal) issued
motion control instructions.
The speech comprehension system in Levelt’s model not only completes the
speech comprehension in the general conversation process, but also completes self-
monitoring in the process of speech production. Everyone in the course of the con-
versation will inevitably make errors, but often self-corrects, which is due to the
self-monitoring function. To this end, the speech comprehension system should be
able to extract each word ‘word annotation’ and ‘word form’ information, and the
voice encoder output (equivalent to internal words) as their input, the output is parsed
language and thus can determine their own words are correct. Once it is wrong, it
can be corrected by the corresponding part of the speech production system (gram-
matical error—corrected by the grammar encoder; pronunciation error—corrected
by the pronunciation encoder).
Fig. 4.3 Gazzaniga’s model
4.1.3 The Gazzaniga Model3
In the second chapter, we introduced the information flow in two different ways
of speaking about Gazzaniga model of language comprehension and production,
which actually reflects Gazzaniga model’s mental processing in two different ways
of speech. We can not only draw the model diagram shown in Fig. 4.3 according to
information flow, but also through the process to determine and speech production
and speech comprehension of these speech-related neural physiological mechanism.
As mentioned earlier, Gazzaniga believes that speech comprehension and speech
production involve the same neurophysiological mechanisms in the cerebral cor-
tex—all related to the three speech centers, which are the Wernicke Area (the left
hemisphere Brodmann 39–40 Area), Broca Area (the left hemisphere Brodmann 44
district), and the concept center (also known as the psychological lexicon, near the
supramarginal gyrus and the angular gyrus).
3 Gazzaniga, M. S., Lury, R. B. & Mangun, G. R. Cognitive neuroscience. W.W. Norton & Company,
Inc. New Yourk. 1998.

4.1 General Models of Speech Comprehension … 57
4.1.4 Comparison of the Main Features of the Three Models
There are two characteristics of the Blumstein model: first, to emphasize the speech
production and speech comprehension process share a lexicon (psychological vocab-
ulary); second, that speech production and speech comprehension of the psycholog-
ical processing process is similar to each other, and speech production is the use of
the lexicon for coding. Speech comprehension is the use of the lexicon to decode;
the two are mutually reversible process.
Levelt’s model also emphasizes that speech production and speech comprehension
process shares a mental lexicon, but it differs from the Brunstein’s model in the
following three ways.
(1) Speech comprehension is not the reverse process of speech production, because
the former in addition to complete the general dialogue process for the voices
of understanding, but also to check if their own speech generated correctly by
self-monitoring. As for the process of general speech comprehension outside of
‘self-monitoring,’ whether it is the reverse process of speech production, Levelt’s
model does not answer; even the general language understanding system is
how the work is not illustrated (Levelt is more concerned with how words are
generated).
(2) That the psychological vocabulary from the ‘word note’ and ‘word form’ two
parts, the former includes the lexical meaning and related syntactic knowledge,
the latter includes the vocabulary of forms and voice information.
(3) The ‘world knowledge’ (including contextual knowledge, discourse model,
encyclopedia knowledge, etc.) needed to generate speech, extracted from the
public dictionary of the Blumstein model, as an independent module—‘Concept
formation.’
Gazzaniga’s model also emphasizes that speech production and speech compre-
hension process shares a mental lexicon (concept center), and that speech recognition
is not an inverse process of speech production, but it differs from Levelt’s model in
the following ways.
(1) The psychological lexicon (concept center) of Gazzaniga includes two aspects:
the meaning of vocabulary and the various concepts and cosmopolitan knowl-
edge needed for speech production. Levelt’s mental lexicon includes only two
parts of the word note and the word form, as mentioned above; the former
includes the meaning and syntax knowledge, and the latter includes the word
form and voice information. Obviously, the two in addition to ‘meaning’ part
is common, the rest are not the same. The lexicon in the Brunstein’s model is
vocabulary, which has a broader meaning. It actually corresponds to the syn-
thesis of the three parts of the word, the form, and the conceptualizer (which
contains cosmopolitan knowledge) in the Levelt’s model.
(2) The knowledge of lexicon (including the knowledge of the form and parts of
speech) and the knowledge of the grammar (including the knowledge of the
composition of phrases and analysis of sentences) are assumed to be stored in
the Broca Area. Of the voice information is assumed to ‘word phoneme feature
lexicon’ in the form of preservation in the Wernicke Area. So the psycholog-
ical representations of these three kinds of knowledge (lexical, syntactic, and
phonetic) are not directly displayed in Gazzaniga’s model.
(3) Gazzaniga’s model not only describes the process of mental processing of speech
production, but also describes the process of mental processing of speech com-
prehension. It can be seen from the model that these two processes are not
reversible, and the difference between them can also be clearly understood.
(4) There is also a prominent advantage of Gazzaniga’s model that the model not
only describes the psychological processing and processing characteristics of the
two speech modes, but also gives the neurophysiological mechanisms needed to
achieve these two speech processing—three language centers. This is beyond the
reach of other models, and this is crucial for the study of speech comprehension
and production.
4.2 Models of Language Comprehension and Production

Based on Semantic Perception
Through the introduction and analysis of the previous section, we find that in the
present day, among speech recognition and speech production models, Gazzaniga’s
model has a more prominent advantage, which can be used as a better construct for
speech production and speech recognition model. These advantages include:
(1) The concept center (psychological lexicon) contains the meaning of words, a
variety of concepts and global knowledge, and shared by language comprehen-
sion and speech production process;
(2) It makes a specific description of the psychological processing process of speech
comprehension and speech production in the same time;
(3) It not only describes the psychological processing process and processing char-
acteristics of these two speech mode, but also gives relevant neurophysiological
mechanisms.
At the same time, we will make the following four adjustments to Gazzaniga’s
model based on the new knowledge gained from the previous Chaps. 2 and 3 on the
study of the functional system and the perceptual function.
(1) In Gazzaniga’s model, the psychological processing of speech comprehen-
sion mainly includes two aspects: speech discrimination and grammar anal-
ysis (which also includes content formation and syntactic analysis). Semantic
problems are only in the function of conceptual center in the model semantic
analysis of the specific process, and mechanism was not included. According
to our earlier study of the function of semantic sensation and perception, it is
proved that children have the ability of speech perception and discrimination as
well as semantic analysis and recognition, and have relevant neurophysiologi-
cal mechanisms. To this end, we will add semantic analysis and recognition to
4.2 Models of Language Comprehension … 59
the new speech model, i.e., speech recognition and production model based on
semantic sensation and perception, so as to compensate for this deficiency of
Gazzaniga’s model.
(2) In Sect. 4.4, the previous chapter, Susan and Heidi, through the study of deaf
children, not only prove that children have a natural semantic analysis and recog-
nition ability, and they also pointed out that children’s analysis and identification
of semantics can be used. The various relationships in grammar are simple and
clear, which shows that grammar can be used as an effective method of semantic
analysis in speech recognition and production model. To this end, we should
add a module—‘semantic relation matching’ module—which specializes in the
analysis of grammar in the speech recognition and production model based on
the sense of language, to identify a number of ‘case blocks’ generated by the
current input sound string whether or not to match a legitimate semantic relation
pattern.
(3) In order to adapt to the need for semantic analysis using grammar syntax, the
grammatical analysis should also be modified accordingly. Since case gram-
mar mainly analyzes the relationship between various case blocks generated
by the current input sound string to see whether they meet a certain permissi-
ble (i.e., in line with the language specification) semantic relations structure, so
semantic relation analysis can be achieved by matching the relationship between
the case blocks generated by input speech strings to semantic relation patterns
stored in the schemata. As mentioned earlier, the so-called case block refers
to the characterization of different case relations, and ‘language chunk’ that
is a phrase or phrase structure. This means that in order to meet the needs of
grammar analysis, it is sufficient to complete the phrasal feature analysis (i.e.,
block recognition—to determine which kind of ‘block’) the grammar belongs
to. And this phrase feature analysis can be completed based on only in the word
meaning recognition and phrase structure. So, in our new model, grammatical
analysis contains word meaning recognition and phrase structure to generate
these two simpler modules, which are indispensable in Gazzaniga’s model and
other speech models; involving sentences and sentences and the more complex
modules analysis are omitted because of redundancy. As we shall see below, the
omission of this module (i.e., sentence and sentence analysis module) is of great
importance to the development of child language—it is one of the key factors
for children to master oral language in a relatively short period.
(4) In order to achieve ‘speech discrimination’, Gazzaniga’s model emphasizes the
support of the ‘phonetic representation bank’ (There are standard phoneme rep-
resentations of each vocabulary in this bank, and Gazzaniga believes it lies in
the Wernicke Area). In order to achieve ‘grammar analysis’, Gazzaniga’s model
emphasizes the need for ‘grammar knowledge bank’ support (There are word
forms and parts of speech, phrase constitute rules, sentences, and sentences
type analysis and other aspects of the grammatical knowledge in this bank, and
Gazzaniga believes that this knowledge bank exists in Broca Area). In order to
achieve comprehension and production of words, Gazzaniga’s model empha-
sizes the need for a ‘concept center’ supporting the meaning of words and the
various concepts required for the production of speech, and Gazzaniga believes
that this center exists in the edge of the cerebral cortex and the back of the cortex.
In our new model, ‘sound discrimination’ is also an essential part and needs the
support of ‘vocabulary phonetic character bank’ in the Wernicke Area. ‘Gram-
mar analysis’ as mentioned above, is now simplified as phrase feature analysis
(i.e., block recognition—to determine which kind of language block). Therefore,
Brocade Area of grammar knowledge base is still necessary, but the knowledge
required has been greatly reduced, just save word forms, as well as semantic
analysis, which is not really involved in Gazzaniga’s model, only in the con-
ceptual center, it is assumed that there is a sense of recognizing the meaning of
the word. The necessary concepts of ‘word meaning’ and discourse production
are obviously not enough for our new model. On this basis, we must add the
Semantic Relational Structure Pattern Bank (to support semantic analysis of
grammar). In other words, in the semantic perception-based speech recognition
and production model, the content of the conceptual center is assumed to consist
of three parts: a lexical bank containing various lexical meanings, a general con-
cept bank, and a general semantic relation, semantic relations structure model
bank.
In this way, based on the three advantages of absorbing Gazzaniga’s model and
the improvement of the four aspects of Gazzaniga’s model based on the research of
the theory of semantic sensation and perception, we draw a new semantic perception-
based speech comprehension. And the model is shown in Fig. 4.4.
It should be noted that in Fig. 4.4, in addition to considering the advantages
of Gazzaniga’s model and improving its deficiencies, it also incorporates the ‘self-
monitoring function’ feature in Levelt’s model. As mentioned above, everyone in the
course of the conversation will occasionally make errors in words, including pronun-
ciation, grammar, and semantic aspects, but often self-corrects, which is due to the
monitoring role. In addition, the former Soviet Union well-known physiologist L.K.
安诺欣 also pointed out that if the advanced neural activity formed by signal system
of the brain is an open-loop system, it will not be able to explain why the organism
according to their own action results and immediately adjusts their behaviors (see
Chap. 6, Sect. 6.5). When the behavior of organisms deviates from the intended target,
the current information can be transmitted to the brain by returning to the incoming
function. The stored experience information is compared to produce predictions of
the results of the behavior (i.e., ahead of the reflection) and corrected. According
to Levelt’s model, the self-monitoring feedback signal is derived from the output of
the speech encoder and sent to the input of the speech understanding system (see
Fig. 4.2); but according to L.K.安诺欣, ‘returning to incoming information’ refers
to the feedback of the output of the entire signal system to the input of the entire
signal system. We think that these two feedback input methods have their reasons.
In Fig. 4.4, the connecting method is based on L.K.安诺欣.
4.3 Child’s Language Acquisition and Adult’s … 61
Fig. 4.4 Comprehension and production model based on semantic perception (mental process of
listen and speak process; in dotted lines are concept center)
4.3 Child’s Language Acquisition and Adult’s Speech

Comprehension/Production Compared
Comparing the process of children’s language acquisition with that of adults’ lan-
guage comprehension and production, there are similarities and differences between
them. The similarities are shown in the following two aspects.
(1) The same neurophysiological mechanism of speech processing
According to the theory of semantic perception, whether children acquired language
or adults’ speech comprehension, they need the support of neurophysiological mech-
anisms of the semantic sensation and perception system, which include the sensory
organs of the semantic sensation and perception system, the afferent nerves (these
two parts are exactly the same as the auditory system), the subcortical low-level
linguistic (four levels, of which levels 1 and 2, and the auditory system overlap).
But they are completely separated from the auditory system after levels 3 and 4, and
the high-level linguistic centers in the cerebral cortex, also known as speech centers.
There are three Areas, namely Wernicke Area (master speech analysis and phoneme
planning), Broca Area (master grammar analysis and pronunciation planning), and
concept center (master word meaning and semantic recognition). It should be empha-
sized here that the linguistic nervous system supporting semantic perception function
should not be confused with the auditory nervous system supporting general sound
perception.
(2) The Links and Processes of Speech Processing are Consistent
According to the theory of semantic perception, whether children acquire language
or adults’ language comprehension, it involves the same process of speech processing
and production. For adult speech perception and comprehension, the corresponding
processing steps and processes are:
Sound Spectrum Analysis → Speech Discrimination → Word Sense Recognition

→ Phrase (Block) Production → Semantic Relation Recognition
For adult discourse production and expression, the corresponding processing steps
and processes are:
Semantic Relation Matching → Separation of Chunks (Phrases)

→ Word and Sequence Determination → Phoneme Planning → Pronunciation Planning
It should be pointed out here that in the above-mentioned processing steps and
processes (whether speech comprehension or speech production), the grammati-
cal analysis only involves words and phrases, not sentences and sentence patterns.
This is because, according to the view of the theory of semantic perception, human
mastery of language is inherently inherited in phonetic discrimination and semantic
relationship recognition, and can be self-taught without special teaching. Grammat-
ical analysis is related to the morphological characteristics of different languages
and many conventional rules, involving innumerable knowledge and rules related to
words, phrases, and sentences. Therefore, the ability of grammatical analysis must
be acquired through longtime learning. However, since the theory of semantic per-
ception finds that speech discrimination and semantic recognition are congenital,
grammatical knowledge and grammatical rules are not all required to be mastered,
but only grammatical knowledge related to the identification of semantic relations
is really needed. This greatly simplifies the process of grammatical analysis (only
the analysis of words and phrases is left, not the analysis of sentences and sentence
patterns), which is the biggest difference between the speech model based on the
theory of semantic perception and other theories.
The differences between child’s language acquisition process and adult’s speech
comprehension and production process are mainly manifested in:
(1) The process of child language acquisition occurs in ‘critical period,’ while
adult’s speech comprehension and production occur outside the ‘critical period.’
As mentioned in Sect. 3.2 of Chap. 3, there is a critical period for all innate hereditary
abilities—during which it is very easy to learn and master such abilities without
teaching; once this critical period passes, it will be very difficult to acquire such
abilities. Thus, if we want to compare the process of child’s language acquisition
with that of adults’ language comprehension with that of production, we should

distinguish two cases:
First, adults are already proficient in language (whether the language is his mother
tongue or a foreign language), while children are still in the process of learning a
language. In this case, if compared, child’s speech ability is certainly not as good as
adults.
Second, adults are learning the language as a foreign language. Because adults learn
the language after a critical period (the critical period is before puberty); in this case,
whether children learn as their mother tongue or as a foreign language, because they
are in a critical period, generally speaking their speech ability is always better than
that of adults.
Usually, people talk about the comparison of child language acquisition process
and adult speech production and comprehension process, which is the comparison
in the first case rather than in the second case, which we must be clear. Next, we will
continue to explore the differences between the two on the basis of the first case.
(2) Adults have more comprehensive and abundant knowledge of grammar and
semantics than children.
As we all know, in order to understand and generate a language or to acquire a lan-
guage, we need the knowledge of phonetics, lexicon (including morphology, mean-
ing, phrase formation), syntax (involving sentence formation and sentence pattern
analysis), and semantics (the actual meaning of a sentence, namely, to find out the
semantic relations of ‘what is it’, ‘how’, ‘who did it’, ‘what to do’, ‘how to do’
and ‘when’). Lexicon and syntax are also collectively referred to as ‘grammar.’ In
other words, in order to understand and generate a language or to acquire a lan-
guage, we need to have a relatively complete knowledge of phonetics, grammar,
and semantics. As mentioned above, the theory of semantic perception holds that
both speech discrimination and semantic recognition can be acquired through inher-
itance. Because the number of phonetic elements (phonemes) involved in phonetic
discrimination is limited and the phonemes of all languages are basically the same,
the ability of phonetic discrimination is congenital, which can be accepted by most
scholars in international linguistic circles at present. However, there is still a great
controversy in the academic circles as to whether the ability of grammatical analysis
and semantic analysis is congenital or not. A few scholars believe that grammati-
cal analysis is congenital (e.g., Chomsky and its supporters), but most scholars do
not believe Chomsky’s theory that children are born with a ‘language acquisition
mechanism’ (LAD), which is suitable for analyzing any language, because of the
diversity of languages of different nationalities in the world and the complexity of
the corresponding grammatical rules. It is doubtful that children are born with this
kind of ‘Universal Grammar’ analytical ability, and it is believed that knowledge
and analytical ability about grammar and semantics can only be acquired through
learning. According to this prevailing majority of scholars, adults who have mastered
a certain language (whether mother tongue or foreign language) are of course much
more knowledgeable about grammar and semantics than children who are still in the
learning stage.
(3) The process adult speech comprehension and that of child’s language acquisition
are sometimes not identical.
As just mentioned, grammar includes morphology and syntax, while syntax involves
the analysis of the composition of various sentences, and the number of grammatical
rules is countless. If we think that the ability of semantic analysis can only be acquired
through acquisition, language knowledge and rules that children are required to learn
are more difficult and complex. It can be seen from the above viewpoint that if chil-
dren want to acquire or master a language by learning sentences, it will take a long
time and hard to make it possible (I doubt that 10 or 8 years are possible). However,
in fact, all linguists acknowledge that children aged four or five of any ethnic group
can easily master their own oral language without teaching. It can be seen that it is
subjective and arbitrary to think that both grammatical and semantic analysis abil-
ities are congenital (Chomsky has never provided evidence for neurophysiological
mechanism of UG theory; in other words, UG theory is only a hypothesis), but it is
also inconsistent with the actual situation to think that neither of them is congeni-
tal. At present, many scholars in linguistic circles hold a compromise view on this
issue: neither do they think that grammatical and semantic analysis abilities are born
entirely, nor that they are learned entirely. However, no one can tell which of them
are innate components and which are learned components, and no one has put for-
ward more convincing scientific evidence. The theory of semantic perception, based
on a large number of facts provided by the progress of contemporary neuroscience
and linguistics (see Chap. 3, Sects. 3.3 and 3.4), proves that not only the ability of
speech discrimination is congenital, but also the ability of semantic analysis (i.e., the
ability to identify the semantic relationship of a sentence) is also congenital (but the
theory of semantic perception excludes grammatical analysis as congenital). Chil-
dren do not understand sentences and grasp their semantic relations on the basis of
parsing them. They are born with the ability to identify the patterns of semantic rela-
tions implied in various language sentences, which is equivalent to the case-grammar
analyzer inherent in child’s speech centers. In Sect. 3.4, Chap. 3, Susan and Heidi
found that six deaf children aged 1.5–4 years old can both understand sentences and
grasp their semantic relations. The case of independently creating more complex
sign language is a powerful proof. In other words, children can grasp and understand
the meaning of sentences without complex parsing of sentences, only by identify-
ing limited semantic relation patterns. Child’s acquisition of language (whether as a
mother tongue or a foreign language or as a second language) is achieved through
mastery of pattern classes. In other words, children’s acquisition of language adopts
a ‘model-by-model’ approach (In this case, the model refers to semantic relation
structures models; and each model represents not a sentence, but a large number
of sentences, that is, dozens or even hundreds of different sentences with the same
semantic relation structure model). Adults’ speech processing, whether it is the pro-
duction of discourse or the comprehension of discourse, can be processed according
to semantic relations as children do; that is, by using the mode-by-mode processing
method. Sometimes, it can also be processed only for a sentence that is currently to
be expressed or perceived; that is, sentence-by-sentence processing method may be
adopted. The reason why it is possible for adults to generate and understand discourse
sentence by sentence is that adult speech center has accumulated rich and compre-
hensive knowledge of grammar, semantic relations, and world knowledge involving
various concepts, while for children, especially for infants, such knowledge is blank
and needs to be gradually constructed from scratch. It can be seen that, compared
with production process and language acquisition process of children, language pro-
cessing methods used by adults may sometimes be different—the former may be
‘sentence-by-sentence processing,’ while the latter always uses ‘model-by-model
processing’; that is, language processing is based on patterns rather than sentences.
It is the model-by-model approach that makes it possible for children to acquire
language with high efficiency.
Now let us further analyze how children acquire or master language from scratch.
4.4 Main Stages of Child’s Language Development
Based on a large number of experimental studies on children’s language development

at home and abroad so far,4,5,6,7,8 we believe that the development of child’s oral
language ability from birth to proficiency mainly goes through the following four
stages.
4.4.1 Articulation Practice Period (Born to About 6 Months)
During this period, babies have no speech ability, that is, they can neither speak any
words nor understand any words, but they can make different sounds. Initially, the
sound is relatively single, and later, through imitation, the sound is becoming more
and more varied. The sound produced during this period is only used to express
the baby’s hunger, thirst, joy, pain, and other feelings, or some kind of demand and
desire, and is not a phonetic symbol representing a specific meaning (concept), so it
still belongs to the first signal system, not the second signal system, as Pavlov said.
Professor Gui9 pointed out: “Babies cry because of their uncomfortable feelings.
4 Li, Y. M. Child Language Development. Wuhan: South China Teachers University. 1995.
2001.
6 Piaget, J. The principles of Genetic Epistemology. Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. 1972.
7 Zhu, Z. X. Child Psychology. (revised 1993). Beijing: People’s Education Press. 1998.
8 Li, Y. M. & Chen, Q. R. Language comprehension and production. South China Teachers Univer-
sity, 1998.
2001.
Most of these sounds are shrill and nasalized vowels, originating from the front
of the mouth and accompanied by tense facial expressions. Mothers can quickly
identify the causes of their cries according to their different forms, such as hunger,
pain, overcooling and overheating. In addition to reflecting uncomfortable sounds,
babies also emit comfortable sounds, which are relaxed, deep and non-nasalized
cooing. Then came some consonants… The earliest consonants are wa, la, nga,
ha, ma, na and so on. But these sounds cannot be said to have communicative
intentions, because they are not yet a flexible and purposeful act.” Professor Gui’s
analysis of the causes of infant sound is very insightful, but the final conclusion that
‘infant voice has no communicative intention’ is worth discussing. Although infant
sounds are not purposeful behavior, we do not think it is possible to conclude that
these voices have no communicative intentions. In Chap. 4 of Gui’s newly compiled
Psycholinguistics (p. 138),10 the author gives the fact that according to the observation
of child linguists, even the ‘chirp’ of a three-month-old infant will attract the attention
of the mother or the nanny. Moreover, when adult responds, the infant will produce
a more verbal sound, and when the baby makes such a sound, they will continue to
wait for adults to respond, and their reactions and dialogues are very similar. It can
be seen that from about three months, infants have the intention to establish some
kind of communication with adults through sound—this is a kind of communicative
intention. Of course, this intention is still very preliminary, not too clear, or just an
instinctive behavior.
4.4.2 Speech Preparation Period (7–11 or 12 Months)
Speech preparation period is also known as ‘babbling’ period. Babies begin to enter
this period when they grow up to about 5 or 6 months and will last for about half
a year. Gui11 pointed out that: “Babies’ first babble is often uttered on bed after
they have eaten enough. At this time, there is saliva in their mouth and it is easy to
swallow. Therefore, they learn to pronounce post consonants such as gu, ga, ka, cha,
ra and so on. When Babies suck, they not only use their lips, but also make their
tongues against the upper gums, and as they suck they put their tongues down. If
the baby exhales while doing this, it will emit consonants such as ta, da, la, na, etc.”
Later infants will gradually acquire other consonants and vowels. Vowel acquisition
usually starts with front vowels, then mid-vowels and back vowels; consonant is the
opposite—first soft palate sounds, then alveolar and bilabial, and finally dental and
palatal. During this period, children will learn all kinds of phonemes involved in the
language system. Many psychologists have also found that by this point (i.e., until the
end of the babbling stage), or before that, children of all nationalities in the world can
perceive and emit the same phonemes (which is another evidence of child’s innate
2001.
11 Ibid.
4.4 Main Stages of Child’s Language Development 67
ability to perceive and distinguish speech). But from then on (or just before that),
they begin to separate—children of all nationalities. Gradually it becomes possible to
perceive and emit all the phonemes of the native language. De Boysson-Bardies and
others compared the vowels of Cantonese-speaking infants with English-speaking
infants.12,13 Both groups were about 10 months old. They found that the average fre-
quency of the first formant of Cantonese-speaking children’s vowels was higher than
that of English-speaking babies, while the average frequency of the second formant
was lower. The difference between them coincides with the acoustic characteristics
and occurrence frequency of Cantonese and English vowels. An analysis of vowel
distribution in the two languages shows that English tends to have a high vowel/front
vowel while Cantonese tends to have a low vowel/back vowel. From the results of
this study, we can see that mother tongue environment has a significant influence on
infant vowel pronunciation. The process of vowel pronunciation acquisition is sim-
ilar to that of other phonemes (i.e., influenced by the mother tongue environment).
This means that babies have learned to adjust their pronunciation according to their
mother tongue before the end of the speech preparation period. This study also helps
us understand why babies before babbling can perceive and emit phonemes in var-
ious languages of the world, but when babies grow up, they can only perceive and
emit phonemes related to their own national languages, but can no longer perceive
and emit phonemes unique to other languages.
During the speech preparation period, the infant cannot speak words though, he
has begun to understand the words preliminarily. For example, when the infant hears
the words ‘give the apple to the mother,’ he can make a response to take the apple
to the mother.14 In addition, babies can communicate with adults through simple
body language and gestures, such as raising their hands to show that they want to
be held by adults and sucking with their mouths; gestures are mostly directed at,15
usually with the index finger straight and the other four fingers bent. The function
of pointing is to request or identify things, and the correct response to pointing is
to see the object, not to see the index finger. According to Professor Li Yuming’s
research,16 for infants in the second half of this period, there are about 200 words
that can be roughly understood (i.e., they can basically understand the meaning, but
cannot express ideas), of which nouns and verbs account for roughly half. This is the
beginning of the second signal system. It can be seen that infants begin to have initial
speech ability in the second half of this period; that is, around 11 or 12 months. It
should be pointed out that in later period of babbling stage, babies not only gradually
mastered various phonemes of their own language, but also began to learn more
12 De Boysson-Bardies, et al., A crosslinguistic investigation of vowel formants in babbling. Journal
of Child Language. 16, 1989.

2001.
14 Li, Y. M. Child Language Development. Wuhan: South China Teachers University. 1995.
2001.
16 Ibid.
complex pronunciation methods—phonemes or phonemic combinations (syllables

and words); that is to say, babies began to be able to speak a single word. In this way,
we have made full preparations for the next stage of language development.
4.4.3 Speech Development Period (1–2.5 Years Old or so)
During this period, children have been able to actively participate in verbal commu-
nication activities, that is, not only to listen, but also to speak. However, the language
used by children in this period is still immature, incomplete, and belongs to child’s
special language. The development of this special language can be divided into three
sub-stages: single-word sentences, double-word sentences, and telegraph sentences.
According to the theory of semantic perception, children are born with the ability
of semantic perception, that is, the ability to recognize phonetics and semantics. As
mentioned above, Li Yuming’s research also confirms this point. From 7 to 12 months,
children can understand about 200 words and understand simpler sentences. In this
period, children can only use fragments of words or telegraph sentences to express
their meanings, without complete and coherent sentences. It is only because the num-
ber of words and grammatical rules they master is still very limited, not because there
is a problem with semantic understanding of the whole sentence to be expressed. For
example, in order to express the complete sentences of ‘I want my mother to hug’
and ‘I want my sister to play the car with me,’ there are three different expressions
in different age-groups of children:
Children aged 1–1.5 years old or so are often referred to as ‘hug’ (or ‘hug hug’),
‘car’ (or ‘car, car’)—the stage of monologue sentence;
Children aged 1.5–2 years old are often said to be ‘mother hug’ and ‘play car’—two-
word sentence stage;
Children aged 2–2.5 years old are often said to be ‘my mother hugs’ and ‘my sister
plays with a car’—telegram sentence stage.
For such one-word sentences, two-word sentences, or telegram sentences, if
viewed in isolation, it is ambiguous or even incomprehensible, but in a certain con-
text of communication (i.e., a certain context), and accompanied by child’s gestures,
postures, and expressions, children will not have any obstacles in communicating
with others in such incomplete language.
4.4.4 Speech Maturity (2.5–4.5 or 5 Years Old)
After two and a half years of age, with the increase of children’s practical activities
(play, learning, etc.) and the gradual expansion of the scope of communication with
others, speech ability has been rapidly developed, and the mastery of native oral
4.4 Main Stages of Child’s Language Development 69
speech has gradually become proficient and perfect. In the 1980s, psychologists in
China counted the oral vocabulary of more than 2000 pre-school children in ten
provinces and cities. The results showed that there were 1730 common words for
children aged 3–4, 2583 for children aged 4–5 and 3562 for children aged 5–6.17 At
the same time, a child’s mastery of language rules and understanding of language
phenomena in their native languages also increases. Professor Li Yuming, a linguist,
once took the interrogation system as an example to study language development
of infants aged 1–5 years in China. Reorganization of knowledge and experience,
expression of thoughts and feelings and other abilities, so interrogative sentences
in children’s language and thinking development has a special important position.
Professor Li Yuming’s research conclusions point out that the question system of
children after three years of age has entered a perfect stage. During this period, various
forms of children’s questions have gradually emerged; non-interrogative usage of
rhetorical questions and specific interrogative words has emerged in large numbers,
and the syntactic organization has gradually become fluent. Especially after the age of
four, the extensive use of causal questions indicates that children’s causal awareness
is gradually strengthened, and there are more ‘inquisitive questions.’ This shows that
the function of children’s questions has matured, and the important task in the future
is the pragmatic development of questions. Although Li Yuming’s research only
deals with interrogative sentences as a language sub-system, as mentioned above,
this sub-system is of special importance and representativeness in the development
of child’s language and thinking. Therefore, the process of learning and mastering
this language sub-system should reflect a large extent the process of child learning
and mastering the whole native language. In other words, according to Li Yuming’s
research, we can conclude that after the age of 4, children’s mastery of various
sentence patterns of the native oral speech has gradually become perfect and mature,
and in the future, they will mainly develop in the direction of ‘usage.’ In fact, today’s
linguistic circles, whether in China or around the world, acknowledge the basic fact
that ‘children of four or five years old of any nationality can master their own native
language without being taught, which contains innumerable changes in grammatical
rules’ (only for ‘why can children master their own spoken language without being
taught in only a few years’). At present, there are different opinions and controversies
in linguistic circles for this.
From the above analysis, it can be seen that ‘initial speech ability’ of children is in
the second half of ‘speech preparation period,’ that is, around 11 or 12 months (about
1 year old), while ‘proficient oral ability’ is in the second half of ‘speech maturity
period,’ that is, around 4.5 or 5 years old.
4.5 Child’s Language Development and Native Language

Teaching
In order to achieve the desired results, one of the keys is to fully understand the teach-
ing objects, especially the students’ original learning foundation, suitable learning
strategies and methods, and the characteristics of students’ thinking ability. Only in
this way can we really teach students in accordance with their aptitude. The concrete
analysis of the development of child’s language in the last section provides inspiring
new ideas for reforms in Chinese education from three aspects, thus laying a theoret-
ical foundation for the development of Chinese education. The ideas in these three
aspects are as follows:
(1) Children who have just entered the first grade of primary school (about 6 years
old) are not unprepared for their mother tongue learning, but already have a
very strong foundation.
As mentioned above, as early as in the 1990s, a survey by psychologists in China
has shown that pre-school children aged 5–6 have mastered more than 3500 oral
vocabulary.18 Professor Li Yuming’s in-depth study on the process of learning and
mastering ‘interrogative sentence sub-system’ also shows that Chinese children’s
mastery of various sentence patterns in oral Chinese has tended to be perfect and
mature after the age of 4.19 We believe that the fact that pre-school children aged 5–6
have mastery of Chinese spoken ‘words’ and ‘sentence pattern’ is very important, and
it is also the objective basis for us to realize the fast development of Chinese education.
As far as Chinese words are concerned, their teaching objectives generally require
mastery of phonetics, form, and meaning. As pre-school children have mastered
more than 3500 spoken words, this shows that they have mastered more than 3500
words, sounds, and meanings, but they cannot recognize and write Chinese characters
related to the words. This greatly reduces the difficulty of word teaching in Chinese
teaching—as long as students learn Chinese Pinyin and add Pinyin labeling to the
text, students can read texts and understand by themselves. During the class, teachers
only need to spend a small amount of time to guide the writing of Chinese characters,
and then let students practice appropriately, and make necessary explanations on the
key and difficult points. The teaching goal of this text can be achieved. In this way,
every class can spare a lot of time for students to expand reading, so as to create the
necessary conditions for the fast development of Chinese education.
(2) Focusing on language use is the fundamental way and method for children to
learn language quickly.
From the process of child language acquisition described above, we see that the reason
why children of any ethnic group can master their own oral language without being
taught in a few years (before 4–5 years old), except for the genetic factors that human
19 Li,Y. M. & Chen, Q. R. Language comprehension and production. South China Teachers Uni-
versity, 1998.
4.5 Child’s Language Development and Native … 71
beings have innate speech centers (such as Broca Area in charge of speech expression
and Warwick Area in charge of speech comprehension). In addition, children learn
languages in the process of communicating and communicating with others. That
is, in the process of using language. Language learning is for communication, so
when you learn it, you must use it. Even if you don’t have enough words, even if
you don’t know enough grammatical rules of your native language, you should use
them boldly. The ‘speech development period’ between the ages of 1 and 2 and a
half is a typical example. In this period, even if children use incomplete sentences
(telegram sentences), or just two words (double words), or even single words (one
word), they should make efforts to express their complete meaning with the help of
context, body posture, gestures, expressions, etc., so as to achieve communication
with others. It must be emphasized here that:
➀ Children learn language entirely in the process of language use. Even if they have
just learned a few words, phrases or incomplete sentences, they should immedi-
ately be used to communicate with others. It is also because of this that children
can quickly find and correct their own pronunciation and comprehension errors
in the process of language use, and rapidly increase their language knowledge
about vocabulary, sentence patterns, grammatical rules, and pragmatics.
➁ Children are not practicing using a word, a phrase, or a sentence pattern, but trying
to express the actual meaning of a sentence with the help of such words, phrases,
or incomplete sentences, even at the stage of using a single-word sentence, a
two-word sentence, or a telegraph sentence. The so-called actual meaning of
a sentence refers to the nature, state, movement, and relationship of objective
things that people want to express through the sentence; that is, to explain the
semantic relations of ‘what,’ ‘how,’ ‘who does,’ ‘how to do,’ ‘when to do,’ and so
on. As can be seen from the examples in the previous section, when children say
such words, phrases, or incomplete sentences as ‘car’ (monologue sentence), ‘car-
playing’ (two-word sentence stage), ‘sister-car-playing,’ has a complete semantic
existence in their minds (i.e., in the speech center).
The two meanings emphasized above can be summed up as one point: the pro-
cess and method of child language learning are centered on the use of language. In
order to use language, they should use it immediately and try to use it in a certain
context. Never memorize words and sentence patterns in isolation from the context;
never teach and learn languages by means of ‘grammatical analysis as the focus of
attention.’ Because it violates the rules of child language learning. In a word, ‘lan-
guage use as the focus of attention’ is the basic way and method for children to learn
language quickly, while ‘grammar analysis as the focus of attention’ is the way and
method for linguists to study language, and they must not be confused.
(3) We should combine the cultivation of language ability with the cultivation of
thinking ability (especially creative thinking ability).
Marxist–Leninist classical writers believe that ‘language is the material form of
thinking.’ That is to say, language is the basis of thinking development, without
which there can be no highly developed abstract thinking, which is one aspect of
the problem. On the other hand, because language ability is not entirely inherited
by nature, it also depends on acquisition (grammar rules need to be mastered by
learning); that is, and individual cognitive process is related, so thinking ability which
belongs to cognitive category has a great influence on the development of language
ability. Therefore, language and thinking are inextricably linked. The development
of language ability (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) is closely related to the
development of thinking ability. Combining the cultivation of language ability with
the training of thinking ability (especially innovative thinking ability), not increase
students’ schoolwork burden, but also achieves an ideal effect of complementing
each other, promoting each other and multiplying the results with half of the effort.
On the contrary, if the two are opposed, it is not only unfavorable to the cultivation of
language ability, but also unfavorable to the development of thinking ability. It should
be noted here that when developing students’ thinking ability with the cultivation of
language ability, we should not only consider the logical thinking based on linguistic
concepts, but also the imaginative thinking and intuitive thinking based on images.
We should combine the three basic thinking forms of human beings to cultivate them.
In fact, these three forms of thinking are interdependent, mutually supportive and
inseparable for children who have mastered their own spoken language. In order
to achieve the task of developing language ability and thinking ability, especially
innovative thinking ability, at the same time in Chinese teaching, Chinese teachers
are required to master innovative teaching methods. Since innovative teaching design
method is based on a completely new theory of creative thinking, interested readers
can refer to He (2000)20 and He (2002),21 which will not be repeated here.
4.6 Analysis of Child’s Language Acquisition Process

from the Theory of Semantic Perception
In order to make a scientific analysis of the process of child language acquisition, it

is necessary to establish a model of child language acquisition in line with the reality
of child’s language development. Now let’s discuss how to build such a model.
4.6.1 Children’s Language Acquisition Model Based

on Semantic Perception
As mentioned above, the semantic relations contained in a sentence can be expressed

by the case relations in case grammar, and all kinds of case relations are developed
20 He, K. K. On creative thinking—DC model of construction and confirmation. Beijing: Beijing

Normal University. 2000.
21 He, K. K. On native language education. Proceedings of Mandarin Chinese education and infor-
mation technology forum.

4.6 Analysis of Child’s Language Acquisition … 73
Fig. 4.5 Semantic relational structure of a sentence
around predicates (for English, predicates are verbs). Thus, if case relations defined
in Sect. 3.1, Chap. 3 are followed, the complete semantics of a sentence can be
expressed by the spoke structure shown in the following figure:
The lexical chunk in Fig. 4.5 consists of the headword and its adjuncts which
modify the headword before and after it. As mentioned in Sect. 4.2 of this chapter,
lexical chunks here are equivalent to phrases or phrases in general grammatical
categories.
We believe that the process of language acquisition of infants does not start with
a blank sheet of paper, through imitation, repetition, mechanical memory, sentence-
by-sentence learning (as advocated by behaviorist psychologists); nor does it follow
Chomsky’s theory that children are born with a language acquisition device (LAD),
which is suitable for different nationalities and languages. Generalized grammar even
holds that children are small machines specially designed and manufactured by nature
to master language, so that they can easily acquire language without learning. Nor,
as Donald Hebb described, although the support of the innate ‘listening, speaking,
reading, and writing’ speech center can effectively improve learning efficiency of
these four aspects of language ability, it is still possible for children to acquire
language without learning. It is necessary to master the language through slow rhythm
learning of a specific sentence. We believe that infants’ acquisition of language is
realized through semantic sensation and perception. As mentioned above, semantic
sensation and perception is a kind of advanced perception ability of the human brain to
understand the true meaning of sentences by perceiving and discriminating sounds
in spoken language and analyzing and recognizing various semantic relations in
discourse. This ability is just like visual perception and auditory perception, formative
and innate through long-term evolution. Considering the analysis and recognition of
semantic relations, human beings have this ability, which is equivalent to having the
function of case-grammar analyzer inherently in the speech center of human beings.
This function is embodied in three aspects:
(1) It can be found that sentences in various languages with different external forms
contain similar semantic relations as those in Fig. 4.5.
(2) Try to match the current input sentences with this semantic relation structure (For
this reason, we should first divide the input into correct case chunks, as described
in the previous section, which requires speech recognition and word recognition
of the input sentences. On this basis, we can generate phrases, namely chunks,
and complete the identification of different types of case chunks).
(3) Three different evaluations of matching results can be made: complete matching
(each chunk of input sentence can meet the requirements of semantic relational
structure pattern), partial matching (some chunks of input sentence can meet the
requirements of semantic relational structure pattern, others cannot), and com-
plete mismatch (each chunk of input sentence is not suitable for the requirements
of semantic relational structure pattern).
Considering that children (especially infants) are at the initial stage of language
acquisition, their conceptual centers are almost blank (they have not yet established
a lexical meaning knowledge base, a relatively complete semantic relational struc-
ture model base and a world knowledge base or concept base involving various
concepts, including life concepts and scientific concepts). In the process, there is
a process of building and accumulating the relevant lexical meaning base, pattern
base, and concept base. In addition, as mentioned in the preceding section, child
language acquisition process uses a model-by-model approach, which is sometimes
different from that of adults. In order to reflect these characteristics, we must modify
the perception-based adult speech comprehension and production model shown in
Fig. 4.4 to obtain Semantic Perception Theory of child language acquisition model
shown in Fig. 4.6.
In order to highlight the key points, the process of knowledge accumulation related
to semantic analysis (i.e., how children gradually build up a complete pattern base
of semantic relation structure supported by the inherent case-grammar analysis) and
other knowledge base, such as various concepts, word form, meaning, and phrase
formation (i.e., phrase or chunk formation) of related words are especially illustrated
in the above figure. As for other knowledge, because its accumulation process is not
related to innate ability, belonging to learned knowledge category, and still obeys the
rule of knowledge growth, so we will not further explain the accumulation process
of such knowledge.
According to the discussion in Sect. 4.4, Chap. 4, children begin to have initial
speech ability around 11 or 12 months, with proficient oral ability around 4.5 or
5 years old. From 1 to 5 years old, children are in the stage of speech development
and speech maturity. Based on the model shown in Fig. 4.6 and from the perspective
of the theory of semantic sensation and perception, we will elaborate on the mental
process and processing characteristics of language acquisition of children at this
stage (i.e., children aged 1–5 years old in speech development and maturity) from
two aspects: speech comprehension and speech production, especially those related
to the identification of semantic relations, i.e., innate features.
Fig. 4.6 Child language acquisition model base on sense of language theory (in the dotted frame
is concept center)
4.6.2 Child Speech Comprehension
Many scholars believe that speech production and speech comprehension are inverse
processes: speech comprehension converts speech into meaning, while speech pro-
duction converts meaning into speech. In fact, there are great differences between the
two ways of speech processing, whether in physiological mechanism or in process-
ing content. In terms of physiological mechanism, speech comprehension involves
auditory organs and subcortical inferior linguistic nerve centers, while speech pro-
duction involves vocal cord vibration and muscular movement of oral organs. In terms
of processing content, speech comprehension requires that a surface structure (cur-
rent input sentence) of language be transformed into a corresponding deep structure
(semantic relationship structure). Construction is usually unique; speech production
allows a variety of different surface structures to express the current meaning (a deep
structure).
From Fig. 4.6, it can be seen that the mental processing of speech comprehension
involves the following five stages: (1) spectral analysis of the input sound (i.e., speech
perception); (2) vocabulary phoneme representation bank in Wernicke Area, which
divides the input voice string into word strings (speech discrimination) according to
the phoneme combination characteristics; (3) conceptual analysis, the central ‘lexi-
cal sense base’ recognizes the meanings of each word (word recognition); (4) on this
basis, the phrase composition analysis can be completed by using the ‘grammatical
knowledge base’ preserved in Broca Area, and case chunk (chunk production) con-
tained in the input speech string can be determined; (5) then the relationship between
the current input case chunk and the ‘semantic relation structure pattern’ can be deter-
mined. The semantic relations preserved in the bank are matched and compared, so
as to realize semantic analysis and recognition (semantic identification), and finally
complete the process of speech comprehension.
In the following, according to these stages, we will use the theory of semantic
perception to explain the psychological processes and processing characteristics of
child speech comprehension.
(1) Children receive and perceive current input sound strings (assuming a sentence)
through peripheral auditory organs and subcortical low-level linguistic centers,
and project them to the Wernicke Area of cerebral cortex after spectral analysis
of the last-level linguistic centers of the subcortical system.
(2) In order to divide the input sound string into chunks, Wernicke and Broca Areas
of child speech centers process the input sound string in ‘sound discrimination,’
‘word recognition,’ and ‘phrase (i.e., chunk) production.’
(3) Through the function of semantic perception (semantic sensation and percep-
tion) of the spoken language center, children compare the input chunks with the
relevant parts of the semantic relation structure shown in Fig. 4.5. And make a
judgment on the results of the comparison—whether the two can match or not,
and which of the three types of matching (complete matching, partial matching,
or complete mismatch) belongs to.
(4) If it is judged to be a ‘perfect match’ (i.e., it is recognized by semantic sensation
and perception and passed through), children will initially recognize a pattern
of semantic relation structure and store it in the ‘semantic structure base’ of the
conceptual center. The so-called preliminary cognition refers to the perception
and identification of this semantic relational structure pattern which has just
passed through once. It is not deeply impressed and cannot be remembered, but
it is only known that it has not been really grasped.
(5) If it is judged to be ‘partially matched’ or ‘completely mismatched’ (which may
be due to the fact that some voices are not heard clearly by the child, or the
speaker’s statement is incorrect), the child will not be able to learn a certain
semantic relational structure pattern through the current discourse input. In this
case, because infants have not yet formed speech ability, they can only use the
information of the speaker’s tone, gesture, or posture to correct the processing
links such as ‘speech perception and discrimination,’ ‘word recognition,’ and
‘chunk production’ of the current input speech string (the final result is the
revision of chunk division). When babies are older; that is, when they have
preliminary speech ability, they may also ask the speaker to repeat it (see Fig. 4.6,
semantic relation matching) or ask the speaker about one of the words in order
to correct the original chunking results.
(6) With the increase of a child’s daily activities, interpersonal communication
becomes more and more frequent, and more and more words will be heard. As
mentioned above, every time a new word is heard, if the speech recognition
matches perfectly (i.e., it is recognized by the semantic sensation and percep-
tion), children can initially recognize a new semantic relationship structure and
store it in the ‘semantic relation structure base’ of the conceptual center. If
the words heard at present are new, but the structural pattern of their semantic
relation has been preliminarily recognized, for children, although they have not
learned the new pattern at this time, they can deepen their comprehension and
understanding of the scope and context of application of the original pattern.
If the words heard in the past are completely repeated, it is also meaningful
for children, because this can play a role in reviewing and consolidating the
original preliminary cognitive model, thus leaving a deeper impression in the
long-term memory (the content of the conceptual center belongs to the content
of long-term memory).
In this way, with the increase of child’s interpersonal communication and listen-
ing to discourse, there will be more and more semantic relationship structure models
in their conceptual center, and more and more comprehensive understanding of the
scope of application and context of these models (i.e., child’s grammatical knowl-
edge and world knowledge related to all aspects of social life are also increasing).
When the number of these modes reaches a certain scale, so as to meet the needs of
communication in the process of general interpersonal communication, we say that
the child has basically acquired or mastered the language. For the mother tongue, the
age of children who acquire this ability should generally be about four to five years
old.
(7) It can be seen from the process of language acquisition by the above-mentioned
child language ability is acquired on the basis of progressive cognitive semantic
relational structure model, rather than in the process of learning and memo-
rizing specific sentences. Generally, schemas are classified by category, while
schema classes of semantic relational structures are limited, for example, ‘agen-
tive case—patient case,’ ‘agentive case—patient case—dative case,’ ‘agen-
tive case—patient case—instrumental case,’ ‘agentive case—patient case—
causative case—instrumental case,’ ‘agentive case—dative case,’ ‘agentive
case—patient case—causative case—instrumental case—locative case—tem-
poral case,’ and so on. According to the arrangement and combination, there
are at most 8 × 7 × 6 × 5 × 4 × 3 × 2 × 1 = 40,320 semantic relation struc-
ture patterns which can be combined by the eight case relations. In fact, there
are far fewer types of patterns in practice than 40,000, because some cases are
necessary, some are optional, and some are forbidden when using eight case
relations to form a sentence’s semantic relation structure (e.g., dative case only
appears in a few patterns, and ‘instrumental case,’ ‘place case,’ ‘temporal case,’
and ‘causative case’ appear in many cases. The following are optional. In the
case of intransitive verbs as predicates, the patient case and the resultative case
are prohibited). Generally speaking, mastering hundreds of structural patterns
of semantic relations can initially meet the needs of general communication
and interpersonal communication. Since a pattern class can contain dozens or
even hundreds of different sentences, mastering a pattern class will enable us to
master a large number of sentences. Obviously, this is much more efficient than
the sentence-by-sentence learning process (i.e., ‘sentence-by-sentence process-
ing’). Thus, we can understand why children of four or five years old of any
nationality can master a language more quickly in just a few years.
(8) The process of the above-mentioned children acquiring language can also be
seen that before children use semantic sensation and perception to identify the
semantic relationship of sentences, they need to divide the input sound string
into ‘chunks.’ That is, they need to complete the speech information process-
ing links such as ‘speech discrimination,’ ‘word recognition,’ and ‘phrase (i.e.,
chunk) production.’ Speech discrimination requires the recognition of which
words these syllables represent according to their phonological characteristics
and combinations (i.e., syllables). This can be accomplished by the subcorti-
cal low-level center of the language sense in coordination with the traditional
Wernicke speech center. As mentioned earlier, after a long period of evolu-
tion, human beings have been born with a keen sound discrimination ability, so
this speech processing link can be self-taught. ‘Word recognition’ requires the
recognition of part of speech classification (nouns, verbs, adjectives, or other
words) and the meaning of the word. ‘Phrase (chunks) production’ is to combine
words with different parts of speech into phrases that have different grammati-
cal functions according to certain grammatical rules, i.e., phrases with different
case relations, lexical chunks (in order to prepare for the next step of semantic
relationship identification). Since the symbolic systems of words and characters
in different languages are quite different, and the corresponding grammatical
rules are various, this kind of grammatical analysis ability cannot be innate, but
can only be acquired through learning. Thus, we can understand why infants
and young children, despite their innate ability of ‘phonetic discrimination’
and ‘semantic perception’ (linguistic perception), still need four or five years
to really master the mother tongue. Because for some grammar rules, it takes
time for children to learn (rather than, as Chomsky put it—all speech abilities
are innate and can be mastered naturally without learning at all). However, it
should be pointed out that this analysis of how phrases are formed (based on the
previous step of ‘word recognition’) only involves words and phrases (related
grammar only involves parts of speech, meanings and simpler knowledge and
rules related to the formation of phrases), rather than complex syntax and sen-
tence pattern analysis of sentences. It is a part of the whole grammatical analysis,
so it is much simpler than the grammatical analysis of the whole sentence.
4.6.3 Child’s Speech Production
As can be seen from Fig. 4.6, the mental process of speech production also undergoes
five stages: (1) first, the meaning (semantics) to be expressed should be transformed
into the corresponding semantic relational structure pattern, which can be achieved
by searching and matching the semantic relational structure pattern database of the
conceptual center with the intended utterance. (2) Then, separate the individual case
chunks that make up the pattern from the semantic relationship pattern (chunk separa-
tion, phrase composition analysis). (3) Determine the meaning of the relevant words
in each chunk and the order in which they are arranged (word recognition). (4) On
this basis, the phonemic representations of each word (i.e., phonemic planning) can
be determined by using the ‘phonemic representations bank of lexicon’ preserved
in Wernieke Area. (5) According to the phonemic representations of words, pro-
nunciation control instructions (pronunciation planning) are formed to control the
oral cavity and vocal cords to produce the specified speech, and finally complete the
speech production process (see Fig. 4.6).
Since speech production must be based on the acquisition of complex pronun-
ciation modes (i.e., not only vowels and consonants, but also the combination of
phonemes, i.e., syllables and word pronunciation) and the accumulation of a num-
ber of vocabulary and grammar knowledge, the emergence of speech production is
bound to be later than speech comprehension, and it can only enter child language
development. The third stage (i.e., the speech development period from 1 to 2 and
a half years old) will not appear until later (in other words, language comprehen-
sion occurs during the babbling period). And the development of speech production,
as mentioned in the preceding section, shows the characteristics of transition from
immature, incomplete to mature, and perfect. That is to say, during the development
of speech, one-word sentences, two-word sentences, and telegraphic sentences must
be experienced first, and then complete sentences and various complex sentence pat-
terns can be mastered at the maturity of speech. Following is a detailed description
of psychological process and processing features of child speech production from
the perspective of semantic sensation and perception in accordance with these stages
of development.
(1) According to the theory of semantic perception, infants are born with the abil-
ity of perception and discrimination of speech and analysis and recognition
of semantics. As mentioned above, infants have already had the intention of
communicating with adults as early as the period of vocal practice (about three
months). During the period of babbling, although infants cannot speak words,
they have begun to understand words preliminarily, for example, respond cor-
rectly to the simple words of a mother or adult. With the improvement of pro-
nunciation ability, the desire for communication between infants and adults
becomes stronger and stronger. So once babies acquire certain words (only a few
isolated words at the beginning of language acquisition, they lack grammatical
knowledge to connect these isolated words into phrases), they will immediately
apply them to adult communication (with gestures and body language), which
is the production stage of monosyllabic sentences. The process of this produc-

tion stage is as follows (in the following description, the order and process of
processing are represented by arrows →):
In order to generate discourse, first of all, we search the semantic relational schema
database of the conceptual center to select the matching patterns according to current
meaning of the discourse (semantics). As mentioned above, speech production occurs
later than speech comprehension, so when speech production begins, the semantic
relational schema database of the conceptual center should not be blank but accu-
mulate a small number of semantic relational schemata formed through the process
of speech comprehension. Therefore, it is possible to select the appropriate schema
from the selected schemata by matching search → the case chunks that make up
the pattern are separated from the selected schema → the pronunciation planning
is based on the phonemic representation of each word, → and the pronunciation
control instructions are formed.
The features of this process are that infants accumulate very few words at this
stage (only individual words’ phonemic representations are kept in the phonemic
bank of Wernicke speech center) and lack of grammatical knowledge. Therefore, in
the process of the fourth step above, when determining the phonemic representations
of each word, infants can speak individual words only at this time, and accordingly
only individual words can be identified. The phonemic representations of other words
can be determined, but cannot find corresponding phonemic representations in their
‘lexical phonemic bank.’ Therefore, they can only be represented by sign language
or body language to compensate for the incomplete semantic relation structure of the
current discourse, so the generated linguistic form becomes a ‘one-word utterance.’
(2) As babies grow up, their vocabulary acquisition, language phenomena, and
grammatical knowledge gradually increase (the vocabulary phoneme database
of Wernicke speech center expands correspondingly), and they begin to combine
two or more different words (especially nouns and verbs) in order to express
their meanings more fully in communication. This is the production stage of
two-word sentences and telegraphic sentences. The process and features of these
two productive stages are basically the same as those of the above-mentioned
single-word sentence stages, except that in the fourth stage of processing, i.e.,
determining the phonemic representations of each word, since infants can now
express two or more different words together, such words can be found in their
vocabulary phonemic lexicon in Wernicke Area. The corresponding phonemic
representations of a language result in the formation of a ‘two-word sentence’
or a ‘telegraphic sentence.’
(3) After two and a half years of age, with the increase of practical activities and
the expansion of interpersonal communication, child speech ability has devel-
oped rapidly. Not only has the vocabulary acquired accumulated to over 1000
(i.e., the volume of vocabulary phoneme database in Wernicke Area has greatly
expanded), but also language phenomena, grammatical knowledge, and various
sentence patterns they understand; and comprehension becomes more and more
abundant and complete. So children begin to get rid of the immature and incom-
plete production stage of telegraphic sentences and turn to the production stage
of ‘complete sentences’ which can fully express their meaning with a complete
sentence.
Chapter 5
Innateness and Perceptibility of Speech
The function of speech is to communicate among people. Speech ability is a psycho-

logical quality, which has evolved over millions of years, unique to human beings and
special for communication. Due to the special role of speech ability and its special
formation process, there are two questions about the features of speech ability. For
a long time, these two questions have been debated endlessly in linguistic circles in
China and abroad. These two questions are:
(1) Since speech ability has evolved over millions of years, is it inherited or
acquired? Is speech ability innate? This is the first question.
(2) Since the function of speech is communication, it is natural that we should first
understand what others have said; that is, we should first perceive and understand
the information provided by others. That is to say, a kind of perceptual system
must support speech ability (especially oral ability). It is generally believed
that this perceptual system is the auditory system; but up to now, no scientist
has been able to give a convincing explanation or provide evidence through
neuroscience; if it is not the auditory system that supports the perceptual system,
then what kind of system is there to support it? which raises the second question:
which perceptual system does speech belong to? What perceptual system does
it depend on? What kind of perception does speech ability have?
This chapter is trying to make a more in-depth discussion of the above two issues.
Question One is discussed in the first few sections, and Question Two is discussed
in the last section.
5.1 Innateness of Hearing in Speech
As it is known, speech ability includes four skills: listening, speaking, reading, and
writing. To discuss whether speech ability is congenital, we need to discuss whether
these four abilities are congenital.

84 5 Innateness and Perceptibility of Speech
In Sect. 4.6 of the previous chapter, the analysis of the psychological processes and
processing features of ‘speech comprehension’ and ‘speech production’ is actually
the analysis of the process and features of listening and speaking. Speech compre-
hension corresponds to ‘listening,’ and speech production corresponds to ‘speaking.’
It can be seen that in order to find out whether listening and speaking abilities are
congenital, we can find the answer from the above analysis of the processes and
features of child speech comprehension and speech production.
From the mental process of child speech comprehension described in Sect. 4.6 of
the previous chapter, we see that the process roughly goes through five stages, i.e.,
speech perception, speech discrimination, word recognition, chunk production (i.e.,
phrase or phrase composition analysis), and semantic identification. Word recogni-
tion and phrase composition analysis belongs to the category of grammatical analysis,
and this job is done by Broca Area, the high-level center of semantic perception in
the cerebral cortex, so they can also be called ‘grammatical analysis’ stage. Speech
perception and speech discrimination belong to the same category of speech, but
their analysis methods and processing mechanisms are quite different. As mentioned
above, speech perception is realized by spectral analysis method and is accomplished
by the low-level linguistic center of the cortex. Speech discrimination is achieved
by matching and comparing the phoneme combination features of lexical phoneme
representations bank and the input speech strings. This is completed by Wernicke
Area, the high-level linguistic center in the cerebral cortex. Although both of them
belong to the phonetic category, they are quite different from each other in terms
of the psychological processing features and mechanism. Obviously, they should be
classified into two different psychological processing stages. In this way, the mental
processing of speech comprehension (i.e., ‘listening’) can actually be considered
to consist of only four stages: speech perception, speech discrimination, grammar
analysis, and semantic recognition. Among them, the mental processing ability is
related to speech perception, speech discrimination, and semantics recognition. We
come to a conclusion that the three mental processing abilities do have significant
genetic characteristics; only those related to grammatical analysis have been proved
in the previous chapters (Sects. 3.3 and 3.4, Chap. 3) that relevant mental process-
ing abilities can only be acquired through acquired learning because they involve
different language symbolic systems and numerous linguistic phenomena and gram-
matical rules that vary from language to language. This shows that three of the four
main mental processing abilities related to speech and hearing are congenital and
can be acquired by heredity; only one is not congenital and can be mastered by
acquired learning. However, it should be emphasized that the grammatical analysis
ability mentioned here, as mentioned above, only involves words and phrases (related
grammar only involves parts of speech, meanings and simpler knowledge, and rules
related to the formation of phrases, not complex syntax and pattern analysis of sen-
tences). It is only a part of the whole grammatical analysis, so the grammatical part
of whole sentences is involved. The analysis process is still much simpler. In order
to distinguish it from the usual complex and complete grammatical analysis, we
may call this kind of grammatical analysis, which only involves words and phrases,
‘simple and partial grammatical analysis.’
5.1 Innateness of Hearing in Speech 85
Finally, we can draw a conclusion that speech listening is mainly inborn (three of
the four main mental processing abilities are genetic), but it also contains acquired
acquisition components (because one of the main mental processing abilities is
related to acquired acquisition). However, this ability only involves ‘simple, par-
tial grammatical analysis,’ and though it also needs to be acquired, the process is less
difficult and less time consuming.
5.2 Innateness of Speaking
From the mental process of child speech production described in Sect. 4.6 of the
previous chapter, we see that this process also roughly goes through five stages;
namely semantic matching, chunk separation (phrase or phrase composition analy-
sis), word recognition, phoneme planning, and pronunciation planning. Word recog-
nition and chunk separation (i.e., phrase separation, which is the inverse process of
phrase production) can be expressed as a ‘grammatical analysis’ stage because of
the similarity of their analytical methods and psychological mechanisms. Although
phoneme planning and pronunciation planning belong to phonological category, the
analysis methods and mechanisms are quite different. As mentioned above, phoneme
planning refers to the use of Wernicke’s phoneme representation bank to determine
the phonemic representations (i.e., phoneme combination characteristics) of words
in separated chunks by matching and comparison. The mechanism is in Wernicke
Area, the high-level linguistic center of the cerebral cortex, while the phonologi-
cal planning refers to the use of phonemic representations transmitted by Wernicke
Area to generate instructions that can control speech organs (oral and vocal cords).
At this time, the processing mechanism is in another high-level linguistic center,
Broca Area. Therefore, although both of them belong to the phonetic category, they
are quite different from each other in terms of their psychological processing features
and processing mechanism. Obviously, they should be classified into two different
psychological processing stages. In this way, the mental processing of speech pro-
duction (i.e., speaking) can be regarded as a process consisting of only four stages:
semantic matching, grammatical analysis, phonological planning, and pronunciation
planning. Since the mechanism of mental processing of semantic matching is iden-
tical with that of semantic recognition, and the innate characteristics of semantic
identification have been demonstrated in Sect. 3.4, Chap. 3 already. And the acqui-
sition of grammatical analysis has also been mentioned above, then, what are the
features of mental ability related to phoneme planning and pronunciation planning?
It is generally believed that babbling is the period from vocal practice to speech
preparation when infants grow up to about 5 or 6 months. At this stage, infants grad-
ually master various sounds (or phonemes), namely various vowels and consonants.
According to Professor Li Yuming’s observation and research1 on the pronunciation
of infant’s 1–120 days in China, infant’s mastery of consonants tend to develop ‘from
1 Li, Y. M. Child language development. Wuhan: South China Normal University Press. 1995.
back consonants to front consonants and to the mid consonants.’ At first, consonants
concentrate on the back of uvula, pharynx, and other pronunciation organs, and then
jump out of bilabial consonants; later, the back consonants push to the root of the
tongue, and bilabial consonants extend back to the lip and teeth; the development of
nasal, fricative, and plosive are faster than that of affricative and aspiratory sounds.
“The general development trend of vowels is that the tongue surface is prior to the
tip of the tongue, non-rhotic prior to retroflection, not to curl the lips prior to curling
the lips, low and front vowels prior to high and post vowels.” Linguists also believe
that infants’ ability to master phonemes usually has a certain order2 : For the vowels,
this order is: front vowel, middle vowel, and back vowel; for the constantans the
order is opposite—first soft palate (due to swallowing), then alveolar and bilabial
(due to sucking), and finally dental and palatal. The stage of babbling lasts about
5 to 8 months and then enters the pronunciation stage of ‘phoneme combination’
(syllables and words); that is, speech development stage (one to two and a half years
old). As mentioned earlier, according to the degree of completeness of child’s utter-
ance, this period can be further divided into three sub-stages: one-word sentence,
two-word sentence, and telegraphic sentence. The whole process from vocalization
practice, babbling and learning to be able to speak all kinds of words smoothly is
completely over by children in a relatively short period without being taught.
As phoneme planning and pronunciation planning are two stages that cohere
and inseparable, the phoneme combination characteristics (i.e., the phonetic form
of words) as the result of phoneme planning in Wernicke speech center are used as
input information in the process of pronunciation planning, and Broca speech center
forms instructions to control the action of vocal organs based on this information,
and these two stages are added psychologically. The final result of the work is that the
instruction controls the voice of the vocal organ, that is, the various words spoken by
children, which shows that the above facts that children can automatically complete
the process of speech mastery from vocal practice, babbling to fluent utterance in a
relatively short period without being taught should be taken as sufficient evidence that
phoneme planning and pronunciation planning have innately genetic characteristics.
From the above analysis, we see that in the four stages in the process of mental
processing of speech production (i.e., ‘speaking’), the mental processing abilities
related to phoneme planning, pronunciation planning and semantic matching all have
innately genetic features. Only the mental processing abilities related to grammatical
analysis need to be acquired (as mentioned above, due to the fact that phoneme
planning, pronunciation planning, and semantic matching are three stages). This kind
of mental processing ability only involves ‘simple and partial grammar analysis’;
though it also needs to be acquired, it is relatively less difficult, and the acquisition
time is much shorter. Thus, it can be concluded that speech ability is similar to hearing
ability, mainly hereditary ability in nature.
2 Gui, S. New Psycholinguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai foreign language education press. 2001.
5.3 Acquisition of Reading and Writing Ability 87
5.3 Acquisition of Reading and Writing Ability
5.3.1 A Psychological Processing Model of Reading

and Writing
In order to find out whether reading and writing have innately genetic features,
we first make clear the mental processing model of reading and writing process;
that is, we should establish a mental processing flowchart similar to Fig. 4.4 (or
Fig. 4.6). Figures 4.4 and 4.6 are about speech comprehension and production; that
is, the mental processing flowchart of listening and speaking process. The following
passage is about reading and speaking process.
According to the progress of contemporary brain science research and the latest
research results of neurolinguistics in recent years, we believe that the current psy-
chological model of reading processing, which is generally accepted by academia,
can be summarized as follows. Visual information generated by written symbols can
be converted from light energy to electric energy through retinal sensory cells, and
then from ganglion cells to slow-changing potential. According to ‘all or nothing’
response potential (also known as nerve impulse), the action potential is transmit-
ted to the lateral geniculate body of thalamus through innermost ganglion cell axon
(ganglion cell axon is slender and long, also known as nerve fiber) of the retina,
thus completing the input and preliminary perception of text information from the
retina to the lower cortical center (text perception). The secondary optic nerve fibers
emitted from the lateral geniculate body further project the nerve impulses reflect-
ing visual information of written symbols to the higher visual center of cerebral
cortex, first to the basic Area of the visual cortex V1 (Brodmann 17), and then to
visual cortex contact Area V2 (Brodmann 18). Among them, V1 completes the ini-
tial visual perception, while V2 completes the processing related to the perception
of graphics and contours (perception involving motion parallax is also carried out
in V2), thus forming a specific image of text being read (text discrimination). Then,
the information reflecting the image is transferred from the visual contact Area V2
to the conceptual center (near the supramarginal gyrus and angular gyrus, see Gaz-
zaniga’s speech model in, Sect. 2.4, Chap. 2). The meaning of the currently inputted
characters is interpreted by the semantic database of the conceptual center, and the
recognition of the meaning of words (word recognition) is completed. In the reading
process of continuous input of written symbols, a series of written symbols will form
a sentence. Each character symbols in this sentence will be sent to the Broca Area
after completing the text perception, text discrimination, and semantic perception
recognition in the above way. There are grammatical rules and linguistic features in
this Area, which play a role of grammatical analysis; that is, to analyze the formation
of a group (phrases) of a number of words, so as to generate ‘case chunks’ (chunk
production). On this basis, by matching and comparing the semantic relational struc-
ture of current input sentence with the ‘semantic relational pattern base’ preserved
by the conceptual center, we finally achieve the semantic understanding (semantic
identification) of the current reading sentence.
The mental processing of writing is not exactly the same as the reverse process of
reading. In order to write out a meaning in written language, the meaning (semantics)
to be expressed should be firstly transformed into corresponding semantic relational
structure patterns, which can be accomplished by matching and searching the seman-
tic relational pattern database of the conceptual center (semantic matching). In the
semantic relational model, each case chunk (chunk separation, i.e., phrase composi-
tion analysis) is separated, and then the meaning and order of the words in each chunk
(word determination) are determined by using the lexicon in the conceptual center.
On this basis, the current single word can be linked through the relationship between
the conceptual center (angular gyrus) and the visual cortex contact layer V2. Words
are converted into corresponding symbolic representations (font planning) and trans-
mitted to Broca Area, which forms writing control instructions (writing planning)
according to the representation of each character symbol (i.e., strings arranged in
order of the geometric features and strokes of the characters), so that the writing
motion organs (head, eye and hand) can finally write the required written text.
It should be noted that in the field of neurolinguistics, some experts believe3 that
the speech center responsible for writing in the cerebral cortex is not Broca Area
but Exner Area. It is generally believed that Exner Area is the posterior part of
the mid-frontal gyrus (the second frontal gyrus)—the projection Area of head, eye,
and hand movement in the left hemisphere of the brain (people need coordinated
movement of head, eyes, and hands when writing). While the traditional Broca Area
is the posterior part of the inferior frontal gyrus (the third frontal gyrus), which
is not the same Area. However, Broca Area is responsible for oral production and
Exner Area—for written, the functions of both are ‘expression,’ but the ways of
expression are different, and the two Areas are closely adjacent to each other; more
importantly, the content (semantics) of both is the same as can be seen from the
above narrative, the written expression of psychological processing in the process of
‘expression.’ Semantic matching and word determination are the same as those in
Figs. 4.4 or 4.6, which reflect the mental processing of oral expression. Therefore,
many scholars think that it is better to merge Exner Area and the traditional Broca
Area as a generalized ‘speech expression center,’ while the name of the Broca Area
remains unchanged (Only the range becomes bigger than before). We believe that
this view is quite insightful, so the above narrative uses the concept, which represents
the broad Broca Area.
Based on the above analysis of reading and writing, we can draw a mental pro-
cessing model similar to Fig. 4.4 on the process of reading and writing, as shown in
Fig. 5.1.
3 Wang, D. C. Neuro-linguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. 1997.

Fig. 5.1 Reading–writing processing model
5.3.2 Acquisition of Reading Ability
As can be seen from Fig. 5.1, the psychological processing of reading includes five
links: text perception, text discrimination, word recognition, chunk production, and
semantic recognition. However, as mentioned in Sect. 5.1 of this chapter, the analysis
methods and processing mechanism of word recognition and chunk production are
the same. They can be expressed in the category of ‘grammatical analysis.’ Thus, the
psychological processing of reading can be considered to consist of only four stages:
text perception, text discrimination, grammatical analysis, and semantic recognition.
The inheritance of the ability of semantic identification has been demonstrated in
detail in Sect. 3.4, Chap. 3. The ability of grammatical analysis can only be mastered
by learning for a certain period of time, which is also explained in Sect. 5.1 of
this Chapter. The remaining text perception (text perception refers to the ability of
distinguishing and perceiving the information of text symbols from many visual
information according to the general features of their graphics and contours; that is,
the ability of comprehensively perceiving the whole set of text symbols) and text
discrimination (text discrimination refers to the ability to distinguish one character
from another according to the topological structure, geometric features, and stroke
features of a set of symbols). The acquired acquisition of these two stages is also
obvious: because these two stages involve written words, and the written forms of
different languages are diverse, there are at least hundreds of languages and characters
of different nationalities in the world. Therefore, it is impossible for children to be
born with literary perception and literary discrimination. The ability mentioned above
of speech perception and speech discrimination is likely to be inherited by nature
because, although languages of different nationalities are different, the basic unit
of speech ‘phonemes’ is common. Phonemes in languages of different nationalities
are composed of various vowels and consonants, so through millions of years of
evolution, it is possible for human beings to acquire innate speech perception and
speech discrimination. Many cases listed in Sect. 3.3, Chap. 3 have proved this point.
So far, no real case has been found to support the innate character perception and
character discrimination at home and abroad.
Some scholars believe that since vision is a kind of innate ability, and text percep-
tion and text analysis are realized through visual channels; of course, they should also
have innate features. Vision (i.e., ‘visual perception’) is an innate ability inherited
from parents and possessed by everyone, but it is only for perceiving some external
features of objective things (such as color, brightness, contour, shape, and size). It
does not mean to perceive the internal attributes of objective things, nor the essence
of objective things. To perceive the latter, innate visual ability is not enough, and
acquired learning must be added. The understanding of the content and essence of
some complex things can only be acquired through learning, and also through long
and hard learning. The reading of ‘music score’ is a typical example: music score
is a set of specific music symbols to express the scale, interval, and other singing
requirements and rhythm of written materials. Because it is written material, people
can perceive it visually. But for those who do not understand music (such as the gen-
eral public or children), what they perceive is only a set of special symbols, and they
do not know that this kind of thing called ‘music score’ (i.e., they cannot complete
the ‘perception’ of the music score), nor can they distinguish the features of symbols
in the music score, as well as the relations and difference between them (namely, they
cannot complete the ‘discrimination’ of the music score), and it is much less likely
to sing according to the music score (i.e., the meaning of each symbol cannot be
recognized and the whole music score can be understood on this basis). Obviously,
in order to understand music score, it is far from enough to rely on innate visual
ability. It is also necessary to have specialized learning, and learn under someone’s
guidance, in order to achieve the goal; in other words, it is impossible to be self-
taught without teachers. So is the study of “music score” as a written language of
music, and the same is true of the learning of written materials as a general written
language. That is to say, the two links of text perception and text discrimination
are impossible to be born with, but learned later. This shows that among the four
main mental processes related to the reading process, the abilities related to text
perception, text discrimination, and grammatical analysis are not hereditary, which
can only be mastered by learning; only the abilities related to semantic identification
are inborn and can be acquired through inheritance. It can be concluded that reading
ability mainly depends on learning.
5.3.3 Acquisition of Writing Ability
As can be seen from Fig. 5.1, the mental processing of writing process includes five
stages: semantic matching, chunk separation, word determination, font planning,
and writing planning. Because of the same analysis method and processing mech-
anism, chunk separation and word determination can be expressed in the category
of ‘grammatical analysis.’ Thus, the mental processing of writing can be considered
to consist of only four stages: semantic matching, grammatical analysis, font plan-
ning and writing planning. As mentioned above, the mental processing mechanism
of semantic matching is the same as that of semantic recognition, so it is inborn.
The grammatical analysis involves various complex grammatical phenomena and
numerous grammatical rules in different languages. As mentioned above, it can only
be mastered through learning. Character planning and writing planning are related
to written language system of different languages, and the written language forms of
different national languages are rich and varied. Obviously, they cannot be acquired
through innate inheritance. They can only be mastered through specialized learning
after birth and are often taught by others. In fact, so far, neither at home nor abroad
has been able to find a practical case to prove that children are born with the ability
of ‘font planning’ and ‘writing planning’; which means, children can write without
being specially taught by teachers. This shows that among the four main mental
processing abilities related to the writing process, the abilities related to grammar
analysis, font planning, and writing planning are not inherited and can only be mas-
tered by learning; only the abilities related to semantic matching are congenital and
can be acquired through inheritance. It can be concluded that writing ability also
depends mainly on learning.
5.4 Impacts of Acquired Environment and the Critical

Period in Semantic Perception
5.4.1 Inborn Ability and Environmental Impact
From the above analysis, we see that the four speech abilities commonly referred to as
‘listening, speaking, reading, and writing,’ which are not identical in nature, or even
quite different from each other. As mentioned above, ‘listening and speaking’ are
mainly hereditary abilities, while ‘reading and writing’ are mainly learned abilities.
This conclusion is of great significance to second language teaching (English teaching
in most cases), especially in primary and junior middle schools. It is well known that
all innate and hereditary abilities must have a ‘growth and development period’
(also known as a ‘critical period’). In this critical period, it is necessary to provide
the environment needed for the growth and development of this ability, in order
to gradually mature the individual’s corresponding ability, and finally to form and
demonstrate the ability of the individual. On the contrary, in this critical period, the
ability of individuals to grow and develop gradually can be achieved. If an individual

is not provided with the necessary environment for the growth and development of
this ability (or only after this critical period to provide the required environment for
the individual), it will cause an irreparable loss; the individual will lose this ability
for life, no matter how much time and effort he/she spends on learning later, this
ability will not be obtained.
Neuropsychologists Hubel and Wiesel did an experiment in which an eyelid of a
higher mammal (e.g., a cat) was surgically sutured during a critical period after birth,
temporarily depriving vision for more than a week, resulting in permanent blindness
(even if the suture is removed, the eyesight cannot be restored). One experiment is
the famous ‘visual deprivation experiment.’4 As brain neurologist, Professor Shou
Tiande stated,5 “Visual environment has a great impact on the development of young
animals. Every animal (visual perception) has a particularly sensitive stage of devel-
opment—critical stage, in which visual environment has an irreversible impact on
the development of visual pathways and visual functions of the brain.” He further
pointed out that the critical stages of visual maturity of different animals are dif-
ferent: “Cats are 24–36 days after birth, monkeys are about 40 days after birth, and
people are about 3–4 years old after birth.” This indicates that the visual environment
(light and color stimulation) is of vital importance to the growth and development of
visual nerve cells in neonatal animals. Other biologists have done a similar exper-
iment6 : keeping the newly hatched chickens in the dark room, during which they
were fed only with droppers, and then let them out for sunshine in two weeks. You
will see that the chicken is standing in the grain pile and will not peck. It can be
seen that although the pecking ability of chickens is born genetic, there must be a
corresponding condition for the formation of this ability; that is, the environment of
‘light.’
The above experiments on visual deprivation of cats and dropper feeding of chick-
ens show that this ability cannot be formed without corresponding growth and devel-
opment environment in a period called Critical Period, though it is an innate inher-
itance. The visual ability of cats, the pecking ability of chickens, and the semantic
perception ability of human beings (i.e., the ability of perception and discrimination
of speech and the ability of analysis and recognition of semantics) are the same. In
fact, for human beings, not only visual perception has its critical period of maturity,
but also semantic perception has its critical period of maturity, and the critical period
is longer than visual perception. The reason why the critical period is important
is that during this period if stimulated by appropriate environment, there will be a
‘neural fine-turning’ phenomenon, which is essential for the development of brain
nerve center, and this fine-turning is the essential neurophysiological basis for form-
ing visual or semantic perception. As for the meaning and function of neurodelicate
4 Hubel, D. H. and Wiesel, T. N. Journal of Neurophysiology. 1963: 26.

5 Shou, T. D. Brain mechanism of visual information processing. Shanghai: Shanghai science and
technology education press. 1997.
6 Gui, S. New Psycholinguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai foreign language education press. 2001.
5.4 Impacts of Acquired Environment … 93
tuning, neuropsychologist Stromswold7 explained the following: “To master a lan-

guage, one must be exposed to it in infancy and early infancy. The reason may be
that the neurodelicate tuning associated with learning specific language parameters
must be established when the nerve is highly plastic. The structures and operations
involved in language are modular in anatomy and function, and are significantly
different from those of non-language modules.” Stromswold further pointed out that
‘sophisticated language proficiency tests show that if children first come into con-
tact with a language after puberty, their fluency is rarely close to the level of native
speakers of the language. This phenomenon is consistent with Hubel and Wiesel
findings that normal visual development requires visual stimulation at critical stages
of development of the optic nerve. It also shows that the delicate turn of the nerve is
critical to normal language acquisition, and that such a delicate turn can only occur
in a language environment for a certain period of time.
It can be seen that in order to improve the quality and efficacy of English teaching,
achieve the best results in a short time, and truly change the phenomenon of ‘deaf
English and dumb English’ which has existed for many years; that is, to realize the
fundamental reform of traditional English teaching, we must seriously explore the
critical period of growth and development of human semantic perception and try
to find ways to achieve this key point. During this period, efforts should be made
to create a rich and diverse language environment for children (i.e., a large number
of listening and speaking environments); otherwise, all reforms related to English
teaching in primary and secondary schools will be unable to start and will lead to
failure because of the loss of its most basic premises.
5.4.2 Growth and Development Period for Semantic

Perception and Semantic Perception Sensitivity Curve
Up to now, many linguists at home and abroad made in-depth studies on language
acquisition cases under various conditions (including a large number of cases of
mother tongue learning and second language learning, involving both normal children
and deaf learners), especially Chambers, Stromswold, and Brown. The research cases
of Johnson, Newport, and Wu Fenggang, a Chinese scholar, are more typical, which
leave a deep impression on people and have a wide impact. The typical cases of Chen
Boshi and others can be summarized as follows:
(1) Chambers, a linguist at the University of Toronto, Canada, published a paper
entitled ‘Dialect Acquisition’8 in 1992. Based on the case study of six Canadian
children who emigrated to Britain to acquire southern English dialect, this paper
finds that for the complex rules and new phonemes of the new dialect, children
aged 7 and under (early learners) can acquire it smoothly; those aged 14 and
7 Stromswold, K. The cognitive and neural bases of language acquisition, in The Cognitive Neuro-
Science, VII Language, M. S. Gazzaniga, (ed.) London: The MIT Press, 1995.
8 Chambers, J. K. Dialect Acquisition, Language, No. 4. 1992.
over (late learners) can hardly acquire it smoothly, or even never fully grasp
it. The learning effect of children between the age of 7 and 14 is between the
two above (may be equivalent to early learners, and may be equivalent to late
learners). This study shows that language acquisition does have a critical period.
(2) Stromswold, of the Center for Cognitive Sciences, Rutgers University, USA,
pointed out in a 1995 paper that brain damage in infancy usually caused only
temporary and mild language deficits, while the same brain damage in adults
can cause long-term and severe language disorders. Rehabilitation of aphasia
in children is related to the realization of language functional reconstruction
in two brain hemispheres: the first brain Area is adjacent to the injured left
hemisphere language functional Area; the second brain region is the undamaged
brain region in the right hemisphere corresponding to the damaged brain region
in the left hemisphere (i.e., the same anatomical structure on the right hemisphere
as the injured left hemisphere). If the damaged Area of the left hemisphere—
language function Area—is so large that there are almost no undamaged brain
Areas around it, the corresponding Area of the right hemisphere will assume
language function fully language function reconstruction. Generally speaking,
the effect of remodeling (i.e., the rehabilitation of aphasia) is better when the
age is younger.
Stromswold analyzed numerous cases of language acquisition (including normal
children, deaf people, children growing up under extreme social conditions and
language deprivation, second language learners of different ages, etc.). Later, it
is finally concluded that after the critical period, the ability of human beings to
acquire language decreases with age.
(3) In 1970, a girl named Genie was found in Los Angeles, USA. For some special
reasons, Jenny lived in a language-isolated environment after birth. She was dis-
covered at the age of 12 and a half before she began to learn to speak. After five or
six years of study, she did not learn to speak short sentences and minimum gram-
mar until she was 18 years old. Although her speech had English word order and
could create two-word sentences to express all relations, subordinate relations,
and subject–predicate relations, her speech lacked auxiliary verbs, interroga-
tives and pronouns, and questions cannot be inverted. And her recognition of
face, part and whole, and pattern; in other words, the function of the right hemi-
sphere of the brain is no less than that of normal children. Genie’s ‘two-part
hearing’ experiment (showing two auditory stimuli at the same time, one ear
receiving one stimulus) also showed that her ears were sound, but she used the
right hemisphere of the brain to process all auditory information. This example
shows that Jenny’s left hemisphere of the main language atrophied before she
was 12 years old due to her isolation from the language environment, so when
she started learning language after 12 and a half years old, she could only use
the right hemisphere to perform language functions. Thus, the left hemisphere
of the brain has the potential of language acquisition only before a certain stage,
which is commonly referred to as the ‘critical period.’ In this regard, Curliss
(1977) has further pointed out that the phenomenon that Genie can acquire lan-
guage with incomplete syntactic structure is not a special case, but can be found
in other similar groups, for example, adults whose left hemisphere is resected
and whose right hemisphere has to be compensated for language acquisition,
and adults who have passed a critical period to begin language learning.
(4) Psychologists and sociologists have long been concerned about wild or wolf
children who grew up outside the human social environment. When ‘Wild Peter’
was first discovered in Hanover, Germany, in 1924, academia believed that it was
more significant than the discovery of 30,000 new stars. By the end of the 1950s,
it was reported that 30 children had been raised by wild animals.9 Psycholin-
guist Brown (1977) studied nine cases of wild children from the perspective
of language acquisition. When these wild children were discovered, they could
not speak, and they began to learn language only after they returned to human
society. Educated, these wild children can master human verbal language to
varying degrees, but ultimately they can’t use it as smoothly as normal children
(because most of them were found over the age of six). Generally speaking,
the sooner a wild child is found (e.g., before the age of 8 or 9), the better his
language acquisition ability would be. If he is found after adolescence (14 years
of age), he can only acquire simple words (such as sentences with incomplete
syntactic structure like Jenny), but cannot really master the complete language
of human beings.
(5) Wu Fenggang, a Chinese scholar,10 in ‘Chinese Family Education and Psycho-
logical Development of Children and Adolescents,’ reported a case study of
‘pig child’ by psychologists in China. This article introduces a girl from the
northeast of China called Wang Xianfeng. Her mother’s intelligence was not
very normal. Her father had schizophrenia. Her family lived outside the village
alone. Therefore, Wang Xianfeng was short of care from her childhood and
was often associated with pigs. She sometimes ate pig milk and pig food and
slept in pigsties. When people discovered this situation in 1983, Wang Xianfeng
was 8 years old, but her intellectual development was not as good as that of a
3-year-old normal child. She showed a lot of habits of pigs (such as crawling at
the limbs sometimes and using her mouth to bite), and her language level was
very low, she can only speak a few words, which made it difficult for her to
communicate with others. After four years of primary education, she basically
learned to speak and had a simple conversation with others.
(6) In order to test whether there is a critical period for second language acquisition,
Johnson and Newport studied the English competence of a group of Korean
and Chinese native speakers who started learning English after they entered
the English environment, but the time for them to enter the English environ-
ment varied from the earliest age of 3 to the latest age of 39. The experimental
results show that for adolescents (about 14 years old) who enter the English
environment before puberty, their proficiency in English lexicon and syntax is
9 Dong, Q. Development of life- psycho-development. Jinan: Shandong Education Publishing House.
1992.
10 Wu, F. G. in Zhu, Z. X. China adolescent psycho-development and education. China Zhuoyue
Publishing Company. 1990.
Fig. 5.2 Child’s semantic perception sensitivity curve (child listening, speaking sensitivity curve)
highly correlated with their age at which they enter the English environment (the
younger, the more proficient they are), while for those who enter the English
environment after puberty, there is almost no such correlation. This shows that
there is also a critical period for second language acquisition. If we miss this
critical period, we will get twice less of the result or even lose the effort.
As mentioned above, among the four speech abilities of listening, speaking, read-
ing, and writing, only the abilities of listening and speaking, which is related to the
perception and discrimination of speech and the analysis and recognition of seman-
tics, belonging to (or mainly to) hereditary ability. In this way, if we regard a child’s
highest ‘semantic perception sensitivity’ as 1 (semantic perception sensitivity is a
parameter used to reflect the child’s perception and recognition of speech and seman-
tics), then according to the studies of the above-mentioned linguists on child language
acquisition cases (especially the typical case studies of Chen Boshi et al.), for the
vast majority of children (Except for special cases), we can draw a curve of child
semantic perception sensitivity, as shown in Fig. 5.2.
As can be seen from Fig. 5.2, the most sensitive period of child language acqui-
sition is generally before 8 or 9 years old, from 9 to 12 years old it falls to about 1/2,
and from 14 years old to about 10–15%.
Figure 5.2 can be called the sensitivity curve of child’s listening and speaking
ability. It should be pointed out here that speaking ability is also related to phoneme
planning and pronunciation planning (pronunciation ability). Since pronunciation is
used to produce information to the outside world, it does not belong to the perceptual
system, so it should not be classified into the category of semantic perception. How-
ever, the essence of language is communication, which is a tool for communication
of ideas and emotions. Communication always includes two aspects of “listening”
and “expression.” Therefore, speech comprehension (i.e., listening) and discourse
production (i.e., speaking) are two closely related and inseparable speech processing
processes: the development of listening has a decisive impact on the development
of speaking ability, and vice versa. In fact, during the development of semantic per-
ception, the ability of listening and speaking always develops synchronously (except
for the abnormal children with hearing and speaking defects). In this way, we can
conclude that the language sensitivity curve shown in Fig. 5.2 reflects not only the
change of hearing with age, but also the change of speaking ability with age.
5.5 Importance of Semantic Perception Theory for Foreign

Language Teaching Reform
The significance of Semantic Perception Theory to the reform of foreign language

teaching is mainly reflected in two aspects: first, the inspiration of the model of child
language acquisition based on semantic perception shown in Sect. 4.6 of Chap. 4
to the design of foreign language teaching; second, the curve of child semantic
perception sensitivity shown in Sect. 5.4 of this chapter.
5.5.1 Implications of ‘Child Language Acquisition Model

Based on Semantic Perception’ to the Design
of Foreign Language Teaching
5.5.1.1 Feedback Mechanism in Child Language Acquisition Model
Figure 4.6, ‘Child Language Acquisition Model Based on Semantic Perception,’

shows there are two feedback lines at the speech sound input: one from the semantic
identification module (we call it ‘internal feedback line’) and the other from the out-
put of the speech production system; that is, the output of the whole speech signal
system (we call it ‘external feedback line’). Internal feedback is only related to the
mental processing of speech comprehension (i.e., listening), while external feedback
is related to the whole speech processing—speech comprehension and speech pro-
duction (i.e., listening and speaking). As mentioned above, the essence of language
is communication. If we consider this fundamental functional characteristic, neither
internal feedback nor external feedback can be separated from the ‘communicator’
(i.e., the other party participating in the dialogue). Once the communicator loses the
communication partner, not only external feedback but also internal feedback would
be interrupted. Recognizing this will have a decisive impact on the choice of foreign
language teaching methods and strategies, as well as on the whole foreign language
teaching design. This is because these two kinds of feedback play an important role
in child language acquisition, especially in foreign language learning.
First, let’s take a look at internal feedback.

As mentioned in the section ‘Child Speech Comprehension’ in Sect. 4.6, Chap. 4,
when children have not yet developed speech ability (for mother tongue learning, it
is in infancy of 9 months to over 1 year old; for foreign language learning, it is mostly
in adolescence, such as in the lower grades of primary school), because the accu-
mulated vocabulary is still very small (only preserved in the vocabulary phonemic
representations database of Wernicke speech center) and the lack of grammatical
knowledge, it is often difficult to classify the chunks formed by the current input
speech strings according to a normative semantic relational structure pattern (i.e.,
whether they can match the pattern) after hearing the current input speech strings
and preliminarily completing the processing steps of ‘perception and discrimination
of speech,’ ‘word recognition,’ and ‘chunk production.’ The judgment of correct
semantics cannot be identified. This often happens to beginners in language learn-
ing. So what to do about it? As mentioned above, since language skills of beginners
have not been developed to necessary extend, it is difficult to ask each other to repeat
it through speech or to explain a word. They can only use the information of the
speaker’s tone, gesture, or posture (gesture and posture information can be obtained
through vision) according to the situation of on-site conversation. As mentioned at
the beginning of Sect. 5.3 of this chapter, visual cortical contact Area V2 specializes
in perceptual processing related to figure, contour, and motion parallax; and as can be
seen from Fig. 5.1, there is a neural pathway between V2 and the conceptual center
belonging to the speech center so that the speech center can obtain gesture, posture,
and other information through the visual channel, and ‘speech perception and dis-
crimination’ of the current input speech string. The mental processing links such as
‘word recognition’ and ‘chunk production’ are corrected by speech center (the result
is to revise the chunk partition of the current input speech string), and finally the
semantic relationship pattern determined by the current input speech chunk partition
is correctly determined, so as to complete the semantic identification process of the
current input speech string.
From the above analysis, it is seen that for any language beginner, the information
of the speaker’s tone, mood, gesture, or posture is a necessary condition for the begin-
ner to complete the process of semantic identification; that is, to truly achieve speech
comprehension. All this depends on internal feedback. When language learners form
their initial speech ability, they can communicate with each other directly through
speech (not necessarily relying on gestures, postures and additional information),
and then the verbal expression of communication partner becomes a necessary con-
dition for language learners to master the language proficiently, which still depends
on internal feedback.
Now let’s look at external feedback.
As pointed out in the last paragraph of Sect. 4.2 Chap. 4, the whole speech signal
system returns input (i.e., external feedback) to speech input in order to realize ‘self-
monitoring function.’ By utilizing this function in the process of language learning,
language learners can discover and correct their accidental errors (including phonetic,
5.5 Importance of Semantic Perception … 99
grammatical, and semantic errors) in the process of speaking in a timely manner. With
this function, language learners can compare their current discourse expression with
the experience information (normative and correct expression) stored in their brain,
and also make more accurate judgments on the applicability and appropriateness
of their current discourse based on the information of the voice, tone, gesture, or
posture of the current communicator (i.e., the interlocutor). In other words, through
self-monitoring function of external feedback, we can judge the correctness of the
pronunciation, grammar, and semantics (whether they conform to the norms and
correct ways of expression) of utterances spoken by language learners, and also the
correctness of their ‘context’; that is, if grammatical sentences are not suitable for
the current linguistic environment (e.g., they do not coincide with the context). If it
fails to achieve the purpose of communication, it is useless.
Thus, for language learning, external feedback is a sufficient condition for lan-
guage learners to acquire pronunciation, grammar and semantics, and contextual
knowledge.
5.5.1.2 Significance of Two-Way Speech Interaction in Language

Learning
Above all, we discuss the importance and function of internal and external feedback
in the model of child language acquisition based on semantic perception. Because
internal feedback involves abilities of formation and development of phonological,
grammatical and semantic knowledge, and the formation and development of related
analysis and identification, the language beginners gradually form their initial speech
comprehension from scratch. Necessary conditions are also important for language
learners to master speech comprehension gradually from entry-level to proficiency.
External feedback (which includes internal feedback) is not only related to knowledge
of phonetics, grammar and semantics, but also to knowledge and ability of context
and pronunciation, and it is also closely related to the development of listening by
language learners. It is also a necessary and sufficient condition for language learners
to form and master production ability.
From the above analysis, we see that internal feedback and external feedback are
necessary and sufficient conditions for language learners to develop speech compre-
hension (i.e., listening) and speech production (i.e., speaking). Therefore, it is of vital
importance to child language learning (especially foreign language learning). How-
ever, from the above analysis, we also see that in order to make internal feedback and
external feedback truly a necessary and sufficient condition for developing listening
and speaking ability. There must be a premise that the voice input of the model input
of the child’s language acquisition should be a real ‘communicator’ (preferably a
skilled speaker of the language).
As mentioned above, for a language beginner, it is difficult to interact smoothly

with each other (i.e., verbal communication) due to the lack of vocabulary and gram-
mar knowledge. At this time, the tone, mood, gesture, or posture of the interlocu-
tor become the necessary condition for beginners to complete semantic identifica-
tion; when language learners have formed their initial speech ability, if they want
to improve further and achieve proficiency, it also depends on direct verbal commu-
nication and with the communicator. Besides, to make use of the self-monitoring
function of external feedback to judge whether the language learner’s utterances are
suitable for the ‘context’ of the current dialogue. It is also necessary to understand
what the interlocutor has just said; whether things were fully heard or heard but
not fully understood, it is necessary to make a decision based on the partner’s tone,
mood, gesture, or posture, and other supplementary information. It can be seen that
in all these different situations, a real ‘communicator’ is indispensable. Otherwise, it
is impossible to interact with language learners in real time, including by means of
language or other ways (such as gestures and postures). Obviously, it is not the same
thing to provide speech input by such a real ‘communicator’ (as mentioned above,
the ‘communicator’ is preferably a proficient speaker of the language currently being
studied) and by a tape recorder (or other digital audio and video system). The funda-
mental difference between the two is that real-time two-way speech interaction can
be achieved between the former and the language learners, while the latter (through
digital) can only transmit language materials (they are very standardized in pho-
netics, grammar and semantics though) to the language learners. It is precisely this
difference that prevents the above two kinds of feedback from forming when the
speech input is made by a recorder (or other digital audio and video system). This
is the fundamental reason why no high-quality recorder or digital audio and video
system can become a necessary and sufficient condition for language learners to
form and master the ability of ‘listening and speaking.’ It is also the root cause of
why any high-quality recorder (or any other digital audio and video system) cannot
do. Its digital audio and video system can never replace the real communicators.
On this issue, Professor Wang Dechun, a neurolinguist in China, has also made a
related discussion11 : “Direct language communication is also a necessary link for
children to master language. A child can only hear the language he is speaking, but he
cannot master the language. He also needs some good stimulation from the speech
environment; that is, to enable him to learn to speak by talking with others in an
environment where he can communicate with others.” Those as mentioned above
internal feedback and external feedback mechanisms revealed by the child language
acquisition model based on semantic perception provide neurophysiological support
for this assertion, which proves that this assertion is scientific. Not only that Professor
Wang also cited a typical case to support the above argument.12 There is an American
boy whose hearing is normal, but his parents are deaf, because of this reason they
communicate with the child in sign language. The communication between visitors
and his parents is also in sign language, while the boy himself can only stay at home
11 Wang, D. C. Neurolinguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. 1997.

12 Ibid.
because of asthma. Although he can get in touch with English from TV programs,
he still can’t understand and speak English. When he was about 3 years old, he was
able to communicate with others skillfully in sign language. This shows that chil-
dren should not only have the conditions to listen to the language, but also have the
chances to communicate directly with language users. That is to say, children can’t
learn a language only by listening, but should also have a direct conversation with
other language users.
5.5.1.3 Child Language Acquisition Model and Foreign Language

Classroom Teaching Design
Through the model mentioned above of child language acquisition based on semantic
perception, especially the model mentioned above of internal feedback and external
feedback mechanisms reveal that the rule that ‘real-time two-way speech interaction
with real communicators is a necessary and sufficient condition for language learners
to develop their listening and speaking abilities.’ As well as the typical case of the
normal American child who failed to learn English due to the lack of linguistic
communication environment. The introduction of examples should lead us to think
seriously about the current situation of foreign language teaching and learning, and
draw some useful lessons for foreign language teaching design.
(1) Since ‘real-time two-way verbal interaction’ (i.e., ‘verbal communication’ or
dialogue with each other) is a necessary and sufficient condition for developing
listening and speaking ability, our foreign language teaching design (either for
beginners or for language learners with a certain foundation) must emphasize
‘verbal communication as the center’ rather than ‘grammar analysis as the cen-
ter.’ It should not be ‘centered on listening training’ or ‘centered on reading and
writing training.’ Though the foreign language teaching in China has taken more
than ten years from elementary school, middle school to university, yet the final
result is still ‘deaf English’ and ‘dumb English.’ The most fundamental reason
for its failure is that it does not focus on verbal communication, but in practice,
it focuses on grammatical analysis or explanation of linguistic knowledge, and
emphasizes reading and writing while ignoring listening and speaking training
(whether in classroom teaching, daily exercises, or test). This practice of foreign
language teaching must not continue—it is time for a radical change.
(2) To enable language learners to achieve ‘real-time two-way speech interaction,’
as mentioned above, a real ‘communicator’ is needed, and the communicator
should be a proficient language learner. In foreign language teaching, such ‘com-
municators’ can only be teachers. In order to enable language learners (students
in the class) to generally realize ‘real-time two-way speech interaction’ (verbal
communication), teachers are required to ask as many questions as possible to
students in the class in foreign language; that is, teacher–student dialogue guided
by teachers (such dialogue should not only focus on a few students, but also
spread to every student as far as possible) should be implemented. However,
classroom teaching time is limited (only 40 min for a primary school lesson
and 45 min for a secondary school), and teachers cannot spend all their time on
teacher–student dialogue, but also need to complete other teaching objectives
and tasks. What can one do? It is an optional scheme to organize a one-to-one dia-
logue between two neighboring students, which is also an operable scheme that
can effectively implement ‘real-time two-way speech interaction.’ Of course,
there is a flaw in this kind of interaction: neither of the two communicators is
a proficient speaker of the language at present, so it is difficult to correct each
other’s phonetic, grammatical and semantic errors in the process of communica-
tion. However, this kind of interaction has a great advantage: every student has
the opportunity to participate in the two-way interaction, which is the highest
degree of participation, so that the teaching idea and teaching design centered
on verbal communication can be truly implemented, which is exactly what the
teacher–student dialogue mode guided by teachers lacks. The above analysis
shows that the teacher-led ‘teacher–student dialogue’ and the ‘two-way dia-
logue’ between neighboring students have their advantages and disadvantages
in real-time two-way speech interaction in classroom teaching, and they can
complement each other’s strengths and weaknesses. In classroom teaching, if
the two modes of verbal communication can be well combined (e.g., teachers
use less time to ask questions—to provide a demonstration, and then leave more
time for students to talk with each other, so that each student can fully interact in
two directions), the most ideal effect will be achieved. Therefore, ‘teacher–stu-
dent dialogue’ guided by teachers and ‘two-way dialogue’ between neighboring
students should become most basic and important teaching activities in English
classroom teaching. As for how to grasp the ‘degree’ of the two in the process of
teaching (i.e., how much proportion each communicative mode should account
for in time), it is a problem that foreign language classroom teaching design
should seriously study and try to solve.
(3) It can be seen from the ‘semantic perception-based model for children’ shown
in Fig. 4.6 that if the speech input is not from the real verbal communica-
tor, but from the recorder or other digital audio-video system (in the case of
‘autonomous listening’), the internal and external feedback loops will be inter-
rupted. Because the two-way verbal interaction cannot be realized at this time.
From the perspective of speech comprehension (i.e., ‘listening’) training, it
will be difficult to achieve the ideal listening goal (because it cannot meet the
necessary and sufficient conditions for listening training). However, as can be
seen from Fig. 4.6, although the feedback loop is disconnected at this time,
‘speech perception (spectrum analysis),’ ‘speech discrimination,’ ‘word mean-
ing recognition,’ ‘phrase (chunk) production,’, and semantic recognition are still
in progress. This shows that it is feasible to train language learners’ psycho-
logical processing abilities such as speech perception and discrimination, word
recognition, phrase production, and semantic recognition through tape recorders
or other digital audio and video systems (the ultimate result is to improve their
understanding of current input, i.e., listening), by this kind of training. Although
‘autonomous listening’ is not a sufficient condition for training listening, it is
still a necessary condition. Although the effect of autonomous listening is infe-

rior to that of two-way speech interaction, it is still an effective means to improve
foreign language listening. The disadvantage is that it is difficult to acquire and
master contextual knowledge and that learners’ errors in phonetics, grammar, or
semantics in the process of speech comprehension cannot be corrected imme-
diately through instant feedback. In foreign language teaching, recorders and
digital audio and video systems are still widely used at home and abroad, which
can compensate for the deficiencies of listening training environment through
autonomous listening. Besides, the practice has proved that for foreign language
learning, a large amount of ‘listening’ is the basis of ‘speaking.’ In learning all
foreign languages, we should pay attention to the input of a large amount of
language information; that is, a large amount of listening and reading. In the
process of language input (listening, reading), learners will naturally absorb
a lot of useful language knowledge. We have made such a discovery in the
experiment of English teaching reform in China, that if the experimental class
and parallel class are taught with the same teaching ideas and methods, but the
students in the experimental class have ‘one person, one device’ self listening
environment, while the students in the parallel class do not have. Students in
the parallel class can only listen and read together with their classmates through
a tape recorder or a large screen. There was no significant difference in listen-
ing and oral expression ability between the experimental class and the parallel
class before the experiment. After one year (or even half a year), the experi-
ment results show that the former is much better than the latter in terms of both
listening and oral expression (especially in terms of richness and flexibility of
expression).
The experiment above shows that autonomous listening is not only good for
training students’ listening ability but also useful for improving students’ speak-
ing ability. Therefore, to enable students to listen independently to extensive
reading materials related to texts, which are rich in content, should become an
indispensable essential teaching activity in foreign language classroom teach-
ing, as well as ‘teacher-guided dialogue between teachers and students’ and
‘dialogue between two neighboring students.’
(4) From the model of child language acquisition based on semantic perception
shown in Fig. 4.6, we see that if there is no real speech communicator at the
input end, and no recorder or other digital audio and video equipment, this
is equivalent to the situation where language learners practice speaking inde-
pendently (including reading foreign poems or foreign jingles). Because the
two-way speech interaction cannot be realized at this time, the feedback loop
inside and outside is interrupted. From the perspective of speech production
(i.e., ‘speaking’) training, it will be difficult to achieve the goal of fluent speech
ability (because it cannot meet the necessary and sufficient conditions for speech
training at this time); but from Fig. 4.6, it can be seen that although the feedback
loop has been disconnected at this time, ‘semantic matching,’ ‘chunk separa-
tion,’ ‘word determination,’ ‘phoneme planning,’ and ‘pronunciation planning,’
so on. Psychological processing is still in progress. This shows that it is fea-

sible to train language learners’ mental processing abilities such as semantic
matching, chunk separation, word determination, phonological planning, and
pronunciation planning by letting them practice their way (using foreign lan-
guage to say things, people, things, or to say things fluently or recite foreign
poetry). Because this kind of ‘autonomous speaking’ is not a sufficient condi-
tion for training speaking ability, but it is still an essential condition. Although
the effect of autonomous speech is inferior to that of two-way speech interac-
tion, it is still an effective means to improve foreign language speaking ability.
Its shortcomings are the same as the way of autonomous listening: firstly, it is
difficult to acquire and master contextual knowledge; secondly, it is impossible
to correct learners’ errors in phonetics, grammar or semantics in the process
of utterance production and expression through instant feedback of two-way
interaction. In foreign language teaching, so far, autonomous speaking is still
widely used at home and abroad to make up for the shortcomings of the speaking
training environment, which is based on that.
(5) Through the above analysis, we can draw the following conclusions about how
to implement ‘verbal communication-centered’ foreign language teaching idea
and teaching design in the classroom:
The three best and most basic teaching activities to cultivate listening and speak-
ing ability are teacher–student dialogues guided by teacher’s questions, two-
way dialogues between neighboring students, and machine autonomous listen-
ing. These three activities have their advantages and disadvantages. If they are
well combined, they can complement each other (the reasons are as mentioned
above). Especially the first two methods can achieve better results because they
have the characteristics of ‘real-time two-way speech interaction’ (i.e., ‘verbal
communication’). Similar to these two approaches are ‘three or more group
dialogues’ between students and ‘role-playing’ in which several students par-
ticipate at the same time. The latter two ways also have specific interaction (can
also achieve verbal communication), so it is also beneficial to the training of
speaking ability, but the latter two ways of learners’ participation are not so
useful as ‘teacher–student dialogues’ and ‘dialogues between the two.’ There-
fore, as far as verbal communication is concerned, the two main ways should
be ‘teacher–student dialogues’ and ‘two-person dialogues’ (i.e., these two ways
can be used as a regular and basic way of verbal communication), while the
latter two ways (i.e., ‘three-person or more group dialogues’ and ‘role-playing’
should be chosen appropriately).
Another effective and commonly used way to promote verbal ability is ‘speaking
independently’; that is, letting students independently describe an object or an event
(including time, place, person, reason, process, result) in a foreign language. They
can also speak casually or recite foreign poetry and proverbs. The reason why we
should attach importance to the theory of autonomy has been explained in (4) above
and will not be repeated here.
Since speech comprehension (i.e., listening) and speech production (i.e., speaking)
are two closely related speech activities, and they are accomplished by common
speech centers (including Wernicke and Broca concept centers); in addition, the
purpose of speech is to communicate—to ideas and feelings. Unless one is in an
unusual situation, people don’t usually speak to oneself, but people always have
to understand what the other person is saying before one say it. It can be seen that
‘speaking’ should be based on ‘listening.’ If you can’t understand each other’s speech
well, it is impossible to express your meaning accurately to achieve communicative
purposes. Therefore, our emphasis on ‘verbal communication as the center’ does not
mean neglecting the training of listening; on the contrary, we should reinforce the
practice of listening.
As for listening training, the best way is through teacher-guided ‘teacher–student
dialogue’ and ‘two-person dialogue’ between neighboring students, while ‘three-
person or more group dialogue’ and ‘role-playing’ involving several students are
ways to assist listening training.
Another effective and commonly used way to develop listening is ‘autonomous
listening.’ Recorders or other digital devices can provide the required materials. With
the increasing popularity of network applications, there are more and more digital
foreign language (mainly English) listening materials available on the Internet for
learners’ autonomous listening training. The reason why we should attach importance
to ‘autonomous listening’ has been explained in (3), above, which is not repeated
here.
5.5.2 Practical Significance of ‘Child Semantic Perception

Curve’ to Foreign Language Teaching
Language sensitivity curve shown in Fig. 5.2 has at least the following practical
implications for current foreign language teaching in China:
(1) As can be seen from Fig. 5.2, the key period of child’s semantic perception
development is about 0–12 years old (before the first and second grades in
junior middle school), and the optimum age is 0–9 years old. In other words, our
foreign language teaching must grasp the ‘critical period’ of semantic perception
development at the primary stage (especially the best age of grades 1–4 in this
critical period); if conditions permit children to have access to listening and
speaking in foreign languages before school age, the effect will be better.
(2) All hereditary features are related to the critical period of growth and devel-
opment. As mentioned above, among the four speech abilities of listening,
speaking, reading, and writing, only listening and speaking are mainly heredi-
tary, while reading and writing are mainly learned abilities. This shows that in
the critical period of semantic perception development (especially in the best
age-group in the critical period), foreign language teaching should emphasize
listening and speaking abilities, and should not put listening, speaking, reading,
and writing side by side, especially in the lower and middle grades of pri-
mary schools (i.e., grades 1–4). Otherwise, students will miss the opportunity
to acquire listening and speaking ability, and cause irreparable loss for learners.
(‘Reading and writing’ abilities are mainly learned, basically not limited by the
critical period of semantic perception development, so it is not too late to put
off the training of reading and writing ability until the senior grade or junior
middle school stage of primary school.)
(3) To effectively cultivate children’s listening and speaking abilities within the crit-
ical period (especially during the best age of the critical period), it is necessary
to create a good language environment for children to learn foreign languages
(lack of language environment is the root cause of the special difficulties in
second language learning). This language environment should support both lis-
tening and speaking training. If the necessary environment and experience (e.g.,
monocular visual deprivation of cats) are not provided during the critical period,
such functions cannot actually occur despite the inherent potential functions of
visual and semantic perception in the brain nerve center. It can be seen that while
emphasizing the critical period of semantic perception growth and development,
we should never neglect the role of relevant environment and experience (i.e.,
exercises in the relevant environment). Professor Sun Jiurong, of Peking Uni-
versity, once introduced his observation in this respect13 : ‘The author observed
rats living in a sensorimotor enriched environment in the Laboratory of Neu-
robiology of the First University of Marseilles.’ Rats lived in ‘sensorimotor
enriched’ environment with a variety of toy environments that could be grasped
and rolled, and accompanied by partners. Every day the experimenters played
with them. Rats living in a ‘sensorimotor impoverishment’ environment alone
without any gripping or rolling utensils and had a narrow living space. As a
result, the anterior paw sensorimotor representations in the cortex of the former
adults are larger than those in the latter. Furthermore, we can see that the number
and density of dendritic spines of the former are much higher than those of the
latter. It can be seen that the fullness of the connections between neural net-
works is plastic and directly affected by acquired environment and experience
(i.e., exercises in related environments), and the principle of ‘use it or lose it’ is
implemented.
(4) The problem of lack of environment for training foreign language ‘listening’ can
be solved by introducing multimedia teaching resources and rich listening mate-
rials on the Internet into the classroom; while the environment for training for-
eign language ‘speaking’ ability depends on the use of ‘verbal communication-
centered’ classroom teaching design by foreign language teachers. For this rea-
son, foreign language teachers should be specially trained in relevant instruc-
tional design skills; otherwise it will be difficult to achieve the results.
(5) The principles mentioned above should be implemented not only in the process
of foreign language classroom teaching in primary and secondary schools (espe-
cially in primary schools), but also in the process of compiling new curriculum
13 Sun, J.R. Introduction to brain science. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.
standards and textbooks for foreign languages. Only in this way can we solve the
problem fundamentally. Otherwise, the backward situation of foreign language
teaching in our country will not change much if we only treat the symptoms and
not the root causes.
Nowadays, there is a common phenomenon in teaching and research all over
the country, which underscores the importance of listening, speaking, reading, and
writing in English learning for primary school students. According to Semantic
Perception Theory, it is unscientific and biased to put forward such requirements for
pupils. In addition, the current school tests and examinations tend to focus on word
recognition, word parsing, and sentence comprehension. The objective effect of such
tests and examinations is to emphasize reading and writing rather than listening and
speaking. Therefore, in fact, at the present stage of primary school English teaching
in our country, we do not attach equal importance to listening, speaking, reading
and writing (as mentioned above, the proposition of paying equal attention to four
skills has been biased toward pupils), but focus on ‘reading, writing’ and ignore
‘listening, speaking’ (even for pupils in lower grades), which makes the nature and
consequences of the above errors more serious. Obviously, the occurrence of such
errors is inseparable from the critical period when teachers and researchers neglect or
do not understand the existence of semantic perception. This shows that the present
pedagogic situation has put forward a very urgent requirement for popularizing the
knowledge of ‘Semantic Perception Theory.’
5.6 Perceptibility of Speech
Next, let’s discuss the second question raised at the beginning of this chapter; namely,
what kind of perception speech ability has. As mentioned earlier, perception refers
to what perceptual system speech ability belongs to. Among the four speech abilities
of ‘listening, speaking, reading, and writing,’ the ability of ‘speaking and writing’
is used for the production of information, involving speech expression, which is the
externalization of perception and thinking, so it does not belong to the category of
perception. The abilities of listening and reading are used to receiving information,
which involves speech comprehension. From the mental processing model given in
Figs. 4.4 and 5.1, it can be seen that the process of listening and reading is closely
related to certain perceptual system. Generally speaking, the perception of speech
should be concerned only with listening and reading.
It must be pointed out here that although both listening and reading abilities
are related to perception, they are not identical: perception of listening belongs to
semantic perception system, while perception of reading ability mainly belongs to
the visual system. The former is inherited, while the latter is acquired mainly from
learned knowledge, which is also closely related to different perceptual channels
they belong to.
The reason why the process of ‘listening and reading’ belongs to different percep-
tual systems is determined by the neurophysiological mechanism that supports the
psychological processing of ‘listening and reading.’ As can be seen from Fig. 4.4,
the psychological processes related to listening (i.e., oral comprehension) include
spectral analysis, speech discrimination, word recognition, phrase production, and
semantic recognition. The neurophysiological mechanisms involved are subcortical
low-level semantic perception center and cerebral high-level semantic perception
center. From Sect. 2.4.2, Chap. 2, we see that the lower semantic perception centers
under the cortex include four levels; namely, cochlear nuclei (subcortical first level) >
olive nuclei (subcortical second level) > hypothalamus (subcortical third level) > tha-
lamic occipital (subcortical fourth level). The functions of these four lower linguistic
centers are to complete the perception of speech, i.e., ‘spectral analysis.’ Advanced
centers include three speech centers: Wernicke Area, Broca Area, and concept cen-
ters. Their functions are speech recognition, word (meaning) recognition, phrase
production, and semantic relationship recognition. In the whole nervous central sys-
tem involved in speech comprehension (i.e., ‘hearing’), except for the overlap of the
first and second lower central nervous systems, sensory organs (ears), afferent nerves
(long axons of spiral ganglion), and auditory system. All the other neurophysiologi-
cal mechanisms (including the latter two lower central nervous systems in subcortex
and all three higher levels of the cerebral cortex) are involved. All of them belong to
semantic perception system. Therefore, we can confirm that the perception of speech
hearing is fundamentally supported by linguistic (or semantic) perception system.
As can be seen from Fig. 5.1, the psychological processing related to reading
ability (i.e., written language comprehension) includes text perception, text discrim-
ination, word recognition, phrase production, and semantic identification. The neu-
rophysiological mechanisms involved include the lower visual center in subcortex
and the higher visual center in cerebral cortex, as well as the higher linguistic center.
From Sect. 2.2, Chap. 2, we see that the lower visual center in subcortex only contains
the lateral geniculate body of the posterior thalamus, which completes the percep-
tion of the written symbols (forming the representation information of the characters,
figures, and contours). The higher visual center of the cerebral cortex is the basic
Area of the visual cortex, V1, which completes the initial visual perception. And
then the contact Area of the visual cortex, V2, which completes the analysis of char-
acters (forming the representation of words in order of their geometric and stroking
features). And the next are the advanced linguistic centers, including Broca Area
and the conceptual centers, whose functions are to complete semantic perception
recognition, phrase production and semantic relationship recognition. In the whole
nervous system involved in reading process, in addition to the higher linguistic and
conceptual centers of the cerebral cortex (Broca Area and conceptual center); the
other neurophysiological mechanisms include the lower central and sensory organs
in subcortex, the afferent nerve (i.e., the whole visual channel under the cortex), and
the other higher central part of the cerebral cortex. The basic Area of the visual cortex
V1 and contact Area V2 all belong to the visual system. So we can confirm that the
perception of reading ability is basically supported by both visual system and the lin-
guistic system. However, from the neurophysiological mechanism involved, the role
5.6 Perceptibility of Speech 109
of visual system seems to be greater (especially subcortical processing is completed

by visual channels). Therefore, we believe that if the perception of reading ability is
mainly attributed to the visual system, so it is reasonable to say that reading ability
can be explained primarily through postnatal learning.
Chapter 6
Semantic Perception Theory
and Pavlov’s ‘Two Signal Systems’
In addition to several theories of child language development introduced in the first

chapter, which is closely related to the acquisition process of child language, there
is another theory. Although it does not belong to theories of child language develop-
ment, it has a direct relationship with human perception and learning process. This
theory is Pavlov’s ‘Two Signal Systems.’ It has a significant influence on the acqui-
sition process of child language and has a particular relationship with the theory of
language perception. We must pay enough attention to it. In order to illustrate the
relationship between ‘Two Signal Systems’ and Semantic Perception Theory, it is
necessary to understand the historical background, basic content, and neurophysio-
logical mechanism of ‘Two Signal Systems’.
6.1 Historical Background of Theory of ‘Two Signal

System’
Ivan Pavlov is a Russian physiologist and Nobel Prize winner in physiology. His
life’s research involves three aspects: blood circulation, digestive gland activity, and
advanced nervous activity. Among them, he found the theory of ‘conditioned reflex’
by studying the law of animal’s advanced nervous activity.
The concept of ‘reflex’ was the first put forward in the history of human beings. It
is generally considered that Descartes, a French philosopher of the seventeenth cen-
tury, viewed all the random activities of animals and humans (such as stimulating the
cornea to cause blinking and immediately retracting from the burning heat of hands
and feet) as a kind of reflex reaction (he did not use the word ‘reflex’ at that time)—an
automatic response to external stimuli. Subsequent practice proved that the concept
proposed by Descartes is precious—it plays a vital role not only in neurophysiology
but also in the development of psychology. However, as a philosopher, Descartes did
not study the neurophysiological mechanism of reflex, its formation, and change.
The first pioneer to study reflex from the perspective of brain neurophysiology was

112 6 Semantic Perception Theory and Pavlov’s ‘Two Signal Systems’
the nineteenth-century British physiologist Sherrington,1 who studied the reflex arcs
formed by more than two kinds of nerves and their functions. Unfortunately, Sher-
rington believed that reflex was achieved by the spinal cord, so his research was
limited to the spinal cord and did not involve cerebral cortex. Later, Schechenov2
developed Sherington’s research work, which extended reflexes to all brain activities
(not just the spinal cord). In his famous book Brain Reflection, he pointed out that
‘all activities of conscious and unconscious life, in terms of the way they occur, are
reflections’; ‘everything… psychological activities, without exception, all developed
through reflection’. Besides, Shechenov also associates reflex with inhibition of the
nerve center.3 In this way, the concept of reflection has a richer and deeper meaning.
Based on endowing reflex with new connotation, Schechenov also analyzed the
neural process model of a reflex activity and pointed out that it contains three main
links4 :
(1) Initial link: the process of nerve excitation caused by external stimuli and trans-
mitted to the brain through afferent nerves;
(2) Mid-link: neurological processes and its corresponding psychological activities
occurring in the brain center;
(3) End link: the nervous process in which commands are sent from the central
nervous system to the effector organ and cause the activity of the effector organ
(such as behavior, action, speech).
Through the researches as mentioned above on neural process model of reflex
activity, Schechenov reveals that psychological activities and psychological phe-
nomena are in the middle link of reflex, thus demonstrating that the essence of
psychological activities is reflex. Also, because the mid-link is directly related to
the initial link (the incentive of the initial link causes the activity of the mid-link), it
means that the source of all psychological activities is the role of the outside world
that is caused by the sensory organs. At the same time, because the psychological
process is a reflex activity, it is not only directly related to the initial reflex but also
closely related to the end of reflex that includes human behavior and other activities.
In this way, through the study of the neurological process of reflex activity,
Schechenov has thoroughly solved the long-debated question about ‘what is the
essence of psychology and what relationship it has with external stimuli.’ It is gener-
ally acknowledged that psychology is a science that studies the law of psychological
activities, but what are ‘psychological’ and ‘psychological activities’? What is the
essence of psychology? For a long time, no one could tell. From the origin of English
word psychology, we see that it is composed of two ancient Greek words ‘psyche’ and
1 Shechenov: Russian physiologist (1829–1905).

2 Ye, H. S. (ed.). The essence of psychological theory. Fuzhou: Fujian Education Publishing House.
2000.
3 Shechenov, A. A., The development and present situation of Soviet psychological science. People’s
Education Publishing House, 1984.

2000.
6.1 Historical Background of Theory of ‘Two Signal System’ 113
‘logos.’ The former means ‘mind’ or ‘soul,’ while the latter ‘narration’ or ‘explana-
tion.’ Together, the former means ‘interpretation of mind or soul’.5 It can be said that
the ancient Greek philosophers defined psychology, while ‘soul’ was the understand-
ing of the essence of psychology. Wilhelm Wundt, the founder of modern psychology,
regards feeling as a component of psychology, tries to decompose psychology into
some essential elements such as feeling, and then finds out their relationship and
laws one by one to understand the essence of psychology. On the contrary, Gestalt
psychologists do not advocate the decomposition of psychology into elements and
recognize them. Psychological activity is a whole, a Gestalt, while functional psy-
chology regards psychology as a stream of consciousness. Behavioral psychology,
represented by J.B. Watson, simply denies the existence of internal psychological
activity process and emphasizes the study of specific behavior.
Through the comparative analysis of the views mentioned above on the nature
of psychology, it is not difficult to see that Schechenov’s view is more in line with
dialectical materialism, and has been supported by neurophysiology of the brain, so
it has gradually become the necessary consensus of psychological circles at home
and abroad. For example, in the current textbooks and monographs of ‘psychology’
or ‘general psychology,’ it is generally accepted that psychology is the mechanism
of the nervous system, especially the function of the brain and that the brain is the
organ of the mind.6,7,8 This view comes from Schechenov’s idea of reflection. In
the book, Physiological Psychology published by Peking University Press in July
2001, the concept of ‘psychological activity’ is defined as ‘psychological activity is
the reflection process of the brain to the outer world.’ This process begins with the
sensation aroused by the external world and results in response to external stimuli
(actions, actions or emotions, language reactions, etc.). Comparing this definition
with the above-mentioned ‘three links’ of the reflex active nervous process, it is not
difficult to see that the two have the same connotation, which can be said to be the
same. These facts strongly prove that Shechenov’s research on reflex activity has
indeed laid a solid foundation for modern psychology, and it still plays a role till
now.
Besides, since all kinds of human activities are ultimately related to some muscle
movement, and movement is the final link of reflex, it must be in harmony with the
perception of the beginning link. Through perception, people can understand not only
the object of reflex (the nature of external stimulus) but also the content of reflex (how
to react to external stimulus), as well as the result of reflex (whether the expected goal
has been achieved). Therefore, Shechernov believes that the coordination of motion
and perception is the essential function of the neuro- regulator. That is, perception can
identify the results of the main body’s movement to determine whether the expected
goal has been achieved. This identification is carried out not only at the end of the
action but also in the course of action execution, which makes it possible for the
5 Zhang, H. C. (ed.). University psychology, Beijing: Peking University Press. 2002.

6 Ye,Y. Q., & Zhu, P. L. (ed.). Psychology. Wuhan: South China Normal University Press. 1992.
7 Peng, D. L. (ed.), General Psychology. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press. 2001.
8 Wu, L. D., Li, B. S. & Wu, F. Y. Psychology. People’s Education Press. 1990.
main body to correct and adjust at any time in the course of action.9 This brilliant
thought is the earliest origin of the concept of ‘feedback’ in cybernetics and ‘return
afferent’ in neurophysiology.
Pavlov is aware of the great and far-reaching significance of Schechenov’s research
on the neurological process of reflex activity, so he highly praised it as ‘the genius
waving of Russian scientific thought’ and ‘the important contribution of Russian
wisdom to an important branch of natural science’.10 He not only fully inherited
Schechenov’s scientific thought that psychology is reflex, but also here on this basis,
and people have carried out a long-term experimental exploration of animal and
human reflex activities. After 20 years of hard work, Shechernov’s theoretical spec-
ulation on the nature of psychology was finally confirmed by experiments, and a
unique ‘conditioned reflex theory’ was established. This theory first divided the
reflection of the organism into two kinds: innate unconditional reflex and learned
conditioned reflex. Then, it focuses on the establishment process of conditioned
reflex, physiological mechanism, multilevel conditioning, generalization, differen-
tiation, and inhibition of conditioned reflex. Finally, he realized that the essence of
conditioned reflex activity was signal activity in the cerebral cortex. The physiolog-
ical mechanism of this signal activity is the ‘temporary nerve connection’ formed
by the action of conditioned stimuli in the cerebral cortex. A large number of con-
ditioned stimuli form a large number of temporary nerve connections, also known
as the ‘temporary nerve connection system.’ Because this temporary nerve connec-
tion system corresponds to and supports various signal activities, Pavlov regards it
as a signal system. As mentioned above, any reflex activity (i.e., signal activity) is
caused by external stimuli, so Pavlov classifies the signal system into two categories
according to the nature of external stimuli. The conditioned reflex system established
by using specific things as conditioned stimuli is called the first signal system; the
conditioned reflex system established by using words (or speech) as conditioned
stimuli is called the second signal system. This is Pavlov’s definition of ‘Two Signal
Systems’. Usually, people see that plum can quench thirst (‘hope for plum to quench
thirst’) is the activity of the first signal system caused by the specific thing ‘plum’
as a conditioned stimulus, while talking about tigers makes people feel afraid (‘turn
pale at the mention of a tiger’) is the activity of the second signal system caused by
the abstract word ‘tiger’ as a conditional stimulus.
9 Scehchenov, A. A., The development and present situation of Soviet psychological science. People’s
Education Publishing House, 1984.

10 Ibid.
6.2 Basic Contents and Physiological Mechanisms of ‘Two Signal Systems’ 115
6.2 Basic Contents and Physiological Mechanisms of ‘Two

Signal Systems’
As mentioned in the previous section, the essence of conditioned reflex activity is

signal activity in the cerebral cortex. In order to understand this essence, a careful
analysis of the basic contents of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and its neurophysiological
mechanism is needed. Next, we analyze the first signal system (a conditioned reflex
system using specific things as conditioned stimuli) and then the second signal system
(a conditioned reflex system using words as conditioned stimuli).
6.2.1 Establishment of Basic Conditions

and Neurophysiological Mechanisms of Conditioned
Reflex
Regarding the conditioned reflex system (the first signal system) which uses specific
things as conditioned stimuli, Pavlov believes that its physiological mechanism is to
establish a ‘temporary nerve connection’ between the excitation centers induced by
conditioned stimuli and those caused by unconditional stimuli in the cerebral cortex.
For example, in Pavlov’s conditioned reflex experiment with dogs, dogs produce
saliva when they eat food, which is an unconditional reflex. A single bell stimulation
does not induce salivary secretion in dogs, but if the bell is given with food at the
same time or later, and the combined effect occurs many times, the salivary secretion
in dogs will occur when the bell appears again alone. This shows that the ringtone
becomes a signal of food, and the unrelated stimulus, which has no meaning to the
organism—the ringtone is transformed into a signal stimulus which indicates a certain
meaning (food), also known as the conditioned stimulus. It can be seen that the basic
condition for the establishment of a conditioned reflex is the close coordination of
unconditional stimulus (bell) and unconditional stimulus (food) in time (the former
occurs before or at the same time). In the above experiments, two excitation centers11
were formed in the cerebral cortex of the dog when the dog was given bell stimulation
at the same time or a little earlier. One was caused by unrelated stimulation (bell),
in the unconditional stimulation (food) located at the auditory center, and the other
one was caused by unconditional stimulation (food) in the dietary center. According
to Pavlov’s theory, there are two forms of high-level nervous activity, excitation
and inhibition, following the ‘diffusion and concentration rule.’ (After excitation or
inhibition occurs in a part of cerebral cortex, it does not stay at the primary point,
but propagates along the cortex to the adjacent Areas, so that the adjacent Areas also
produce the same excitation or inhibition activities, called ‘diffusion.’ Stimulation
or inhibition also tends to converge from the spreading cortex to the primary site,
2000.
a phenomenon called ‘concentration.’ Advanced nervous activity, whether exciting

or inhibiting, always interacts in a diffuse or concentrated way, which is the law
of diffusion and concentration of nervous activity.) According to this rule, there
will be a ‘temporary nerve connection’ between the two excitation centers in the
cerebral cortex. If the combined action of bell and food occurs many times, this
nervous process is strengthened, and the temporary nerve connection is gradually
entrenched. Even if the ringtone stimulation is given alone, the excitation center can
be transmitted from the auditory center of the cortex to the dietary center along with
the temporary nerve connection, and then down to the salivary gland through the
medulla, which would cause salivary secretion, too. A conditioned reflex it is. It
can be seen that the neurophysiological mechanism of the conditioned reflex system
(i.e., the first signal system) formed by using specific things as conditioned stimuli
is the temporary nerve connection between the two excitation centers stimulated by
conditioned stimuli and unconditional stimuli in the cerebral cortex.
6.2.2 Basic Contents and Neurophysiological Mechanisms

of the Second Signal System
6.2.2.1 Basic Contents of the Second Signal System
Pavlov began to develop the concept of the second signal system in 1924 when he
wrote a textbook for the Military Medical University: Lectures on the Functions of
the Two Hemispheres of the Brain. Although the names of the first and second signal
systems are not yet used in this textbook, he has analyzed the meaning of words
as signals of conditioned stimuli from a physiological point of view. He pointed
out12 : “Words, like other stimuli shared by humans and animals, are also a realistic
conditioned stimulus, but this stimulus is so vast and abundant that no other stimuli
possess; in terms of quantity or quality, it cannot be used to compare animals with
those conditioned stimuli. Because of all the life relations of adults, words are asso-
ciated with all external and internal stimuli that reach the cerebral hemisphere, and
are always used as signals to replace these stimuli at any time; words can trigger
actions and reactions determined by those stimuli to the organism at any time.”
Pavlov put forward the term ‘second signal system’ and formed the theory of ‘Two
Signal Systems’ which was more than three years later in his book on conditioned
reflex; he put it this way: “In the developing animal kingdom, at the stage of human
beings, a special additive to the nervous system occurs. For animals, the reality is
almost exclusively signaled by stimuli from specialized cells that directly reach the
visual, auditory, and other sensory organs of the organism, as well as the traces left
by these stimuli in the brain hemisphere. This is what human have as impressions,
12 Pavlov,
I. Human first and second signal systems, Translated by Zhao Biru from Soviet Teacher,
August 13, 1952.
feelings, and representations from their surroundings, whether natural or social, in

addition to the words people hear and see. This is the first material signal system
human share with animals. Words, however, constitutes the second signal system of
human’s unique reality, which is the signal of the first signal. The countless stimuli of
words, on the one hand, divorce human from reality, so people should remember this
point and not misinterpret their relationship with reality; on the other hand, it is words
that make people human. Undoubtedly, the basic rules determined in the activities
of the first signal system should also govern the second signal system, because they
are all activities from the same kind of nerve tissue.” Pavlov also pointed out that
“the new principle of nervous activity, that is, the abstraction of innumerable signals
from the first signal system, is caused by the second signal system. For people, this
principle restricts the possibilities of indefinitely determining directions in the world
around them, and also creates the advanced adaptability of human beings—science”.
In another critical paper, Pavlov gave a more concise and accurate description of
the concept of the second signal system, which has the same meaning as the above two
paragraphs13 : “If our sense and expression of the world around us is the first actual
signal, the specific signal, then speech, first of all, is the kind of dynamic stimulation
from the speech organ to the cerebral cortex. It is the second signal; that is, the
signal of the abstraction of reality. It can be summarized, it constitutes the unique
high-level thinking of human beings, which first creates the general experience of
humans, and finally creates Science - the advanced orientation tool of human beings
in the surrounding world.” From these quotations, it can be seen that Pavlov’s thought
has developed from the original one; the second signal is no longer only attributed
to ‘words,’ but correctly attributed to ‘speech’ (that is, the use of language). In his
later years, more and more attention has been paid to the importance of language in
the development of logical thinking (i.e., the use of concepts to analyze, synthesize,
abstract, generalize, judge, and reason psychological activities), and the loss of logical
thinking ability is directly related to obliteration of the second signal system.
6.2.2.2 Physiological Mechanism of the Second Signal System
Pavlov’s above viewpoints profoundly discuss essential contents of the second signal
system (including the essential features of the second signal system, significance to
the development of human thinking, and the internal relationship between the second
signal system and the first signal system). On this basis, in order to further elucidate
the neurophysiological mechanism of the second signal system, Pavlov proposed a
model called ‘analyzer.’
Pavlov pointed out that analyzer is a complex nerve mechanism that transforms
external energy into nerve process. ‘The analyzer consists of the following parts:
certain peripheral endings—eyes, ears, etc.; the corresponding nerves and the brain
13 Pavlov, I. Twenty year experiment. Cited in Pipneirov, Translated by Zhang S. C. & Zhang, M.
X. Pavlov’s theory of two signal systems and Marxist-Leninist epistemology. Science Publishing
House, 1956.
endings of this nerve, that is, a nerve device composed of the cell group where the
nerve endings are located.’ The primary function of an analyzer is to decompose
the external world into various factors. Because of separate activities of various
analyzers, these factors can be perceived separately like the complex of perception
factors. The higher the level of brain development, the more complex the relationship
between them and their surroundings, and the more factors they have in the objective
world. Pavlov pointed out that ‘the whole body of low-level animals is an analyzer.’
The higher the level of development of animals, the more analyzers they have, the
more factors they can analyze, the more accurate the reflection of reality, and the better
they can adapt to the surrounding environment. For example, dogs can distinguish
between the sound differences of 101 and 104 Hz frequencies and can recognize small
changes in light stimulation, which enables dogs to respond quickly and accurately
in complex environments.
It is not problematic to see from the ‘composition’ and ‘function’ of the above
analyzer that Pavlov’s definition of analyzer consists of two different concepts from
the Encyclopedia of China mentioned in Sect. 2.1, Chap. 2. Where the analyzer only
refers to the sensory organs, and here the analyzer actually refers to the ‘sensory
system’ in modern neurophysiology, because, as described in Sect. 2.1, Chap. 2,
many psychologists believe that it is hard to divide the boundary between sensa-
tion and perception strictly and that the two should belong to a unified processing
system. This is because peripheral endings (eyes, ears, etc.) consist of peripheral sen-
sory organs, corresponding nerves, and the cell groups where the nerve endings are
located, namely afferent nerves and central systems (including the higher nerve cen-
ters in the cerebral cortex and the lower nerve centers in the subcortex). The so-called
function of decomposing the external world into various factors is the function of
analyzing the various attributes of objective things, which is the perceptual function.
According to the above analyzer model, Academician Bekov14 of Pavlov School
roughly described the neurophysiological mechanism of the second signal system
as: “The second signal system can ensure that people can form various words, which
represent audible and visible signals of different objects and phenomena. When each
word is uttered, the stimuli generated by the sensory (kinesthetic) tissue based on
the muscular system of speech organs are transmitted to the cortical endings of
the speech motion analyzer, and the stimuli are consistent with those evoked by
the same word and transmitted to the auditory analyzer in time. It is transmitted
to a speech analyzer rather than an auditory analyzer.” Ivanov Smolinsky, Pavlov’s
student, used a large number of experiments to prove that “the effects of word stimuli
occur through the transmission of excitation and inhibition from the second signal
system to the first signal system.” Because of people’s long-term life experience,
words are closely combined with various external and internal direct stimuli (i.e.,
the first signal, which acts on various objects and phenomena of our analyzers)
reaching different regions of the cerebral cortex. In other words, due to long-term
life experience and language use, words and expressions in the speech center are
14 Bekov, K. The theory of a second signal system, translated by Zhao Biru in Medical Worker, Vol.
29,1952.
developed, between the excitation centers and the excitation centers caused by various
external and internal direct stimulations reaching different cerebral cortex centers,
and a reasonably solid ‘temporary nerve connection’ has been established. Words can
become a representation or signal of these direct stimulations (i.e., the first signal) at
any time, thus causing actions or reactions determined by these direct stimulations
to organisms. This is why words or speech are called the second signal (or signal of
signals).
In summary, the conditioned reflex system (the second signal system) is formed
by using words or speech as conditioned stimuli. Its neurophysiological mechanism
is the stimulation of words in the auditory center (the speech center in Semantic Per-
ception Theory) and the corresponding excitation center caused by various external
or internal direct stimuli in the cerebral cortex, as well as some unconditional stimuli.
Temporary nerve connections are established between the excitation centers induced
by those three stimuli. For example, if you look at children who have undergone sev-
eral experiments of combining ringtone stimuli with electric finger shocks, you will
find that not only the use of ringtones alone will cause the contraction of children’s
fingers, but even the word ‘bell’ will cause the same contraction of fingers (which
is the main content of the Smolinski experiment mentioned above). The reason for
this reaction is that the word ‘bell’ has a temporary nervous connection between the
excitation center caused by the speech center and the excitation center resulted from
the direct stimulus (bell) it represents, which has been formed for many years due
to years of life experience and language use. As Pavlov’s student, Bekov15 pointed
out that: “Adults have a large number of speech signs, not through the stimulus of
the current word and the external specific object directly generated by combination
of the stimulus; but through the stimulus of current word and the past has been
formed as a variety of specific object stimulus signals to achieve.” When condi-
tioned stimuli (ringtones) and unconditional stimuli (electric shocks) are combined
to form conditioned reflexes, there will inevitably be a temporary nerve connection
among the three excitation centers stimulated by word stimuli, conditioned stimuli
and unconditional stimuli in the cerebral cortex (as described in Sect. 6.1)—as long
as conditioned reflexes are formed, conditioned stimuli and unconditional stimuli
will be established. There must be a temporary nerve connection between the two
excitation centers so that the pronunciation of words can become a signal of specific
things and will cause the same finger contraction response when the ringtone appears
(although the real ringtone stimulus is not present). This is precisely what Smolin-
sky pointed out—the conditioned reflex process which is caused by word stimulus
and transmitted from the second signal system to the first signal system through
temporary nerve connections.
29, 1952.
6.3 Importance of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and Interrelation

Between the Two Systems
6.3.1 Significance of Two Signal Systems for Human

Survival and Development
Conditioned reflex is a physiological phenomenon in terms of the establishment of

temporary nerve connections, but it plays a signaling role in terms of the meaning
of stimuli revealed by conditioned reflex, and the understanding of the meaning of
stimuli belongs to the category of psychology. It is for this reason that Schechenov
regards reflection as the essence of psychology. Since conditioned reflex is a kind of
signal activity, the establishment of conditioned reflex makes the original unrelated
stimulus becomes a kind of signal, indicating that something dangerous or related
to survival is imminent, so that organisms can decide their actions according to the
meaning of the signal, so as to better adapt to the surrounding environment. So,
how important is the conditioned reflex system for the survival and development of
organisms? As Pavlov16 pointed out, “If an animal can only grab a small amount of
food in front of it, it will often starve and die of hunger, so it must search for food
according to various occasional and temporary signs. That is, conditioned stimuli
(signal stimuli) that cause the animal to move in the direction of food, which will
eventually bring food into its mouth. Start the whole conditioned reflex activity. The
same is true of all good or bad things that are needed for the survival of organisms and
species, that is, things that need to be ingested or avoided from their surroundings.”
For example, when a beast smells a small animal or sees its footprint, it will search in
the corresponding direction. This is because the odor or footprint of a small animal has
been associated with the small animal many times and becomes a signal (conditional
stimulus) for the appearance of a small animal, thus causing the conditioned reflex
activity of ‘search.’ Similarly, once a small animal hears a roar or sees far any unusual
movement in the bush, it will run away immediately. Because this kind of sound or
environmental change has appeared many times at the same time with the beast,
it becomes the signal of the arrival of the beast and causes the conditioned reflex
activity of escape.
All the above-mentioned are conditioned reflex systems, i.e., the first signal sys-
tem, which is constructed by using specific things as conditioned stimuli. This kind
of conditioned reflex system is not only important for the survival and development
of animals but also human beings. For human beings, not only the first signal sys-
tem but also the conditioned reflex system, i.e., the second signal system, can be
established by using speech as a conditioned stimulus. Moreover, the second sig-
nal system plays a large role in the development of human thinking. As mentioned
above, Pavlov argues that “the new principle of nerve activity, that is, the general-
ization of the many signals abstracted from the first signal system, is caused by the
16 Pavlov, I. Objective study of animal higher neural activity (behavior) for twenty years, in Selected
Works of Pavlov,Beijing: social science Press. 1955.

6.3 Importance of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and Interrelation … 121
second signal system… For people, this principle restricts the possibility of indef-
initely determining directions in the world around them”; “Speech… is the second
signal. That is, it is the signal of signals, which is the abstraction of reality and can
be summarized. It constitutes the unique high-level thinking of human beings. This
thinking first creates the general experience of human beings and finally creates the
advanced orientation tool of science and human beings in the world around them.”
“It is words that make us human beings.” This shows that the second signal system is
the main symbol that distinguishes human beings from animals. Pavlov (1955)17 also
pointed out that: “Man, the most complex system, often practices so many, almost
innumerable conditional reflexes. It is not only often in a large general natural envi-
ronment, but also in a unique social environment that reaches the whole range of
human beings.” So temporary nerve connections are the most common physiologi-
cal phenomena in the animal kingdom and humans themselves. Conditioned reflex
is the central phenomenon in physiology. On this basis, Pavlov (1954)18 asserted
that: “Obviously, our education, teaching, all kinds of discipline training, all kinds
of habits are a series of conditioned reflexes.” In other words, through learning and
mastering knowledge and skills, students form normative moral behavior. In terms of
their neurological processes, they form conditioned reflexes, and their physiological
mechanisms are all temporary neural connections.
6.3.2 The Interrelation Between Two Signal Systems
Both animals and humans own the first signal system, and organisms can directly
reflect the objective world by relying on the first signal system. As mentioned above,
besides the first signal system, human beings also have the second signal system
(which is the unique signal system of human beings). By relying on the second sig-
nal system, human beings can make an indirect and generalized reflection of the
objective world, thus revealing the essential attributes of things and the internal rela-
tions between things. The Two Signal Systems of human beings are not independent
and unrelated, but interdependent and cooperative. Because there can be no second
signal system without the first signal system, and the activity of the second signal
system must be based on the first signal system. For example, if you want children to
use words that represent specific things (such as ‘apple’) as the conditional stimulus,
you should have children connect the word with the actual, specific apple (the first
signal) in advance, at least with the graphics or images of apple, which will make it
possible. If children are expected to use words that represent abstract concepts (such
as ‘morality’) as conditional stimuli, then it seems that there is no specific thing (the
first signal) directly corresponding to this abstract word that can be connected with
17 Ibid.
18 Pavlov,
I. Lecture on the function of both hemispheres of the brain (B), Shanghai: Shanghai
Medical Publishing House. 1954.
it. However, as Academician Bekov pointed out,19 the abstraction of such words ‘is
due to the complex chain formed by the second signal system when the stimuli of
one word are combined with those of other words…’ This kind of chain includes
a large number of links, and each link is based on the combination of one word’s
signal and another word’s signal; but the first link must be based on the combination
of word’s stimulus and external specific stimulus in the first signal system. That is
to say, there is no correspondence between the words representing abstract concepts
and the concrete things (the first signal), but this correspondence is not direct but
indirect (that is, through the links of other words, and this kind of link is often more
than one level). Taking the word ‘morality’ as an example, it generally includes
‘ethics,’ ‘public morality,’ ‘professional morality,’ ‘ethics’ and whether ‘filial piety
to parents,’ ‘love between husband and wife’ or ‘caring for children,’ and so on,
but whether filial piety to parents is associated with specific acts such as ‘respect,’
‘scolding,’ or ‘abuse’ (i.e., external specific stimulus in the first signal system). Tie
together; ‘professional ethics’ also involves ‘doctor’s ethics,’ ‘teacher’s ethics’ or
‘business ethics,’ and so on, while ‘doctor’s ethics’ is directly related to the attitude
toward patients and whether the operation is conscientious and responsible. It can
be seen that even words representing abstract concepts, as Bekov pointed out, begin
with a link that ‘must be based on the combination of word stimuli and external
specific stimuli in the first signal system.’ Therefore, without the support of the first
signal system, the activity of the second signal system is meaningless, and the latter
must be based on the former. This is one aspect of the relationship between the Two
Signal Systems.
Another aspect of this relationship is that, in the process of the Two Signal Systems
working together, although the first signal system is the basis, the second signal
system plays the leading role. For a neurologically sound person, his second signal
system will regulate and monitor the activities of the first signal system anytime
and anywhere, and this regulation and monitoring function are essential, quick, and
flexible. For example, when a child reaches for a rose, the adult says, ‘Don’t pick
it. There are thorns!’ The child will immediately retract his hand. Examples such
as the use of a second signal system to regulate and monitor the activities of a first
signal system are abundant. For humans, it is enough to say, ‘You do this’ or ‘You
don’t do this’ (for animals in general, it is never easy for you to influence or change
their behavior). As a matter of fact, teacher’s teaching process is also mainly through
speech (the second signal system) to achieve the purpose of promoting students’
mastery of knowledge and skills and helping to form the code of moral behavior
(of course, teachers’ speech and actions not only have a direct impact on students’
activities of the first signal system but also are essential to the development and
improvement of students’ second signal system). The reason why the second signal
system can play such a leading role is that human beings have formed abstract
29, 1952.
6.3 Importance of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and Interrelation … 123
thinking based on words, as Pavlov20 said: “In the final analysis, all complex human
relations have been transformed into the second signal system.”
It is through these interdependent synergies that the Two Signal Systems enable
people to complete various complex psychological activities.
6.3.3 Importance of ‘Two Signal Systems’

to the Development of Psychology
The Two Signal Systems not only play a vital role in the survival and development of
human beings but also have epoch-making significance in theory (especially in the
development of psychology). As mentioned earlier, Russian physiologist Schechenov
first put forward a precise idea of ‘the essence of psychological activity is reflection’
in the nineteenth century, which made psychology get rid of the superstition of ‘soul
interpretation’ and begin to build on the solid foundation of natural science. Although
Schechenov’s thought is logical, it is only a speculation or hypothesis, and it is not
a rigorous theory verified by experiments. Especially, Schechenov’s thought only
explains ‘what is the essence of psychological activity,’ but cannot explain ‘the law
of formation and development of psychological activity,’ let alone the essential dif-
ference between animal’s psychological activity and human’s psychological activity.
As mentioned earlier, Pavlov inherited and considerably developed Schechenov’s
thought in this respect. First, he distinguished the reflection of the organism studied
by Schechenov into two kinds: innate unconditional reflex and learned conditioned
reflex. Then, through 20 years, he made a systematic and in-depth experimental
study of the process, physiological mechanism, generalization, differentiation, vari-
ous inhibition phenomena and multilevel conditioning of conditioned reflex. Based
on this, then he proposed a far-reaching ‘conditioned reflex theory’. During the long-
term experimental and theoretical exploration of conditioned reflex, Pavlov realized
that the essence of reflex activity is the signal activity of cerebral cortex, and any
signal activity of cerebral cortex is caused by external stimulation. According to the
theory of conditioned reflex, in the case of conditioned reflex, the external stimulus
is also called conditioned stimulus, which prompts Pavlov to study the nature of the
conditioned stimulus seriously. And then, he discovered that there are two kinds of
conditioned stimulus (specific object stimulus and word stimulus) which are closely
related to each other and essentially different from each other. He divides the signal
system accordingly (i.e., reflex activity). On this basis, the theory of ‘Two Signal
Systems’ is formed. A large number of facts and scientific arguments show that the
first signal system is common to both animals and humans, while the second signal
system is unique to humans. In this way, Pavlov, through the theory of ‘conditioned
reflex’ and the ‘Two Signal Systems’ formed based on this theory, thoroughly solved
the problem that was not answered by the psychology world for a long time, which
20 Pavlov,
I. Human first and second signal systems, Translated by Zhao Biru from Soviet Teacher,
August 13, 1952.
was derived from Shechenov’s thought. That is, ‘how to form and develop psycho-
logical activities’ is mentioned above and ‘what is the essential difference between
animal psychology and human psychology.’
6.4 Relations and Differences Between ‘Semantic

Perception Theory’ and ‘Two Signal Systems’
Through the introduction of the historical background, basic content, significance,

neurophysiological mechanism, and interdependence of the ‘Two Signal Systems’ in
the preceding sections, we should have a comprehensive understanding of this the-
ory. Comparing the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ with the previous chapters, we
can find that although the theory is concerned with the signal activity of the cerebral
cortex, which belongs to the field of psychology; while semantic perception studies
the occurrence and development of children’s language as well as the understanding
and production of language, which belongs to the category of child language devel-
opment (i.e., child language studies). Similarly, if we look at the essence, there is
a specific internal relationship between the two studies. This connection is mainly
manifested in the following aspects.
6.4.1 Fundamental Differences Between Man and Animals
According to ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory, the first signal system is owned by both
animals and humans, and only the second system is unique to humans. Therefore,
the fundamental difference between humans and animals is whether they have the
second signal system. As mentioned earlier, the signal system is divided according
to the properties of conditioned stimuli. The so-called second signal system refers to
the conditioned reflex system established by using words or speech as a conditioned
stimulus. In other words, language refers to the use of words. This shows that accord-
ing to the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’, whether we can master and use language
(that is, whether we have language) is the fundamental symbol that distinguishes
human beings from animals.
According to Semantic Perception Theory, linguistic perception (semantic per-
ception) is the sixth kind of perception possessed by the brain, which is specially used
to sense and identify various semantic relations in oral language. Generally speak-
ing, the five senses (vision, hearing, taste, smell, and somatosensory) are shared by
animals and humans. Only semantic perception is unique to humans. Therefore, the
fundamental difference between humans and animals is whether they have semantic
perception or not. Since the semantic perception is to identify the semantic relation-
ship in oral language, it must be based on phonological perception and discrimination
6.4 Relations and Differences Between ‘Semantic Perception Theory’ … 125
as well as lexical and syntactic analysis, and the perception and identification of pho-
netics, lexicology, syntax, and semantics, which is essentially the understanding of
the whole speech. As described in Sect. 5.4, Chap. 5, ‘speech comprehension (i.e.,
‘listening’) and discourse production’ (speaking) are closely related and insepara-
ble processes. Therefore, we highlight that semantic perception is unique to human
beings, that is, the ability of ‘speech comprehension’ and ‘speech production’ is
unique to human beings. It is well known that the ability to understand and pro-
duce speech is the concrete embodiment of mastering and using language. As for
the reason why Semantic Perception Theory underscores that semantic perception
is ‘semantic perception’ rather than ‘linguistic perception’ or ‘speech perception,’ it
has been clearly explained in Sect. 2.5, Chap. 2: ‘Every perception should be innate
and inheritable. Since speech involves grammar (i.e., lexical and syntactic), gram-
matical rules vary from language to language. It cannot be acquired by heredity; the
meanings are different; it does not vary from language to language. The ability to
recognize semantics can be innate. It can be seen that if the name ‘speech perception’
is used, it will not guarantee the innate genetic attribute of this perception ability.
If ‘semantic perception’ is used, there will be no such problem. This indicates that
according to the Semantic Perception Theory, the following two views are essentially
identical, that is, the emphasis on semantic perception is unique to human beings and
the second signal system is unique to human beings according to the ‘Two Signal
Systems’ theory. Ultimately, whether human can master and use language (that is,
whether we have language) is the fundamental symbol of human being distinguish-
ing from animals. This is one of the internal relations between Semantic Perception
Theory and ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory.
Of course, the fact that the two theories are intrinsically related to each other on a
particular issue does not mean that they are identical to each other on this issue, but
there can still be some differences. As far as the fundamental mark distinguishing
humans from animals is concerned, both theories emphasize that this mark is lan-
guage, the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ refers to both spoken language composed
of speech strings and written language composed of text strings. As the former Soviet
psychologist Pipneirov pointed out21 : “When Pavlov talks about the second signal
system, he divides the traces into three categories: the sound traces of words he hears
and the visual traces of words he writes. Finally, the traces of kinesthesia; that is,
the stimulus traces of the applied parts that can be sensed”. The ‘trace’ here refers
to the impression that an external stimulus leaves in the brain. Therefore, it is clear
that Pavlov’s use of words (or speech) as the second signal of conditional stimulus
includes both words (or speech) in audible phonetic form and words (or speech) in
visible literal form; that is, both oral and written language. Semantic Perception The-
ory refers to only oral language. Although the psychophysiological processes and
neurophysiological mechanisms of reading and writing processes (involving writ-
ten language) are also analyzed in Semantic Perception Theory, the purpose is only
to make a comparative study of ‘reading and writing processes’ and ‘listening and
21 Pipneirov, translated by Zhang, S. C. & Zhang, M. X. Pavlov’s theory of two signal systems and
Marxist-Leninist epistemology, Beijing: Science Publishing House, 1956.

speaking processes.’ Ultimately, to better understand and reveal the ‘speech compre-
hension’ (i.e., listening) and ‘speech production’ (i.e., speech) of oral language—the
characteristics of mental processing and the essence of nervous activity. it is obvious
that the two theories are different in this respect.
6.4.2 The Relation Between Language and Thinking
According to ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory, language formed based on words is

prerequisite for the brain to have high abstraction and generalization and to form
abstract logical thinking peculiar to humans. As mentioned earlier, Pavlov believed
that ‘the new principle of nervous activity, that is, the abstraction of innumerable
signals from the first signal system, is caused by the second signal system.’ For
people, this principle restricts the possibility of indefinitely determining directions
in the world around them; speech is the second signal. It is the abstraction of reality.
It can be summarized. It constitutes the unique high-level thinking of human beings.
The reason why language plays such an important role in thinking is that although the
advanced form of logical thinking is judgment and reasoning, its basis is abstraction
and generalization. As just mentioned, language is indispensable for abstraction
and generalization. Pavlov pointed out22 that “Because of abstraction, the unique
attributes of highly generalized words, we can include our relationship with reality
in the general form of time, space, and causality. We regard them as ready-made
things and use them directly to orient in the surrounding reality, so we don’t have to
study the facts which are the basis of general form and concept”.
From Sect. 4 and Sect. 5 in Chap. 4, it can be seen that on the one hand, based
on the materialistic dialectical view that ‘language is the material shell of thinking’,
Semantic Perception Theory emphasizes that language is the basis of development of
thinking and without language, there can be no highly developed abstract thinking; on
the other hand, based on cognitive learning theory, it emphasizes that thinking ability
that belongs to the cognitive category can will inevitably have a significant impact
on the development of language ability. Therefore, Semantic Perception Theory
holds that language and thinking are inextricably linked, and the development of
language ability (i.e., listening, speaking, reading and writing) is closely related to
the development of thinking ability. Therefore, we insist on combining the cultivation
of language ability with the training of thinking. Only this way can we achieve the
ideal effect of complementing and promoting each other. Over the years, we have
carried out Chinese teaching reform experiments in primary and secondary schools
based on this guiding ideology (that is, the idea that language ability training should
be combined with thinking training) and achieved remarkable results, proving that
this guiding ideology is correct.
22 Pavlov,
I. Pavlov Wednesday Vol 3. Cited in Pipneirov Pavlov’s theory of two signal systems and
In terms of the importance of language to the development of thinking, the theory

of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and Semantic Perception Theory are basically the same—
both of them believe that language is the basis (or prerequisite) for the development
of advanced thinking, and there will be no highly developed abstract logical thinking
without language. This is another intrinsic link between the two theories.
It has been pointed out earlier that the two theories have common views on a certain
issue, which does not mean that they are in complete agreement with each other.
The theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ focuses on the importance of language to the
development of thinking, especially on the abstraction and generalization of ‘words,’
and how to form various concepts on the basis of which to make judgments and
inferences, so as to develop human-specific abstract logical thinking. This is Pavlov’s
contribution to the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’. However, Pavlov only stresses
the importance of language to the development of thinking, while overlooking the
other aspect that thinking has a decisive influence on the development of language
ability. Semantic Perception Theory makes up for the deficiency in this respect. While
recognizing the importance of language to thinking, it also emphasizes the decisive
role of thinking in the development of linguistic competence. This shows that the two
theories have both similarities and differences in terms of the relationship between
language and thinking.
6.4.3 The Structure and Function of Analyzer
Pavlov proposed the concept of ‘analyzer’ in order to elucidate the neurophysiologi-

cal mechanism of the second signal system. As mentioned earlier, the structure of the
analyzer consists of several parts: ‘certain peripheral endings—eyes, ears, etc., and
the corresponding nerve and the brain endings of the nerve, that is, a nerve device
composed of the cell group where the nerve endings are located.’
As for the function of the analyzer, Pavlov believed that ‘the energy of external
stimulus is transformed into a nervous process’ and ‘the external world is decom-
posed into various factors.’ The former Soviet psychologist Pipneirov more directly
attributed the function of the analyzer to ‘feeling’23 : ‘The analyzer can decompose
the world into individual entities and understand them as sensations, so it is possible
to distinguish the individual nature of the object; the understanding of the surround-
ing world begins from there. Without this distinction and subsequent comparisons,
it would be impossible to think. Therefore, it is an indispensable basis for thinking
to distinguish individual sensations’.
In Semantic Perception Theory, the analyzer is equivalent to the sensory system or
the perceptual system, as mentioned earlier. Many psychologists believe that it is dif-
ficult to strictly divide the boundary between sensation and perception, which should
belong to a unified psychological processing system. Semantic Perception Theory
23 Pipneirov, translated by Zhang, S. C. & Zhang, M. X. Pavlov’s theory of two signal systems and

agrees with this view. Its structure should consist of four parts: sensory organs,
afferent nerves, subcortical low-level perceptual centers (which may include several
levels), and cerebral cortex high-level perceptual centers. The function of the per-
ceptual system, as described in Sect. 2.3 of Chap. 2, is to respond to external stimuli
through peripheral sensory organs, and to transform the properties and intensity of
the stimuli into certain nerve impulses, which are transmitted to the lower central
cortex through afferent nerves and then projected to the corresponding higher central
cortex. Neural impulses are analyzed and synthesized in turn at all levels of the cen-
tral nervous system. First, the individual attributes of objective things are identified.
Then, on this basis, through further processing of advanced central nervous system
and the integration of the brain contact cortex (the integration of multiple sensory
information), the comprehensive grasp of various attributes of things and their inter-
relationships is realized; thus, the perceptual experience of current external stimuli
is completed.
Comparing the structure of Pavlov analyzer with that of the perceptual system,
it is not difficult to find that they are basically the same. As mentioned earlier,
peripheral endings are peripheral sensory organs, and corresponding nerves and the
brain endings of this nerve are afferent nerves and central systems (including the lower
subcortical centers and the higher cortical centers); then, the function of the analyzer
and the perceptual system is compared. By comparing their functions, we see that
they are basically the same—they are to convert the energy of external stimuli into
nerve impulses in the form of electric impulses, then pass the corresponding nerve
into the central system and then through the analysis and synthesis of the central
system, and complete the perception process of the current external stimuli. Thus, as
far as the structure and function of the analyzer (or perceptual system) are concerned,
and the view of Semantic Perception Theory is somewhat similar to that of the ‘Two
Signal Systems’ theory, which once again shows the internal relationship between
the two theories.
Same as before, having something in common does not mean they are the same. In
fact, the comparison of the two aspects of ‘structure’ and ‘function’ just now clearly
shows differences between them: ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory defines the structure
and function of the analyzer roughly, generally, and imprecisely, while Semantic
Perception Theory defines the structure and function of the perceptual system more
carefully, precisely, and strictly. Of course, this difference should not be the reason to
blame Pavlov but should be attributed to the limitations of the times or history. After
all, the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ was established in the 1920s, when brain
neuroscience was still at a relatively low level, while Semantic Perception Theory
was based on the achievements of brain neuroscience since the 1990s, so it is natural
to have this difference. Another difference is more substantial and worthy of people’s
attention: according to the ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory, the function of the analyzer
is to identify only the individual attributes of the objective things. This view is biased.
In fact, since the structure of the analyzer also contains brain endings (i.e., cerebral
cortex), it should be able to integrate a variety of sensory information to achieve
the overall grasp of things, that is, to complete the ‘perception’ of objective things.
This is the biggest difference between Semantic Perception Theory and ‘Two Signal
Systems’ theory.
6.5 Difference and Complementarity Between Semantic

Perception Theory and Two Signal System
In addition to the internal relations mentioned in the previous section, there must
be some essential differences between Semantic Perception Theory and ‘Two Sig-
nal Systems’ theory, which should be paid more attention to because they are two
different theories after all. This section is to focus on this issue, which is also the
main purpose of writing this chapter. Next, we will focus on the essential differences
between the two theories and their complementarity from three aspects: the research
object, ‘neurophysiological mechanism,’ and ‘innate nature.’
6.5.1 The Main Research Objects of the Two Theories
As mentioned earlier, the essence of conditioned reflex activity is signal activity in the
cerebral cortex. Each conditioned stimulus forms a corresponding temporary nerve
connection in the cerebral cortex, while many conditioned stimuli form a ‘temporary
nerve connection system.’ Because the temporary nerve connection system corre-
sponds to various signal activities and plays a supporting role, it can be regarded as a
signal system. Any reflex activity (i.e., signal activity) is caused by external stimulus.
As mentioned above, in the case of conditioned reflex, external stimulus is also called
conditioned stimulus. According to the nature of the conditioned stimulus, Pavlov
divides the signal system into two categories: the conditioned reflex system, which
uses specific things as the conditioned stimulus, called the first signal system, and the
conditioned reflex system which uses words (or speech) as the conditioned stimulus,
called the second signal system. This is the origin of the Two Signal Systems.
From the background of the above Two Signal Systems theory, it can be seen that
the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ is completely based on the theory of conditioned
reflection (both signal systems are conditioned systems themselves). Therefore, the
research object of conditioned reflection theory should be the research object of ‘Two
Signal Systems’. As mentioned above, the theory of conditioned reflex specializes
in the study of the nature and regularity of conditioned reflex. It can be seen that ‘the
nature and regularity of conditioned reflex’ (including the establishment conditions,
physiological mechanism, multilevel conditioning, generalization, differentiation,
and various suppression phenomena of conditioned reflex) is the research object of
the ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory. Generally speaking, the theory of ‘Two Signal
Systems’ is regarded as an integral part of the theory of conditioned reflex, without
distinction between them. If we have to say something different between the theory
of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and the general theory of conditioned reflex, we think that
the difference is mainly manifested in the following aspects: the former focuses on
the study of words or speech (i.e., the second signal). In addition, the theory of ‘Two
Signal Systems’ needs to study the relationship between the second signal system
and the first signal system. How do they work together through mutual support
and interdependence? However, although there are some differences between ‘Two
Signal Systems’ theory and the theory of conditioned reflection, it is certain that
the main research object of ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory should be ‘the nature and
law of conditioned reflection.’ Because the essence of the conditioned reflex is the
signal activity of cerebral cortex, which reveals the meaning of external stimuli,
and the identification of the signal meaning of external stimuli is a psychological
phenomenon, it can indicate that the main research object of ‘Two Signal Systems’
theory belongs to the category of psychology.
The central questions to be studied in Semantic Perception Theory are ‘Why
can four- or five-year-old children of any nationality master their spoken language,
without being taught, which contains innumerable changes in grammatical rules?’
Is language ability inherited or learned? How should we promote the development
of child language ability? These problems are also the fundamental problems that
linguists, especially language educators, have been concerned about for a long time
and have not yet been solved. In order to answer the above questions satisfacto-
rily, we have made great progress in the research of neuroscience since the 1990s.
Based on an in-depth analysis of human perceptual pathways and nerve centers,
we found that besides the five well-known original perceptions, humans also have
the sixth perception—semantic perception. The first five perceptions are common
to humans and other mammals. Only the sixth sense is unique to human beings. It
is the semantic perception that plays a vital role in the occurrence and development
of child language and in the psychological process of speech comprehension and
production. Therefore, through the study of the neurophysiological mechanism of
semantic perception, its processing methods, and features, it is possible to make a
breakthrough in the fundamental issues of concern to the above language education
circles. Thus, although the study of semantic perception starts from the perceptual
channels and nerve centers of humans (such studies belong to neurophysiology), the
ultimate solution to this problem is how child language occurs and develops. The
solution to this problem obviously cannot be separated from the understanding of
the essence of language ability; that is, whether language ability depends mainly on
innate heredity or mainly on learning after birth? To unravel this mystery, we need
to explore the psychological process of speech comprehension and discourse pro-
duction and its neurophysiological mechanism. This shows that although there are
many studies on semantic perception involving neurophysiology and psychology, its
main research object is the occurrence and development of child language and the
understanding and production of language, which belongs to the category of child
language studies (also known as ‘the theory of child language development’ or ‘the
theory of child language acquisition’).
Although there are essential differences between Semantic Perception Theory and
‘Two Signal Systems’ theory, there are significant complementarities between them.
6.5 Difference and Complementarity Between Semantic Perception … 131
The theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ makes a thorough study on the nature and
regularity of conditioned reflex activity established by conditioned stimulus with dif-
ferent signals (from the established conditions, physiological mechanism, multistage
conditioning to generalization, differentiation, inhibition, etc.), but does not make
any analysis on the external stimulus itself, which causes conditioned reflex activity.
Of course, as the first signal, ‘concrete things’ are simple, clear, and self-evident
and can be explained without much effort. Speech, as the second signal, is a special
abstract external stimulus, which can only be produced by humans and cannot be
produced by other animals. As for ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory, a special and sig-
nificant ‘second signal,’ it should be explained. However, because the main research
object of ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory is the psychological category, the linguistic
problems are ignored, and Semantic Perception Theory makes up for the theory of
‘Two Signal Systems’ in this respect.
As the sixth sense of human sense, its neurophysiological mechanism is also
composed of four parts, namely sensory organs, afferent nerves, low-level subcorti-
cal centers, and high-level centers of the cerebral cortex. The first two components
(sensory organs and afferent nerves) are equivalent to the ‘starting link’ of the model,
while the second two components (high- and low-level centers) are equivalent to the
‘intermediate link’ of the model. Because perception only involves the perception
and identification of input information, it does not include the neurophysiological
mechanism of central output commands. In the Schechenov model, the ‘terminal link’
related to this part (involving efferent nerves and effectors), for the other five percep-
tion systems, they are matched by efferent nerves throughout the body and the skin
of the extremities (as effectors). As for the semantic perception system, the efferent
nerves of the speech production part and the vocal organs including the oral and vocal
cords (as an effector) correspond to it. It can be seen that the semantic perception
system, like other perception systems, also meets the requirements of Schechenov’s
neural process model of reflex activity. It can also cause conditioned reflex activity by
the first signal (concrete things as conditioned stimulus) or the second signal (words
or speech as conditioned stimulus). For example, ‘bright moonlight in front of the
bed’ causes homesickness and poetry, which is a typical example of conditioned
reflex activity in the speech system caused by the first signal (conditioned stimulus
with the specific thing of ‘moonlight’). When the conference host announces ‘the
conference begins,’ the participants immediately remain quiet and stop talking; it
is caused by the second signal (speech) as the conditioned stimulus, examples of
conditioned reflex activity in the linguistic system. Semantic perception is the sixth
sense, which has never been discussed before, so although the main research object
of Semantic Perception Theory is child language studies. In order to have a deeper
understanding of the essence of ‘semantic perception’ and its physiological mech-
anism, Semantic Perception Theory has made a more comprehensive and in-depth
discussion on other perception systems and on the linguistic features of language
perception system. This is not enough, especially that the semantic perception sys-
tem is also a vital signal system (or even more critical signal system). The theory of
‘Two Signal Systems’ makes up for the Semantic Perception Theory in this respect.
Thus, although there are essential differences between the Semantic Percep-
tion Theory and the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’, there is a functional com-
plementarity between them.
6.5.2 Neurophysiological Mechanisms Involved in the Two

Theories
First of all, we will look at the neurophysiological mechanism involved in the theory
of ‘Two Signal Systems’. As mentioned above, the neurophysiological mechanism
of the first signal system is the temporary nerve connection between two excitation
centers stimulated by conditioned and unconditional stimuli in the cerebral cortex.
The neurophysiological mechanism of the second signal system is that excitation
centers induced by word or speech stimuli in the speech center correspond to various
external or internal direct stimuli in the cerebral cortex. The temporary nerve connec-
tions between excitation centers are caused by the central nervous system and those
caused by some unconditional stimulus. It can be seen that physiological mechanism
of both the first and the second signal systems is the temporary nerve connections
established between different Areas or centers in cerebral cortex.
Look at the neurophysiological mechanism involved in Semantic Perception The-
ory. As mentioned in the preceding section, as the sixth sense of human sense, the
neurophysiological mechanism of language perception consists of four parts: sensory
organs, afferent nerves, lower subcortical centers, and higher cortical centers. For
the linguistic system, the sensory organs are the ear (a large number of hair cells dis-
tributed on the basement membrane of the cochlea are the sensory receptors), and the
afferent nerve is the long axon of the spiral ganglion cells after the cochlea. The lower
linguistic center under the cortex is divided into four levels according to the order
of information transmission and processing: the cochlear complex nucleus (which
receives the nerve impulse from the afferent nerve) and the superior olivary nuclei,
hypothalamus, and thalamic occipital (from the thalamic occipital projection of the
sequentially processed nerve impulses to the high-level cortical center). The high-
level cortical language perception center also includes three parts: Wernicke Area,
Broca Area, and the concept center (the concept center is near the supramarginal
gyrus and the angular gyrus).
By comparing neurophysiological mechanisms involved in the two theories, it is
obvious to see that both theories are related to the central nervous system, and there
are fundamental differences, however. From the above-mentioned Schechenov reflex
activity model, we see that the signal system (conditioned reflex system) formed
by the brain’s advanced nervous activity includes three parts: the beginning (input
signal), the middle (identification of signal meaning), and the end (central output
command, response to current signal). Since the output is not fed back to the input, it is
an ‘open-loop system.’ Such a reflection pattern is generally called a ‘reflection arc.’
Former Soviet physiologist Anoxin found that if this reflex pattern was followed, it
6.5 Difference and Complementarity Between Semantic Perception … 133
would not explain why an organism could adjust its behavior immediately according
to the results of its own actions. To this end, Anoxin proposed the concepts of
‘return afference’ and ‘advance reflection.’ When an organism’s behavior deviates
from its intended goal, the current information can be checked with the experience
information stored in the brain by return afference, to produce a prediction of behavior
outcome (i.e., advance reflection) and correct it. In this way, Anoxin can better explain
the phenomenon of organism’s self-regulation behavior. The corresponding reflection
pattern is called ‘reflection ring.’ The signal system is no longer an open loop, but a
closed loop. Its feature is that there is a return input between the output end and the
input end; that is, there is ‘feedback.’
Whether the signal system is regarded as a reflection arc or a reflection ring (which
is more reasonable, of course), there is little difference in its physiological mechanism
(in the case of a reflection ring, only one ‘back-to-afferent’ path is added between the
output and the input). Here, we will analyze it according to the reflection ring. At this
time, neurophysiological mechanism of the whole signal system should obviously
include the following links: peripheral sensory organs → afferent nerves → sub-
cortical low-level centers in the input channel (which can be sequentially divided
into several levels) → cerebral high-level centers (where complex temporary con-
nections can be established between different regions or centers) → subcortical
low-level centers in the output channel, and the axis (which may contain several
levels in sequence) → efferent nerve → effector organ → return afferent.
Now, let us look back at the neurophysiological mechanisms studied by the above
two theories. It is not difficult to see that they all include only part of the physio-
logical mechanism of the whole signal system: ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory studies
the temporary nerve connections between different regions or centers in the cerebral
cortex, while semantic perception studies all the other links except this (and gives the
specific components of several levels in each link). Thus, neurophysiological mech-
anisms involved in these two theories are different, and the functions they support
are also essentially different. As mentioned above, temporary neural connections
are used to support various reflex activities, i.e., to identify the meanings of various
signals, while physiological mechanisms of various links in the speech perception
system are used to support phonetics and grammar (including words), and syntax
and semantic analysis (i.e., speech perception and comprehension) as well as the
production and expression of discourse. However, they are complementary to each
other. The physiological mechanism not considered by the theory of ‘Two Signal
Systems’ is the content of the study of semantic perception, and the physiological
mechanism not involved in the theory of linguistic perception is the focus of the
study of the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’. The combination of the two is precisely
the complete neurophysiological mechanism supporting a signal system. It can be
seen that the two have a good complementarity—this complementary perfection can
be described as ‘seamless.’
6.5.3 Inherent Nature Involved in the Two Theories
Both theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and Semantic Perception Theory pay attention
to the problem of inheritance and learning (especially Semantic Perception Theory
which spends much time on this aspect), but the objects involved are different.
The theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ holds that unconditional reflexes are an innate
inheritance, innate, and acquired, while conditioned reflexes are acquired through
learning and training based on unconditional reflexes.
The hereditary traits that are concerned and emphasized in Semantic Percep-
tion Theory refer to the ability of human beings to perceive and distinguish phonet-
ics and to analyze and recognize semantics, which can be inherited by race, innate,
and self-taught. However, the ability of grammatical analysis (including lexical and
syntactic analysis) is acquired non-innately, which can only be mastered after a long
time of learning and training in an appropriate language environment.
It can be said that the innate nature involved in these two theories is essentially
different. But there are complementarities between them.
As mentioned above, according to Schechenov’s conditioned reflex activity
model, a conditioned reflex system (signal system) should consist of three parts: the
starting part (input signal), the intermediate part (identification of signal meaning),
and the final part (central output command, response to current signal). The ‘Two
Signal Systems’ theory confirms that conditioned reflex system is acquired; that is to
say, signal input, meaning identification, and instruction output are all acquired. This
conclusion is undoubtedly correct (whether it is the first signal system or the second
signal system). The problem is that ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory only focuses on
the acquisition of the intermediate meaning identification link, while the input and
output links are taken as self-evident. It is correct in the case of the first signal system,
but it is debatable in the case of second signal system, because the situation of using
speech as the conditional stimulus is different from that of using concrete things as
the conditional stimulus. Semantic Perception Theory has made an in-depth analysis
of the innate nature of language (the second signal) itself. Obviously, it has made a
good remedy for the deficiency of ‘Two Signal Systems’ theory in this respect.
On the other hand, since semantic perception is the sixth sense of human per-
ception, as mentioned above, the linguistic sense system should belong to the signal
system as well as the other five sensory systems (and is a more important signal sys-
tem). In this way, it is obviously incomplete to study the innate nature of semantic
perception system if it only involves the process of speech comprehension and pro-
duction, but not other processes as the whole signal system. The study of the innate
nature of the conditioned reflex system by the theory of ‘Two Signal Systems’ makes
up for the deficiency of Semantic Perception Theory in this respect. It can be seen
that the above two theories are complementary to each other in the study of innate
nature.
Chapter 7
Semantic Perception Theory: Inheritance
and Development to Child Language
Development Theory
7.1 Inheritance and Development to Lenneberg’s Critical

Period Hypothesis
In the first chapter, we introduced two theories of hereditary determinism about chil-
dren’s language development, which still have great influence and impact at present.
The first one is Lenneberg’s ‘critical period hypothesis’; this theory holds that there
is a critical period in human language development (including the development of
mother tongue and second language). After this critical period, human’s ability to
acquire language has been greatly reduced, specifically, not only does it require more
efforts, but also we cannot master it even all our lives. At present, many neurophysiol-
ogists have confirmed this theory through experimental researches and observations
of patients with brain injury (as mentioned above, Chambers, a Canadian linguist,
Stromswold, an American neuroscientist, Johnson and Newport did more in-depth
research in this field).
However, if further analysis is made on the process of speech mastery in young
children, we believe that Lenneberg’s critical period hypothesis is not entirely correct,
although it has some validity and is supported by some experimental observations
and researches on neuroanatomy of the brain. As Lenneberg emphasized in his mas-
terpiece The Biological Foundation of Language, the acquisition of child speech
ability is entirely innate and determined by genetic factors, and the critical period
hypothesis is based on that child speech ability is innate and inherited. Is that true?
As Semantic Perception Theory in Chap. 5 proves, in the four aspects of ‘listening,
speaking, reading, and writing,’ only listening and speaking abilities have hereditary
features, while reading and writing abilities mainly rely on learning. As far as lis-
tening and speaking ability is concerned, the so-called hereditary features are also
aimed at the main aspects, which does not mean that listening and speaking ability is
purely or completely inherited. For example, from the above analysis of the mental
processing and processing features of ‘speech comprehension’ (i.e., ‘listening’), we
can see that the core part of this process is to use semantic relational structure bank to

136 7 Semantic Perception Theory: Inheritance and Development …
‘semantically identify’ the input discourse in order to determine the type of the cur-
rent semantic relational structure of the input sentence. However, in order to achieve
this goal, it is necessary to divide the input discourse into ‘chunks,’ which involve
several speech information processing links such as ‘speech perception,’ ‘speech
discrimination,’ ‘word recognition,’ and ‘phrase composition analysis.’ As demon-
strated above, the ability of ‘semantic identification’ is innate and determined by
genetic factors. The ability of ‘chunk division’ should be analyzed concretely as fol-
lows: the first and second links of chunk division are ‘speech perception’ and ‘speech
discrimination,’ which are supported by both speech and auditory nerve centers. It
has been proved that the ability of speech perception and discrimination is innate
and can be acquired through heredity. The third and fourth links of chunk division
involve part of speech analysis and phrase composition analysis of different language
systems. Due to the different language systems of different nationalities, the ability
of these two links cannot be acquired by inheritance, but only by acquired learning.
Of course, as pointed out at the end of the section ‘Child Speech Comprehension’ in
Sect. 4.6, Chap. 4, the part of speech analysis and phrase composition analysis here
only involve words and phrases (the relevant grammar only involves parts of speech,
meaning, and simpler rules related to the formation of phrases), rather than complex
syntax and sentence patterns of sentences, but only a part of the whole grammatical
analysis. Compared with the grammatical analysis of the whole sentence, it is much
simpler. As mentioned earlier, it is only a simple and partial grammatical analysis.
Similar conclusions can be drawn from the analysis of the psychological process
and processing features of ‘speech production’ (i.e., ‘speaking’) (besides the hered-
itary ability of ‘semantic identification,’ ‘phoneme planning,’ and ‘pronunciation
planning’ are congenital).
Therefore, strictly speaking, only the ability of listening and speaking has more
genetic factors, or is mainly innate and determined by heredity. We cannot conclude
in generally term that children have inherited speech ability, because this inherited
ability only includes speech perception, speech discrimination, phoneme planning,
pronunciation planning, and semantic recognition ability, but doesn’t include the
ability of grammatical analysis (the ability of grammatical analysis can only be
acquired through learning and hard work). Moreover, the ability of reading and
writing is not included, too.
In this way, we can clearly see the essential difference between the Semantic
Perception Theory and Lenneberg’s theory of critical period, or the relationship
between inheritance and development.
The reason why we say ‘inheritance’ is that Lenneberg’s critical period hypothesis
is based on the fact that all children’s speech abilities are innate and hereditary, while
our theory is based on the fact that children’s basic speech abilities (i.e., listening
and speaking abilities) are innate and hereditary.
The reason for ‘development’ is that Semantic Perception Theory, on the premise
of affirming the critical period of child linguistic development, has made three amend-
ments to Lenneberg’s theory:
7.1 Inheritance and Development to Lenneberg’s Critical Period … 137
(1) Within the linguistic category, children’s innate ability is only the ability to
perceive and recognize phonetics and semantics (i.e., semantic perception) and
phoneme planning and pronunciation planning, not all speech abilities (at least
not including grammatical analysis, reading and writing abilities);
(2) Since the abilities related to grammatical analysis (such as part of speech
and meaning recognition of words and phrase formation analysis) need to be
acquired through learning, children’s language development process is not a
‘natural maturation’ process that does not require learning as Lenneberg advo-
cated. He suggested, along with the development of pronunciation organs and
neurophysiological functions of the brain, children would naturally acquire lan-
guage abilities. But we believe that children still need education and learning
to master a language more effectively and deeply after birth.
(3) Lenneberg believes that the critical period of children’s language development
(also known as the sensitive period of language development) is between 2 and
12 years old. As mentioned in Sect. 1.2, Chap. 1, according to Lenneberg’s
view, language ability is dominated by the right hemisphere of the brain at the
beginning of children’s growth, then gradually shifts from the right hemisphere
to the left hemisphere, and finally forms the linguistic superiority of the left
hemisphere (lateralization). The lateralization process takes place between the
ages of 2 and 12. He believes that this is the key period of children’s language
development. It is emphasized that after this period, if the left hemisphere of the
brain is damaged, it will cause serious language barriers, even lifelong loss of
language ability; if the left hemisphere is damaged at the beginning or middle
stage of this critical period (i.e., before the completion of left lateralization),
the language ability will remain intact in the right hemisphere. It can be seen
that Lenneberg’s ‘critical period’ actually refers to the period during which the
dominant language in the left hemisphere (from the right hemisphere to the
left hemisphere, i.e., the dominant language in the left hemisphere) is formed.
In our Semantic Perception Theory, the ‘critical period’ refers to the sensitive
period of semantic perception; that is, the period of growth and development
of semantic perception related to the perception and discrimination of speech
and the analysis and recognition of semantics. There is no question that the
right hemisphere dominates the brain and then transfers to the left hemisphere
(the findings of neuroscience in the brain have so far failed to provide evidence
of such transfers). It can be seen that the ‘critical period’ of Lenneberg’s and
Semantic Perception Theory are two different concepts with identical names
but different meanings.
In addition, even if the specific meaning of the key period is left side, Lenneberg’s
view is quite different from Semantic Perception Theory in terms of the impact of
the critical period on children’s language abilities. Lenneberg does not point out
that children’s language sensitivity varies within this age-group; in other words,
the critical period of children’s language development is a flat one. This view is
inconsistent with the actual situation. As described in Sect. 5.4, Chap. 5, the ‘child’s
semantic perception sensitivity curve’ (i.e., Child’s Sensitivity Curve of Listening and
Speaking) drawn based many contemporary linguists’ study on children’s language

acquisition cases is a semi-trapezoidal curve (not a straight line) as shown in Fig. 5.2.
It is not difficult to conclude that although our ‘Semantic Perception Sensitivity
Curve’ and Lenneberg’s ‘Critical Period of Language Development’ (2–12 years old)
have similar names, their meanings are different, and the significance for language
teaching is also distinct.
7.2 Inheritance and Development to Chomsky’s ‘LAD’
The analysis in the previous section shows that Semantic Perception Theory and
related concepts put forward by us can not only draw a clear line with Lenneberg’s
critical period theory (not generally affirming that children have innate linguistic
competence, but only affirming that children have innate linguistic competence; that
is, the ability to listen or speak), but also inherit their reasonable components (the
key to child language development does exist, this critical period must not be missed,
otherwise it will cause irreparable losses). Next we will further prove that through
the Semantic Perception Theory, we can draw a clear line with Chomsky’s theory,
but also inherit its scientific core, so that the Semantic Perception Theory can be built
on a more solid theoretical basis.
As described in Sect. 1.2, Chap. 1, Chomsky believed that children have a ‘lan-
guage acquisition mechanism’ (LAD) that is inherently determined by genetic fac-
tors. To illustrate the role of this mechanism, Chomsky proposed a language acqui-
sition model based on Universal Grammar (UG) in his masterpiece Language and
Problems of Knowledge (1988). According to this model, Chomsky regarded the
principle system of Universal Grammar as an ‘intricate network,’ which is con-
nected with a ‘switch box’ containing a switching matrix, and the switching value is
a parameter determined by experience. Language learning is the process of determin-
ing the undetermined parameter values (i.e., the switching values in the switching
matrix) in the Universal Grammar Principle System. ‘Language learning is not what
children are actually doing, but what happens to children in a suitable environment,
just as child’s body grows and matures in a predetermined way under suitable envi-
ronmental stimulation and nutrition conditions.’1 Children do not master language
through sentences, but through a series of rules (each rule governs a large number
of sentences). Chomsky believes that this is the fundamental reason why all children
can acquire their mother tongue quickly in a relatively short time.
Comparing Chomsky’s above-mentioned core ideas on LAD theory with Semantic
Perception Theory expounded in the previous Chapters (Chaps. 2, 3, and 4), it is not
difficult to see that there is a principled difference between the two theories, but
there is an inherent connection, or a certain relationship between inheritance and
development.
1 Chomsky, N. Language and Problems of Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press. 1988.
7.2 Inheritance and Development to Chomsky’s ‘LAD’ 139
The reason why we call it ‘inheritance’ is that Chomsky’s LAD theory emphasizes
that children have innate language acquisition mechanisms. The Semantic Perception
Theory also emphasizes that language perception (i.e., the ability to perceive and
recognize speech and semantics, which is mainly determined by genetic factors) has
its corresponding neurophysiological mechanisms, such as Wernicke, Broca, and
conceptual centers (supramarginal and angular gyrus). In addition, Chomsky’s LAD
theory insists that children acquire language not through sentences, but through a
series of rules (each rule governs a group of sentences). In other words, Chomsky
believes that children acquire language not through sentence-by-sentence processing,
but through batch-by-batch processing, which means that they can master mother
tongue quickly. As mentioned in Sect. 4.3, Chap. 4, the Semantic Perception Theory
also holds that children acquire language not by ‘sentence-by-sentence processing’
but by ‘model-by-model processing.’ The mode mentioned here refers to the mode of
semantic relation structure. Each mode represents not a sentence, but a large number
of sentences (i.e., all kinds of sentences with the same semantic relation structure).
Therefore, the model-by-model processing method of Semantic Perception Theory
and the batch-by-batch processing method of LAD theory are in fact similar to each
other.
The reason why we call it ‘development’ is that, while affirming that children
have innate speech centers (i.e., language acquisition mechanism) and emphasiz-
ing that children acquire language not through ‘sentence-by-sentence processing’
(but through ‘model-by-model processing’ (i.e., batch-by-batch processing), we also
make the following amendments to Chomsky’s theory.
(1) Chomsky suggests that children are born with a neurophysiological mechanism
for dealing with Universal Grammar (Chomsky calls it language acquisition
device, or LAD). While language perception theory believes that the ability
of this neurophysiological mechanism (commonly called speech center) to be
acquired through heredity is only the ability to perceive and recognize phonetics
and semantics (i.e., language perception ability), not includes grammatical anal-
ysis and processing ability (such as recognition of part of speech and meaning,
analysis of phrase composition and sentence pattern).
(2) Chomsky inclines to the view that children’s acquisition of language is actually
a process, in which children actively discover and determine the parameters and
related vocabulary items in the Universal Grammar network system (i.e., the pro-
cess of determining the switch values needed to make the network work). While
the theory of semantic perception holds that children acquire language through
matching the structural patterns of semantic relations (rather than through the
grammatical network). The acquisition of child language is actually a process of
gradual establishment and accumulation of semantic relational structure pattern
bank, lexical meaning bank, and concept bank.
(3) Chomsky did not attach much importance to the role of acquired learning. He
believed that children could acquire language ability automatically as long as
they were exposed to ‘a suitable environment’—just as the body grew and
developed automatically under proper nutritional conditions. Although ‘some
suitable environment’ is also mentioned here, in all Chomsky’s theories, how

environment influences children’s language acquisition process is not discussed,
the core of his theory is always to emphasize the role of innate mechanism. As
long as children used some linguistic phenomena and materials around them,
they could rely on innate LAD to act like linguists, and grammatical rules
could be found from the input language materials so as to master the language.
Therefore, on the question of which factors determine the development of chil-
dren’s language, linguistics have classified Chomsky’s theory into the category
of ‘hereditary determinism.’ In this respect, the Semantic Perception Theory
clearly supports the theory of the interaction between innate and acquired, which
recognizes that children’s language acquisition is largely influenced by innate
genetic factors, and that environment and experience have a decisive influence
on the formation and development of language competence. It is under the
guidance of this idea that we have overcome to a great extent the fundamental
defects of foreign language teaching due to lack of acquired language envi-
ronment (overcoming these defects is difficult for foreign language teaching)
through the full use of modern educational technology (including the use of
online teaching resources and innovative teaching design centered on verbal
communication). In this way, the quality and efficiency of foreign language
teaching in our experimental schools have been greatly improved, thus real-
izing the leap-forward development of foreign language teaching in primary
schools.2
7.3 Inheritance and Development to Hebb’s Interaction

Theory
As mentioned in Sect. 1.3, Chap. 1, Canadian psychologist Donald Hebb believed

that babies’ brain had special structures for receiving, understanding and generating
speech, so they were particularly sensitive to human speech patterns at birth. But
in order to make the special structure of infant’s brain produce speech function, it
is necessary to have proper environment and experience. That is to say, the reason
why human beings have speech function is, on the one hand, because of a special
structure (speech center) which specializes in speech function, and of the ability to
deal with abstract language symbols; on the other hand, because of the influence
of language environment and the role of experience. Because Hebb attached great
importance to both genetic factors and environments and experience in the process of
children’s language acquisition, international linguists generally call Hebb’s theory
as the theory of Interaction between nature and nurture.
Comparing Hebb’s theory of interaction with the view of Semantic Perception
Theory that we have expounded in the previous Chapters (Chaps. 2, 3, and 4), it is
2 Stage
Report of an experiment on rapid development of English learning, www.etc.edu.cn/学者
专访/何克抗, Dec, 2003. In Primary School Mandarin Chinese.
7.3 Inheritance and Development to Hebb’s Interaction Theory 141
not difficult to see that there is also a relationship of inheritance and development
between the two theories.
The reason for ‘inheritance’ is that Herb’s theory of interaction not only acknowl-
edges the decisive role of innate genetic factors in children’s language acquisition,
but also attaches importance to the great influence of environment and individual
experience on children’s language acquisition. Our theory of semantic perception
also emphasizes that these two factors play an indispensable role in the formation
and development of child language.
The reason for ‘development’ is that Semantic Perception Theory, while affirming
that children’s language acquisition is achieved through the interaction of pre- and
post-natal factors, has also made in-depth research on several aspects neglected by
Hebb’s theory, thus making new contributions.
(1) Although Hebb acknowledges that speech centers can receive, understand, and
generate speech signals, which is conducive to children’s acquisition of speech
ability, this theory also holds that children’s acquisition of speech ability can
only be achieved through the learning of specific sentences. That is to say, Hebb
believes that children acquire language through sentence-by-sentence process-
ing, so Hebb’s theory is still unable to answer and understand the core question
of children’s language development, that is, “Why can four or five-year-old chil-
dren of any nationality master their own spoken language without being taught,
which contains innumerable changes in grammatical rules?” Semantic Percep-
tion Theory holds that children acquire language through ‘model-by-model pro-
cessing.’ As mentioned above, the model here refers to the semantic relational
structure model. Each model represents not a sentence, but a large number of
sentences (tens or even hundreds of different sentences with the same semantic
relational structure). In other words, the ‘model-by-model processing’ means
‘batch by batch.’ As a result, the Semantic Perception Theory, like Chomsky’s
LAD theory, can well answer and explain the above-mentioned core questions
about children’s language development.
(2) Herb’s theory insists that the inheritance of children’s language acquisition is
based on the hypothesis that the human brain has a special structure for receiving,
understanding and generating speech, that is, the brain has ‘speech center’ for
speech function. As mentioned above, through the progress of neuroanatomy
and brain science researches in the past two decades, it has been found that there
are indeed four speech centers in human brain:
• The expression center, specializing in oral expression, is located in the poste-
rior part of the inferior frontal gyrus of the left hemisphere of cerebral cortex.
• Writing center, specializing in written language expression, is located in the
posterior part of the middle frontal gyrus of the left hemisphere.
• Understanding center, specializing in speech perception and understanding,
includes the left superior temporal gyrus, posterior temporal lobe and parietal
lobe.
• The reading center, specializing in establishing the relationship between the
visual representation of written language and the auditory representation of
spoken language, thus realizing the functions of reading and reading aloud,
is located in the angular gyrus,
These four centers correspond to the four speech abilities of ‘speaking, writing,
listening, and reading.’ It can be seen that Herb’s hypothesis that the human brain
has a special structure of receiving, understanding, and generating speech (i.e.,
expression) is scientific and credible. Unfortunately, Hebb only put forward a
hypothesis, but did not prove the content of the hypothesis, nor did he analyze the
psychological processing process, processing methods, and processing features
of each speech center. Therefore, Hebb’s theory could not explain how innate
factors play a role in the four speech abilities of ‘speaking, writing, listening,
and reading.’ It is also impossible to explain why the ability of listening and
speaking mainly depends on innate factors, while the ability of reading and
writing mainly depends on learned ability. This is the fundamental reason why
linguists at home and abroad have been arguing for many years about whether
children’s language acquisition depends mainly on inheritance or learning.
While analyzing the neurophysiological basis of semantic perception’s func-
tion in depth, Semantic Perception Theory makes a detailed analysis of the
psychological processing and processing methods of the four speech abilities of
listening, speaking, reading, and writing. On this basis, it not only clarifies the
neurophysiological mechanism and psychological processing features of each
of the four speech abilities, but also proves for the first time that which link
is mainly inheritance and which link is mainly acquired by learning in all the
psychological processing links involved in the four speech abilities. Thus, the
essence of innate features of listening and speaking ability and the essence of
acquisition features of reading and writing ability are clarified.
(3) Hebb’s theory of interaction emphasizes both innate factors and acquired envi-
ronment and experience, but it does not seriously analyze how environment and
experience play a role. Therefore, it is impossible for this theory to put forward
how to effectively promote children’s acquisition of language by using environ-
ment in learning. That is to say, it has less impact for second language teaching.
In this respect, Hebb’s theory is incomplete.
As Lenneberg pointed out,3 all innate genetic abilities have a ‘critical period’—
the period of growth and development of this ability. The so-called influence of
environment and the role of individual experience mainly refer to the influence and
role of environment and experience on the formation and development of this ability
in the critical period. After this critical period, that is, after the period of growth and
development of this ability, no matter how good the environment, or how rich the
experience is, it will not play a big role, or even not at all. Although Hebb’s theory also
recognized that environment and individual experience were directly related to child
language acquisition, it is impossible to really understand the timing and conditions
under which environment and experience are really important for children’s language
acquisition, because of lack of understanding and research on hereditary ability.
3 Lenneberg, E. H. Biological Foundation of Language, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 1967.
7.3 Inheritance and Development to Hebb’s Interaction Theory 143
Semantic Perception Theory not only inherits Lenneberg’s correct view on ‘critical
period,’ but also enriches and develops it. On the basis of summarizing various
cases of mother tongue learning and second language learning investigated by many
linguists at home and abroad, a semi-trapezoidal semantic perception sensitivity
curve is drawn for the first time (Fig. 5.2). This curve not only clearly shows that
the key period of speech ability (mainly listening and speaking ability) determined
by semantic perception is 0–12 years old, but also directly determines that the best
age for children to learn a second language is before 9 years old. Obviously, it has
important implications for when to create language environment and how to make the
most effective use of individual experience to promote child language development.
Appendix A
An Innovative Study of English Education
Leaping Development Based on Semantic
Perception Theory
Kekang He and Junfen Lin
Abstract This paper introduces the background, objectives, development, and

results of the “innovative study of English education leaping development based on
Semantic Perception Theory”. The reason why it is called “innovative study of leaping
development” is that the goal of this experiment has doubled beyond the development
goal of language ability that traditional teaching can achieve in the same period of
time and takes the brand new theory of children’s language development (Semantic
Perception Theory) as the main theoretical basis. This paper conducted a compre-
hensively comparative analysis on listening, vocabulary, and speaking between the
experimental and non-experimental classes in several experimental schools that had
been tested for two years, which proved that the results were very significant. On
this basis, the author made an in-depth analysis of the main reasons of the success
in this study.
Keywords Semantic Perception Theory · English education · Leaping development ·

English education reform
A.1 Overview
A.1.1 Background
English education is very important in China. English discipline is given a priority

in amount of instructional time in schools and in entrance and employment exams.
It became especially important after China joined the WTO which led to rising
enthusiasm of English learning. Although teenagers in our country spend long time
(before the implementation of new curriculum standards, most of the students start
K. He · J. Lin
Institute of Modern Education and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1104-2
146 Appendix A: An Innovative Study of English Education Leaping …
learning English from junior which means a high school graduate will learn English
for at least 6 years; a bachelor graduate will learn English for at least 10 years. After
the implementation of new curriculum standards which manipulated that students
should learn English from grade three, then a high school graduate will learn English
for at least 9–10 years, and a bachelor graduate will learn English for 13–14 years)
on learning English, and many people (including children, students, and adults) may
spend extra time, energy, and money to participate in different kinds of English
training course, but the results are ineffective, the phenomenon of deaf English and
dumb English is still widespread. Chinese new curriculum standards propose to
realize a shift from focus-on-grammar instruction to the types of instruction which
emphasize that students should acquire language knowledge and skills through the
language context; lay stress on developing students’ comprehensive language skills.
However, under real-life conditions, due to the long-term influence of traditional
language teaching, there is still a long way to go between the results of reform and
people’s expectations. How to deepen the reform of English teaching and improve
students’ verbal communication skills is still a major issue in English education.
At the same time, the rapid development and widespread application of infor-
mation technology based on computers and networks have a revolutionary impact
on education. This influence is not only reflected in the changes in teaching meth-
ods, but more importantly, it has triggered deep changes in teaching from various
aspects such as teaching concepts, teaching content, and teaching means. “Promoting
the modernization of education with educational informatization and realizing the
leaping development of education” has become an important strategy for education
reform in many countries. China has also issued a series of related policies aimed at
promoting education informatization and deepening education reform.
“Innovative Study of English Education Leaping Development Based on Seman-
tic Perception Theory” (hereinafter referred to as “Leaping Study”) is an English
teaching reform project carried out under the macro-background of accelerating the
process of education informatization and implementing a new round of curriculum
reform in China. Its purpose is to reform the traditional teacher-centered teaching
structure and the English teaching mode which is centered on grammar analysis or
linguistic knowledge and construct a new type of dominant-subjective teaching struc-
ture as well as an English teaching model centered on verbal communication under
the guidance of advanced educational ideas and theories, especially the guidance of
Semantic Perception Theory (a new theory of children’s language development). By
deeply integrating which is centered on information technology and English teaching
and using information technology based on computers and networks as a cognitive
tool, collaborative communication tool, and emotional motivation tool to promote
students’ independent learning. Thereby, realize the fundamental changes in English
education, greatly improve students’ English listening and speaking, and completely
solve the “deaf-and-dumb English” problems.
Appendix A: An Innovative Study of English Education Leaping … 147
A.1.2 Objectives
“Innovative Study of English Education Leaping Development Based on Semantic

Perception Theory” requires teachers to firmly grasp the critical period for language
development. In the lower grades, we mainly focus on listening and speaking by
using innovative teaching design ideas centered on verbal communication and rich
multimedia network resources to design varied activities for “speaking” (teacher and
student, counterparts, in groups), “listening” (listen to teachers, listen to counterparts,
listen to the online resources), “reciting” (maxims), “singing” (children’s songs,
English songs), “acting” (role-play), and other diverse activities. Without increasing
the class hours and schoolwork burden at all, the vocabulary and sentence patterns
acquired in each class are doubled by means of English verbal communication and
expanding listening and reading activities (but students do not feel burdened). At the
same time, students’ listening and speaking abilities have been greatly improved (far
beyond the standard of listening and speaking in the non-experimental class of the
same grade or even one senior grade). The specific goal is that students should master
3000 English words in the primary school and solve basic problems of listening,
speaking, reading, and writing. That is to say, according to the requirements of the
new curriculum standards (experimental draft), students who have participated in
the study from the first grade of primary school are supposed to possess language
ability (vocabulary, listening, speaking, etc.) equivalent to the eight levels by the
time of graduation from primary school. It can be seen clearly that the goal of this
experiment is to significantly exceed the gains of traditional teaching, which is the
origin of why this experiment is being titled “leaping development”.
A.1.3 Development
In June 2002, the “the Innovative Study of the Leaping Development of English Edu-
cation Based on Semantic Perception Theory” was officially started in two second-
grade classes (about 90 students, with an average age of 7 years) at Nanhai Exper-
imental Primary School in Foshan City, Guangdong Province. In September of the
same year, we launched an experimental study on English leaping development
in Dongshan District—six schools participated in the trial (the number of schools
has increased to 17 at present). So far, in addition to the earlier establishment of
the Dongshan Experimental Zone in Guangzhou, the Nanshan Experimental Zone
in Shenzhen, and the Experimental Zone in Zhongshan, Beijing, Dalian, Xiamen,
Hebei, Foshan, and other places have also set up experimental zones. The first round
of English leaping experimental class, which began in June 2002, will be upgraded
to the fifth grade in September this year (2004), and the class that participated in the
trial earlier will also enter the third grade.
A.2 Results
The first batch of experimental schools has only been tested for two years since June
2002 or September 2002 (most of the remaining experimental schools have only
been tested for about one year), but showed encouraging results. Both the famous
schools with better teachers and hardware environment, or the ordinary schools, even
the rural primary schools, the students’ listening, speaking and comprehensive skills
have been greatly improved.
The two first batches of experimental classes in Nanhai Experimental Primary
School in Guangdong Province use “Cambridge Young Learners” English textbooks.
English teachers in two classes are young teachers who just graduated from the
Guangdong English College for two years; they have 2–3 classes per week in the
multimedia network classroom. Under the guidance of the Semantic Perception The-
ory, the two teachers actively explored the English instructional mode centered on
verbal communication. After 7 or 8 months of the test (early 2003), Nanhai Experi-
mental Primary School used these two experimental classes to perform an open class
to all primary school English teachers in Nanhai District. The excellent performance
of the students’ listening and speaking surprised other teachers that they believed this
school employed foreign teachers to teach them English. Now, the fourth-grade stu-
dents in this experimental class, whether the performance of dialogue with teachers
in class or the fluency of introducing personal and school situations in English, are
greatly appreciated by the visitors to the school. According to the teachers’ feedback,
as to the score in usual tests, final exams, and oral ability, the students in the experi-
mental class outperformed than the non-experimental classes. At the same time, two
young teachers who have participated in the project have also become the leading
teachers of English teaching in Nanhai City and have introduced their experiences
at national conferences for many times. At present, Nanhai Experimental Primary
School not only opened experimental classes in the first and second grades, but also
promoted the project throughout the school. The team of teachers also expanded
from the two teachers to the entire English group.
In September 2002, two first-grade experimental classes at Dongfengdonglu Pri-
mary School in Dongshan District, Guangzhou City, carried out “Leaping Study”
experiments in both Chinese and English subjects (students take classes in a multi-
media network classroom every day). English textbooks used in these two classes
were prepared by Guangzhou Teaching and Research Office. Although the English
teachers just graduated from the Guangzhou University English College, the students
in the two experimental classes have achieved outstanding results and impressive per-
formance both in Chinese subject and in English. Dongfengdonglu Primary School
attracted a number of visitors from the national education departments and schools
due to the remarkable results obtained by the experiment. The good study habits,
listening and speaking skills, and self-confidence of the students in the experimental
class have made the visiting teachers suspect that they are senior students or top stu-
dents selected by the school. In the evaluation in October 2003 (1 year after the trial),
students in the experimental and non-experimental classes were asked to describe
the scene within the same amount of time (5 min). The test results show that the
students in the experimental class have significant differences comparing to the non-
experimental students in terms of the vocabulary used, the number of sentences, and
the vividness and richness of the description. To illustrate the situation, below is an
example of the description of one of the experimental students (not the best).
Dai Guyi (Grade 1, Class 5) describes the picture:
My name is Daiguyi. My English name is Betty. The boy’s name is Tommy. Tommy
is play (ing) computer. (The) bed is purple and yellow. The ball is green, blue, red,
orange and yellow. The bag is so big. The floor is pink. The bag (is) on the floor. The
eraser is on the ball. The clock is yellow, blue and red. The paper is pink, yellow and
blue. The chair is orange. The table is yellow. The computer is on the table. Tommy
is happy. The ball is how(so) beautiful. The Eraser is small. Tommy (is) sitting on
the chair.
In the assessment at the end of June 2004, the first batch of experimental classes
(grade 2) was better than the second-grade and the third-grade non-experimental stu-
dents in terms of vocabulary (including picture talk, choose pictures by listening the
words, matching the words), listening (Including sentence selection, sorting, TPR
by listening to the sentences; TPR is the abbreviation of Total Physical Response,
which is “all action-reaction method.” Here, teacher speaks English instructions, and
the students perform in according actions) and speaking (including daily conversa-
tions, saying by watching pictures, answering questions by watching pictures) (see
Tables A.1, A.2, A.3, A.4). Among them, the students in the experimental class were
especially obvious excellent in two aspects of listening and speaking, and the average
value was 6.2 points and 14.7 points higher than the second-year non-experimental
class (see Table A.2).
Unexpectedly, the non-experimental classes of the second grade are similar to
the experimental classes in teaching mode and method because the teachers often
participate in the theory and method training of leapfrog experiment (only the experi-
mental classes are taught in the network classroom, not the experimental classes only
have a certain class hour per week in the public computer room of the school). As a
result, both the vocabulary and the listening of students in non-experimental classes
were also significantly better than the third grade who received traditional instruction
(see Table A.3). Although their oral expression ability was slightly lower than the
Table A.1 Comparison of the mean difference between the second-grade experimental class and
the non-experimental class of Dongfengdonglu Primary School (2004–6)
Independent samples test
Levene’s test t-test for equality of means
for equality
of variances
F Sig. t df Sig. Mean Std. error 95% confidence
(2-tailed) difference difference interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Vocabulary 1.034 .313 −1.9 75 .065 −4.025 2.148 −8.305 .255
−1.9 71.99 .066 −4.025 2.159 −8.329 .280
Listening .125 .725 −2.9 75 .005 −6.202 2.119 −10.423 −1.981
−2.9 74.74 .005 −6.202 2.117 −10.420 −1.984
Oral 1.626 .206 −2.4 75 .018 −14.716 6.079 −26.826 −2.606
−2.4 74.83 .017 −14.716 6.049 −26.766 −2.666
Table A.2 Comparison of the mean values of the second-grade experimental and non-experimental
classes of Dongfengdonglu Primary School (2004–6)
Group statistics
Class N Mean Std. deviation Std. error mean
Vocabulary N-Expe.2 37 35.338 10.020 1.647
Expe.2 40 39.363 8.828 1.396
Listening N-Expe.2 37 33.838 9.191 1.511
Expe.2 40 40.040 9.380 1.483
Oral N-Expe.2 37 43.919 24.853 4.086
Expe.2 40 58.635 28.209 4.460
Table A.3 Comparison of the mean values of the second-grade non-experimental and third-grade
non-experimental classes of Dongfengdonglu Primary School (2004–6)
Group statistics
N-Expe.3 36 24.708 8.782 1.464
Listening N-Expe.2 37 33.838 9.191 1.511
N-Expe.3 36 25.361 9.336 1.556
Oral N-Expe.2 37 43.919 24.853 4.086
N-Expe.3 36 48.722 27.932 4.655
Table A.4 Comparison table of the mean value of the second-grade experimental class and the
third-grade non-experimental class of Dongfengdonglu Primary School (2004–6)
Group statistics
Vocabulary Expe.2 40 39.363 8.828 1.396
N-Expe.3 36 24.708 8.782 1.464
Listening Expe.2 40 40.040 9.380 1.483
N-Expe.3 36 25.361 9.336 1.556
Oral Expe.2 40 58.635 28.209 4.460
N-Expe.3 36 48.722 27.932 4.655
Note Expe.2 in the above three tables indicates the second-grade experimental class, N-Expe.2
indicates the second-grade non-experimental class, and N-Expe.3 indicates the third-grade non-
experimental class (the same below)
third-grade non-experimental class on the average, it did not show statistically signif-
icant differences. At the same time, the English teachers have also greatly improved
their teaching ability and scientific research ability: they have observed dozens of
classes in two years, introduced their experience at national conferences for many
times; the papers and the demonstration classes have also won the national first and
second prizes for many times. The initial results of experiment in Dongfengdonglu
Primary School have made schools, parents, and teachers to be more confident in
the study. In September 2003, the network experimental class increased from two
to four; for the two other teachers in non-experimental classes, the principal also
asked them to teach in public network room with the leaping teaching ideas and
teaching modes. Practice has proved that the quality of teaching improved greatly
in another two non-experimental classes. The results of the trial in Dongfengdonglu
Primary School not only strongly promoted the deepening reform of the school’s
teaching and learning, but also greatly promoted the development of the leapfrog
trial in the entire Dongshan District, which made the participating schools (such
as Peizheng Primary School, Nonglinxialu Primary School, Jianshedamalu Primary
School, Dongshan Experimental Primary School, etc.) achieve satisfactory results in
their English leapfrog trial.
We are greatly encouraged by the success of the Nanhai Experimental Primary
School and Dongfengdonglu Primary School. However, we still cannot dispel the
doubts from some teaching and research departments and schools—the experiment
can be successful in schools with superior hardware conditions, better students and
teachers, and higher parental quality, but can they also achieve the expected results
in other schools, especially those with poor conditions and poor students? In order
to prove this with facts, with the strong support of the Education Bureau of Nan-
shan District, Shenzhen, we selected 15 schools with different conditions in Nanshan
District (later expanded to 19) and launched a leaping experiment in March 2003.
Among them, six schools such as Xiangnan Primary School took the lead in start-
ing the English leaping experiment (other schools such as Baimang Primary School
started experiment in September 2003 due to hardware constraints). Xiangnan Pri-

mary School is a city-level school; it has a normal student base, but the school leaders
and teachers pay special attention to the experiment and firmly believe that the exper-
iment can be successful. The school’s first experimental class was established on the
basis of the original class, and the English textbook used was the Shenzhen Long-
man version. Although the experimental class has undergone many twists and turns
(the experiment interrupted because of the teacher’s demission), with the efforts of
school leaders and teachers, students’ listening and speaking in experimental class
still increased rapidly. The results of the evaluation in January 2004 showed that
the results of students in the experimental class were significantly better than the
non-experimental classes in terms of listening, vocabulary, daily conversation, and
picture talk. The assessment data in June 2004 more clearly reflects the significant
differences in vocabulary, listening, and speaking between the experimental and
non-experimental classes; especially in oral comprehension, the average score of the
experimental class and the non-experimental class actually differed by 32.86 points
(see Tables A.5 and A.6).
Then, take the picture talk as an example, a total of 37 students from the experi-
mental class participated in the evaluation. Among them, 29 people spoke more than
15 sentences (up to 23 sentences), and 8 people spoke between 10 and 14 sentences.
There were 43 non-experimental students, 5 of whom spoke between 15 and 18 sen-
tences and 25 are under 10 sentences. As to variety of sentence patterns, 13 people in
the experimental class used more than 10 different sentence patterns; none of the non-
experimental classes spoke more than 10 different sentence patterns (only 1 student
produce 9 different sentence patterns). In the Nanshan District Leaping Experimental
Class English Proficiency Competition in June 2004, the outstanding performance
of the second-grade students of Xiangnan Primary School in the teacher–student
dialogue and oral production made the invigilators of other schools mistakenly think
that they were students of foreign language schools. In Xiangnan Elementary School,
not only second-grade students, first-grade students also performed well: in March
2004, more than 80 teachers from Chancheng District of Foshan City observed the
first-grade English class of Xiangnan Primary School and asked: “Is this class a sec-
ond or third grade? Is this a review class or a new one?” After heard that “these are
first-grade students and it is a new lesson,” teachers in Foshan felt a lot. In the Nanshan
District Competition in June this year, the first-grade students from the experimen-
tal class of Xiangnan Primary School surpassed some traditional famous schools in
both teacher–student dialogue and picture talk and achieved remarkable results. The
results of the final evaluation in June 2004 also showed that there were significant dif-
ferences in vocabulary, listening, and oral expression between the experimental and
non-experimental classes. The average value of the experimental class in these three
items was 11.6 points, 9 points, and 37.6 points, higher than the non-experimental
class. Especially in the oral expression ability, students in experimental class doubled
the score than the non-experimental class (see Tables A.7, A.8). According to the two
teachers who also taught non-experimental “parallel classes,” their students’ English
scores and abilities are also stronger than other classes (because they are taught by the
same teacher, the teaching ideology and teaching mode are similar to experimental
Table A.5 Comparison of the mean difference between the second-grade experimental class and the non-experimental class of Shenzhen Xiangnan Primary
School (2004–6)
Levene’s test for t-test for equality of means
equality of
variances
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean difference Std. error difference 95% confidence interval
of the difference
Lower Upper
Vocabulary .013 .910 −4.92 78 .000 −11.470 2.329 −16.106 −6.833
−4.88 73.079 .000 −11.470 2.348 −16.150 −6.789
Listening 2.029 .158 −3.37 78 .001 −10.805 3.208 −17.192 −4.419
−3.31 68.908 .001 −10.805 3.261 −17.310 −4.300
Appendix A: An Innovative Study of English Education Leaping …
Oral .059 .809 −6.89 78 .000 −32.863 4.770 −42.359 −23.367

−6.86 74.798 .000 −32.863 4.790 −42.405 −23.321
153
Table A.6 Comparison of the mean values of the second-grade experimental and non-experimental
classes of the Xiangnan Primary School in Shenzhen (2004–6)
Group statistics
Expe.2 43 45.605 9.849 1.502
Listening N-Expe.2 37 38.730 15.900 2.614
Expe.2 43 49.535 12.783 1.949
Oral N-Expe.2 37 47.649 21.894 3.599
Expe.2 43 80.512 20.723 3.160
class, but the “parallel class” has no network environment and generally can only
listen to the English story collectively through a tape recorder or a computer).
The effect of Xiangnan Elementary School made us believe that the leaping exper-
iment can be completely successful in other ordinary schools, and the experiment
at Baimang Primary School has strengthened our belief. Baimang Primary School
is located in the urban–rural fringe, which has the worst living conditions in Nan-
shan District. Among the more than 500 students in the school, 90% of the students
come from the villages around Baimang Village and Maju Village; their parents are
households, factory migrant workers, and small merchant with difficult family eco-
nomic conditions, and less than 10% of the students come from permanent household
families. Although these families are in good condition, most of the parents are unem-
ployed residents and their educational level is not high. The pre-school education
of the students almost did not exist. And this school has a special feature—students
are very mobile (more than 12% of the students often transfer to other schools per
semester). When the English leaping experiment was started in the first grade of the
school in September 2003, the teachers in the class were very worried. They thought
that such students could not make a leap and even thought that “leaping development
is a fantasy for such a school.” However, with the patience and help of our school
leaders, through the efforts of the teachers, the rapid improvement of the students’
listening and speaking ability surprised the teachers. The outstanding performance
of the students in the competition made the test teachers glad to say: “I believe that
our students are definitely no worse than in other schools.” The assessment results in
June 2004 (see Tables A.9, A.10) made the teachers even more excited. She proudly
said: “I taught according to the leaping teaching philosophy and teaching methods
not only in the experimental classes, but also in fifth grade. In addition, I am now
more confident in both students and myself.”
In addition to Xiangnan Primary School and Baimang Primary School, teachers
in Yucai No. 1 Primary School, Nanyou Primary School, Nanshan Primary School,
Qianhai Primary School, Nantoucheng Primary School, Yucai No. 3 Primary School,
etc., in Nanshan District also reflected that the speaking ability of the students in the
experimental class is much stronger than that of the non-experimental class, and the
Table A.7 Comparison of the mean difference between the first-grade experimental class and the non-experimental class in Shenzhen Xiangnan Primary School
(2004–6)
equality of
variances
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean difference Std. error difference 95% confidence
interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Vocabulary 8.205 .005 5.201 75 .000 11.623 2.235 7.171 16.074
5.160 53.887 .000 11.623 2.253 7.107 16.139
Listening 6.498 .013 4.688 75 .000 9.022 1.925 5.188 12.856
4.652 55.058 .000 9.022 1.939 5.136 12.909

Oral 3.764 .056 8.632 75 .000 37.552 4.350 28.885 46.219
8.673 67.317 .000 37.552 4.330 28.910 46.193
155
Table A.8 Comparison table of the average of the first-grade experimental class and non-
experimental class in Shenzhen Xiangnan Primary School (2004–6)
Group statistics
Vocabulary Expe.1 39 45.333 6.191 .991
N-Expe.1 38 33.711 12.468 2.023
Listening Expe.1 39 46.154 5.494 .880
N-Expe.1 38 37.132 10.655 1.728
Oral Expe.1 39 65.026 22.224 3.559
N-Expe.1 38 27.474 15.203 2.466
teachers in the non-experimental class are willing to borrow the experimental class
to perform open class (which can achieve better teaching results).
The three materials described below are the live recordings of the English profi-
ciency competition for students in the first- and second-grade leaping experimental
classes in Nanshan District, Shenzhen, in June 2004. It can be seen from this that
leaping experimental class students have reached their English level after a year or
so of learning (originally there was not much English foundation, basically starting
from ABC) (The words or sentences in parentheses in the material correct students’
misuse of words.).
Description of the topic of “My family” in the competition by Chen Jieru, a student
in grade 2 class 2 of Xiangnan Primary School (2004–6)
My English name is Lily. I am 8. I am a pupil. I am in Class2 Grade2 Xiangnan
Primary School. I have a big happy family. There are six people. They are my father,
my mother, my two younger sisters, my younger brother and I. My father’s name is
Chen Guangze. He is 31. He is short and fat. He has big eyes. He is a boss. He has
big shops. He goes to work at 8:30. He has three meals at home. My mother’s name
is Zheng Xiaomei. She is 30. She is tall and fat. She is (a) housewife. She works at
home. She is very busy. My two younger sisters are small. My younger brother is
7. He is in Class1 Grade1. We go to school together. I am a good pupil at school.
My English and Chinese are wonderful. I am a good daughter at home. I can help
my mother do some housework. Sometimes I can help my mother with my father.
My father sweeps the floor. I clean the windows and sofas. On Saturday and Sunday
we like (to) go to Lixiang Park to fly kite. My father likes (to) play football with my
younger brother. I think we are a happy family. I love my family.
Xiangnan Primary School Chen Kexin’s (grade 1 class 1) description in the
competition (2004–6)
Good afternoon, teacher. My name is Alice. I am in Class1 Grade1. This is a beautiful
picture. I like this picture. Look! The sun is shining. The sky is blue. The time is 8(It is
8 o’clock). Xiaoming and Xiaohong are happy. Xiaoming is very short. Xiaoming is
open(opening) the window(a book). Xiaoming has blue T-shirt and pink pants. He is
Table A.9 Comparison of the mean difference between the first-grade experimental class and the non-experimental class in Shenzhen Baimang Primary School
(2004–6)
equality of variances
interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Vocabulary 3.433 .067 5.325 90 .000 8.762 1.646 5.493 12.031
5.269 81.336 .000 8.762 1.663 5.454 12.071
Listening 1.552 .216 4.177 90 .000 8.078 1.934 4.236 11.919
4.148 84.799 .000 8.078 1.947 4.206 11.950
Oral 28.29 .000 6.401 90 .000 30.627 4.785 21.121 40.133

6.212 57.621 .000 30.627 4.931 20.756 40.498
157
Table A.10 Comparison of the mean of the first-grade experimental and non-experimental class
in Shenzhen Baimang Primary School (2004–6)
Group statistics
Vocabulary Expe.1 44 20.273 8.831 1.331
N-Expe.1 48 11.510 6.906 .997
Listening Expe.1 44 25.682 10.018 1.510
N-Expe.1 48 17.604 8.517 1.229
Oral Expe.1 44 49.023 30.193 4.552
N-Expe.1 48 18.396 13.132 1.895
very lovely. Xiaohong is very pretty. She has black hair and big eyes. The pencil and
rubber is (are) in the purple pencil case. The pencil case, pencil, rubber and ruler
are on the desk. The ruler is red. The rubber is purple, too. There are so many books
in the schoolbag. The schoolbag is green and yellow. A pen and a book is(are) on a
chair. The pen is gray. The book is purple. The chair is very big. The(A) toy chair is
beside the chair. The football(basketball) is orange and blue. The football is behind
the toy chair. The(A) kite is in front of the desk. The kite is red, green, yellow and
pink. Look! The computer is on the desk. There is a beautiful in the computer. The
lychees are on the desk. Look! This is a beautiful picture(map). The picture(map) is
in(on) the yellow wall. The picture(map) is beautiful. The color is green. This is a
beautiful picture. Do you like it? Do you want to see my picture? That’s all. Thank
you!
Liu Xiaoqing (grade 1), Nantoucheng Primary School, describe the picture in the
competition (2004–6)
Good afternoon. My name is Green. I am in Class1 Grade1. Look! This is a beautiful

picture. There are flowers. The flowers is(are) very pretty. This is a clock. I can
listen(hear) “ding-ding”. There are two dogs. They are very lovely and small. There
are so many fruit on the desk. They are very young(fresh). Look! This is a cat. It is in
front of a ball. This is a robot. It is a white and red robot. This is a green car. (The)
green car is small. This is a bear. The bear is very cute. This is a ball. It is small.
There are many pencil(s). They are blue and black. There is a clown. The clown has
a shirt and pant(s). His pants is yellow and blue. His shirt is yellow and green. He
has a hat. It is blue. This is (There are) three balloons. The balloon(s) is (are) blue,
red and green. This is a picture. The picture is beautiful. I like this picture very much.
Do you like it? Do you want to see my picture? That’s all. Thank you!
It is not difficult to see from the above test results that although the English leaping
experiment was not long (the longest experiment was only two years, most of which
was one year) that there are still several years before completing the whole experi-
ment (6 years), the listening and speaking ability of the students in the experimental
class have improved rapidly. Even in ordinary schools with poor student resources,
ordinary hardware facilities, and generally low level of parental education, the qual-
ity of teaching can be greatly improved and the goal of leaping development can
be achieved. This has made the principals and teachers of the experimental schools
strengthen their confidence.
A.3 Analysis
Although the “Innovative Study of the Leaping Development of English Education

Based on Semantic Perception Theory” has achieved great success in a number of
experimental schools, there are still many people who may have such questions: Is it
because the students in the experimental class are better than others? Did the school
add more English class hours to the experimental class? Or is the school chooses
the best English teacher to teach in the experimental class? For those who do not
understand the experiment, it is completely understandable to have such questions.
However, it turns out that these factors do have a certain impact on the experiment
results, but they are not the most fundamental factors.
First, let’s look at the students in the above-mentioned experimental classes.
Although due to the limited conditions, we did not conduct a pre-test analysis of
the English proficiency of the first batch of experimental students in Nanhai Exper-
imental Primary School, Dongfengdonglu Primary School, and Xiangnan Primary
School. However, from the formation process of the experimental class, we can also
see: the two classes that started the experiment in Nanhai Experimental Primary
School were established on the basis of the original class; the first two experimental
classes of Dongfengdonglu Primary School were made up of students who buy lap-
tops voluntarily by their parents; the first experimental class of Xiangnan Primary
School is similar to that of Nanhai Experimental Primary School—it is also based
on the original class.
It can be seen that the students in the English leaping experimental class are
not the best students selected from the same grade. In order to make the experiment
results more comparable, we conducted a pre-test on the first-grade students who just
entered the school in the second week of September 2003. The test results show that
there were no significant differences in letter recognition, vocabulary, and imitation
reading between the experimental and non-experimental classes (see Tables A.11,
A.12, A.13).
Then, let’s look at the teaching conditions in the experimental class. As mentioned
before, the two English teachers of Nanhai Experimental Primary School are new
teachers who have just graduated from Guangdong English College for two years; the
English teachers of the second-grade experimental class of Dongfengdonglu Primary
School just graduated from the Guangzhou University English College when they
participated in the experiment; the English teachers of Xiangnan Primary School
and Baimang Primary School are teachers with rich teaching experience. It can be
seen that this experiment does not require schools to select the most experienced
teachers for the experimental class. Of course, whether the teachers can quickly
accept and understand the English teaching concepts and teaching modes of “verbal
communication-centered” under the guidance of Semantic Perception Theory, and
apply them into practice, will have a direct relationship with whether the experiment
can achieve satisfied results in short time—while this does not depend on the teacher’s
experience, but on the principal’s emphasis on the experiment and the teacher’s
enthusiasm on it.
So is there any increase in instructional time in the experimental class? No. The
English leaping experiment does not require an increase in the number of hours,
and the actual situation is also true. Although the number of English hours varies
from school to school, the number of hours of English classes in the experimen-
tal and non-experimental classes is the same. In addition, the teaching materials
used in the experimental and non-experimental classes are the same, usually the
new curriculum standard materials uniformly required by the teaching and research
departments of the region. In addition, the teaching materials used in the experi-
mental and non-experimental classes are the same; usually, use the new curriculum
standard materials required by the teaching and research departments of the region
(For example, the Nanhai Experimental Primary School uses “Cambridge Children’s
English” textbooks, Dongfengdonglu Primary School uses the textbooks prepared
by the Guangzhou Teaching and Research Section, and Xiangnan Primary School
and Baimang Primary School use the Shenzhen Longman Edition textbook.).
It can be seen that the reason why the “innovative study of the leaping development
of English Education based on Semantic Perception Theory” can achieve a significant
improvement in the quality of English teaching in short time is not due to the increase
of class hours or the selection of students or teachers, and then what are the main
reasons? We believe that there are three main points.
Table A.11 Comparison table of pre-test data of the first-grade experimental class and non-experimental class of Dongfengdonglu Primary School in Guangzhou
(2003–9)
Levene’s test for t-test for Equality of Means
equality of v
variances
interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Alphabet .703 .404 .711 81 .479 .67 .94 −1.21 2.55
.713 77.927 .478 .67 .94 −1.20 2.55
Vocabulary 1.974 .164 1.645 81 .104 3.59 2.18 −.75 7.94
1.680 80.939 .097 3.59 2.14 −.66 7.85
Imitation .725 .397 1.721 81 .089 1.36 .79 −.21 2.94
1.692 70.943 .095 1.36 .81 −.24 2.97
Group statistics

Alphabet Expe.1 46 6.13 4.32 .64
N-Expe.1 37 5.46 4.22 .69
Vocabulary Expe.1 46 17.78 10.68 1.57
N-Expe.1 37 14.19 8.81 1.45
Imitation Expe.1 46 15.07 3.32 .49
N-Expe.1 37 13.70 3.89 .64
161
162
Table A.12 Comparison table of pre-test data of the first-grade experimental class and non-experimental class of Shenzhen Xiangnan Primary School (2003–9)
equality of variances
interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Alphabet 3.399 .069 −1.519 77 .133 −1.53 1.01 −3.53 .47
−1.516 73.520 .134 −1.53 1.01 −3.54 .48
Vocabulary .187 .666 −1.152 77 .253 −1.47 1.27 −4.00 1.07
−1.155 74.081 .252 −1.47 1.27 −3.99 1.06
Imitation 14.95 .000 −.285 77 .776 −.25 .89 −2.02 1.52
−.284 61.854 .778 −.25 .89 −2.04 1.53
Group statistics
Alphabet N-Expe.1 39 4.91 4.88 .78
Expe.1 40 6.44 4.02 .64
Vocabulary N-Expe.1 39 7.36 4.98 .80
Expe.1 40 8.82 6.25 .99
Imitation N-Expe.1 39 10.85 4.81 .77
Expe.1 40 11.10 2.88 .46
Table A.13 Comparison table of pre-test data of the first-grade experimental class and non-experimental class of Shenzhen Baimang Primary School (2003–9)
equality of
variances
interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Alphabet .075 .785 −.035 89 .972 −1.06E–02 .30 −.61 .59
−.035 88.835 .972 −1.06E–02 .30 −.61 .59
Vocabulary .492 .485 .092 89 .927 3.14E–02 .34 −.65 .71
.091 87.436 .927 3.14E–02 .34 −.65 .71
Imitation 2.566 .113 .922 89 .359 .62 .67 −.71 1.95
.925 83.251 .358 .62 .67 −.71 1.95
Group statistics
Alphabet N-Expe.1 45 1.01 1.45 .22

Expe.1 46 1.02 1.42 .21
Vocabulary N-Expe.1 45 1.44 1.73 .26
Expe.1 46 1.41 1.54 .23
Imitation N-Expe.1 45 10.78 2.70 .40
Expe.1 46 10.16 3.62 .53
163
1. Adhere to the main theoretical basis of “Semantic Perception Theory” (new

theory of children’s language development) is the key to the success of the
experiment
As mentioned before, the “innovative study of the leaping development of English

Education based on Semantic Perception Theory” is carried out under the guidance
of a new theory of children’s language development (Semantic Perception Theory).
As we all know, there are three different theories on “how children’s language abil-
ity immerges and develops” or “how children acquire language”, namely, acquired
environmental theory, innate determinism theory, and innate and acquired interac-
tion theory. Among them, “LAD theory” presented by Chomsky (1988) and “critical
period theory” represented by Lenneberg (1967) and “innate and acquired interaction
theory” (He 2004) represented by Canadian psychologist Donald Hebb have great
impacts. We believe that these theories have their own advantages and disadvantages
[for a detailed analysis, see “Semantic Perception Theory—A New Perspective on
Children’s Language Development” (He 2004)], but they still fail to explain the core
issues of children’s language development—Why do children of four or five years
old in all nationalities have the ability to master the spoken language with countless
grammatical rules? Is language competence inherited or acquired? Can it be used
directly to guide our second language teaching reform practice? Therefore, on the
basis of in-depth analysis and comprehensive summarization of the existing results
of Language Acquisition Theories, we absorb its strengths, abandon its shortcom-
ings, and combine our own research practices to propose a new “children’s language
development theory” to explain those core questions. At the same time, we hope that
we can use this theory to guide our second language teaching reform practice.
(1) Basic views of the Semantic Perception Theory (He 2004)

➀ Semantic perception is the sixth sense of human beings. The so-called semantic
perception refers to the sixth sense of perception that exists objectively and
is unique to the human brain and used to feel and recognize various semantic
relationships in spoken language. The semantic perception not only has its own
high-level speech center which is completely independent of other perceptual
cortex in the cerebral cortex, but also has a low-level center under the cortex that
is completely independent and does not overlap with other perceptual channels.
Therefore, the semantic perception can be separated from the original five kinds
of perceptual systems and become the sixth sense of human beings.
➁ The function of semantic perception is congenital and has critical period of
growth and development. The functions of semantic perception of the percep-
tion of phonetics and the analysis and recognition of semantics are related to
both congenital inheritance and acquisition processes, but mainly depend on
congenital inheritance; that is, it is congenital (see the literature (He 2004) for
specific proof). The characteristics of congenital inheritance must have a critical
period, and the semantic perception is not an exception. The critical period of
the semantic perception (the key period for children’s language acquisition) is
0–12 years old, and the best sensitive period is generally before 9 years old.
It starts to fall since the age of 9 and drops to around 1/2 at 12 years old and
dropped to around 10 to 15% at 14 years old (See “Children’s Language Sensi-
tivity Curve” in Chapter 5 of “Semantic Perception Theory—A New Perspective
on Children’s Language Development”).
➂ The in-depth analysis of the three different psychological processing pro-
cesses of phonetics, grammar, and semantics involved in speech comprehen-
sion (listening) and discourse generation (speaking) leads to the following
conclusions:
Phonetics psychological processing (including “speech perception” and “speech
discrimination”) is congenitally inherited.
Grammatical psychological processing (including “lexical analysis” and “syn-
tactic analysis”) is acquired.
Semantic psychological processing (analysis and recognition of semantics) is
congenitally inherited.
➃ On the basis of the above conclusions, the Semantic Perception Theory clearly
distinguishes the “listening and speaking” and the “reading and writing.” It is
believed that the former relies mainly on congenital inheritance, while the latter
mainly relies on acquired learning. They are verbal ability with two different
essential characteristics. Therefore, the teaching methods of these two types of
verbal abilities are also different.
➄ Under the guidance of Semantic Perception Theory, through the criticism and
inheritance of the major contemporary speech understanding and generation the-
ory, a new scientific and reasonable semantic perception-based “verbal under-
standing and generation model” and “semantic perception-based children’s lan-
guage acquisition model” are proposed. Such models have important guiding
significance not only for children’s second language learning, but also for sec-
ond language learning for adolescents and even adults (in the current situation
in our country, second language learning is mainly English learning).
(2) The Significance of the Semantic Perception Theory in the Reform of

Foreign Language Teaching
The significance of the Semantic Perception Theory in foreign language teaching

reform is mainly reflected in two aspects: first, the “semantic perception-based
language acquisition model” has a thought-provoking enlightenment for foreign
language teaching. Second, the “children’s language sensitivity curve” is of vital
practical significance for the current foreign language teaching in China.
➀ The Enlightenment of “Semantic Perception-based Children’s Language Acqui-

sition Model” in Foreign Language Teaching Design
According to the “semantic perception-based language acquisition model,” espe-
cially the law revealed by the internal and external feedback mechanism of the
model, “real-time two-way speech interaction with real communicators is a nec-
essary and sufficient condition for language learners to form and master listening
and speaking skills.” Foreign language teaching must emphasize the use of language
as the center, that is, “centered on verbal communication” rather than “centered on
grammar analysis,” nor “centered on listening training,” or “centered on reading and
writing training”. In order to make the foreign language teaching thought of “ver-
bal communication as the center” be implemented, it is necessary to implement the
“communicative” foreign language teaching mode (in the reality of our country, it
is to implement the “communicative” English teaching mode), and the entire teach-
ing activity process should be designed around the implementation of this teaching
mode.
➁ “Children’s linguistic sensitivity curve” (He 2004) is of vital importance to the
current foreign language teaching in China.
Foreign language teaching must firmly grasp the critical period of primary school
(especially in grades 1–4). In the four abilities of “listening, speaking, reading, and
writing,” the cultivation of the ability to “listen and speak” should be emphasized
during the critical period of the semantic perception period (especially in the best
age-group). In the primary school stage, the requirements on “listening, speaking,
reading, and writing” should not be juxtaposed. The ability to “read and write” is
mainly acquired later and is basically not restricted by the critical period, so it can
be postponed to higher grades of primary school or in senior period. In order to
effectively cultivate children’s foreign language listening and speaking ability, it is
important to create a good language environment. And this language environment
should support the training in both “listening” and “speaking.”
2. Communicative English Teaching Model Provides a Strategic Approach to
the Success of the Experiment
As mentioned before, the teaching philosophy of “Innovative Study of English Edu-
cation Leaping Development Based on Semantic Perception Theory” is “centered
on verbal communication.” In order to implement this central idea, we have pro-
posed an implementation plan for English leaping development: implement two
prerequisites (one is to implement innovative English instructional design based on
communicative-centered approach; another is to develop the high-quality teaching
resources needed for leaping teaching); highlight three key points (in order to ensure
that the teaching resources can meet the requirements of the leaping experiment
objectives, the selection of the content of the recourses should highlight three key
points—this part will be introduced in the “3” section below); handle the relationship
between the four aspects in the process of English teaching design (the relationship
between teacher-led and student-subject, teacher-centered instructional design and
student-centered instructional design, the relationship between autonomous learning
and collaborative learning, and the relationship between curriculum requirements
and leaping requirements); pay close attention to five teaching sessions (speaking,
listening, reciting, singing, acting). In order to better implement this plan in teaching
and the teaching idea of “verbal communication as the center,” it is necessary to
implement a communicative English teaching mode, as well as to carry out activi-
ties around the implementation of this model. In general, the implementation of the
communicative teaching model should include the following teaching activities:
(1) “Teacher—student interaction”
When teaching the new vocabulary and new sentence patterns, this way should be
used. This is the best way to implement a communicative teaching model in the class-
room—because under this condition, the teacher who is one of the communicators is
a master of language, he can correct the pronunciation, grammar, or semantic errors
that students have in the process of communication. In the dialogue, teachers can
talk to individual students or with the whole class. Teachers should pay attention to
both ends when talking to individual students; that is, choose the students who study
well and who study poorly; the former can play the role of demonstration; choose
the latter can help to promote students learning.
(2) “Desk mate Conversation”
The advantage of the desk mate conversations is the high level of participation (each
student has the opportunity to participate in communication); the shortcoming is that
both of them are beginners of language, not the masters, and often cannot correct
each other’s errors in the process of verbal communication. Thus, it can be seen that
both teacher–student dialogue and desk mate conversation have their own advantages
and disadvantages, which can complement each other in teaching.
(3) Let students listen to the materials for language extension related to text
(autonomous listening)
Although the autonomous listening method is less effective than the two-way speech
interaction method, it is still an effective mean to improve foreign language listening,
and usually, it is used to make up for the lack of English listening environment. In
order to achieve better results in listening skills development, one way is to provide
assurance of the quality and quantity of the listening materials—that is, the listening
materials must be closely matched with the text and be interesting (funny, intriguing,
or humorous), and each class should be accompanied by at least 4–5 pieces of such
materials; another way is to ensure that students have sufficient time to listen to these
materials in teaching.
(4) Let the students describe verbally (autonomous speaking)
“Autonomous speaking” is another way to foster speaking ability, such as picture talk
describing scenes, singing songs, reading classics, and so on. Singing and reciting are
other forms of “autonomous speaking.” It is beneficial to improve students’ speaking
ability by appropriate using of this method.
(5) Organize role-playing appropriately in conjunction with the needs of

teaching content
For texts such as “Little Sheep and Wolf Grandma” and “Tortoise and Rabbit Race”
or extracurricular reading materials, students can be grouped and act role-play in
English, which is good for students’ listening and speaking ability training and
deepening the understanding and memory of texts or extracurricular reading mate-

rials. Role-play is a good way to implement “communicative” English teaching, but
the degree of participation is not higher than desk mate conversation, and must be
carefully organized; otherwise, it will affect the teaching order and even waste time.
The “communicative English teaching mode” is actually the concrete manifesta-
tion of the five teaching links of “speaking, listening, singing, reciting, and acting” in
the process of English teaching. The most important part is the first three (“teacher–s-
tudent dialogue”, “desk mate conversation” and “extended listening and reading”).
These three links are necessary and indispensable, while others are optional. In the
process of implementing the “communicative English teaching model,” we must
have a clear understanding of this.
3. Rich and high-quality multimedia courseware and online teaching resources
create a good language environment for listening and speaking ability
training.
In order to effectively develop children’s foreign language listening and speaking
ability during the critical period (especially during the optimal age period), it is
necessary to create a good language environment for children (lack of language
environment is the root cause of the difficulty in second language learning). The large
number of pictures, texts, and listening materials provided by multimedia courseware
and online teaching resources can make up for the lack of foreign language learning
environment and create more favorable conditions in the following two aspects:
(1) Discourse materials with abundant pictures, text, and sounds can create a
good autonomous listening environment
Multimedia courseware and online teaching resources provide students with a variety
of extended listening and reading materials such as text, sound, video, and animation.
Through vivid images and standardized pronunciation, students’ vision, listening,
and motivation can be stimulated, and a good learning situation can be created.
Thus, their learning results can be improved. In order to develop teaching resources
that meet the requirements of English leaping teaching, three key points must be
highlighted:
➀ Highlight the interest under the premise of ensuring ideological and intellectual
nature: ensure the interestingness of materials in both form and content—as to
the form, it requires abundant of pictures, texts, and sounds (mainly in the lower
grades of primary schools); from the content, it should make students love it (all
grades).
➁ Highlight the dubbing under the premise of paying attention to pictures and texts:
each piece must have a standardized English dubbing. If the conditions allow, it
is best to provide dubbing with both fast and normal reading rhythms, or at least
provide a normal rhythm dubbing.
➂ Highlight the paragraphs in the arrangement of the content of words, sentences,
and articles: in the construction of the extended listening resource database,
teacher should emphasis materials with good content, logic, and plots, including
scene dialogues, songs, stories, customs, legends, celebrity anecdotes, humorous

jokes, etc.
(2) Multimedia resources help create a good conversation environment
Multimedia courseware and network resources can not only provide autonomous
listening environment, but also make up for the lack of English textbook conversation
materials. In fact, some multimedia resources which abundant of pictures, texts, and
sounds can be used for autonomous listening, teacher–student dialogue, and desk
mate conversations. However, there are two important things to note when choosing
and using conversational materials: first, the choice of speaking materials should
be based on opportunities to support teacher–student dialogue and the desk mate
conversation; second, regardless of the choice of materials or the use in the teaching
process, teachers must pay attention to demonstration, expansion, and migration
of the materials and cannot stay in simple, mechanical imitation. Moreover, while
developing students’ language competence, teachers should also pay attention to the
cultivation of students’ thinking ability.
A.4 Conclusion
In summary, the results achieved from different types of experimental schools give us
reasons to believe that the theoretical basis of this experiment is reliable and scientific;
the implementations we propose are effective and can be promoted. It is because of
the guidance of scientific theories and the effective implementation of operational
methods and strategies and the support of multimedia teaching resources, the goal
(greatly improve students’ listening and speaking ability, and fundamentally solve
the problem of “deaf-and-dumb English”) of “Innovative Study of English Education
Leaping Development based on Semantic Perception Theory” is fully achievable. The
large amount of statistical data and numerous successful cases obtained by various
experimental schools over the past two years have fully proved this point.
At present, the English leaping experiment not only conducts a deeper exploration
based on the network environment (the experimental class has a dedicated network
classroom or uses the school’s public network classroom), but also conducts a seri-
ous study base on the non-network (the traditional teaching environment that relies
mainly on chalk, blackboards, recorders, and photocopiers) environments from the
second half of 2004 (for this reason, we also established a leaping experimental Area
in rural Areas in Fengning County, Hebei Province, since June 2004). In other words,
in the future, “the innovative study of the leaping development of English Education”
based on Semantic Perception Theory will develop in a broader and deeper direction
on the two levels of the network environment and the non-network environment.
References
Chomsky, N. (1988). Language and problems of knowledge, pp. 62-63 页. Cambridge: Mass. MIT
Press.
He, K. K. (2004). Semantic perception theory—A new theory on children’s language development.
People’s Education Press.
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundation of language. New York: Wiley, Inc.
Wang, D. C. (1997, February). Neurolinguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education
Press.
Appendix B
Guide to the Construction of Teaching Resource
Database of “Innovative Study of English
Education Leaping Development Based
on Semantic Perception Theory”
Kekang He
B.1 Selection Principle of Extended Listening Materials
In order to meet the requirements of the innovative study of the leaping development
of English Education based on Semantic Perception Theory, it is necessary to estab-
lish a relevant English teaching resource database. The relevant resources selected
should meet the following eight principles:
1. The content must be correct—no political or ideological mistakes.
2. Emotionally healthy—conducive to the cultivation of adolescents’ sentiments,
not the opposite.
3. Funny and interesting—can stimulate students’ interest in learning, so that
students can learn and love learning.
4. Language must be standardized—no errors in vocabulary, syntax, and semantics.
5. Standard dubbings—each piece of information must have a standard English
dubbing. If conditions allow, provide both fast and normal reading rhythms of
the dubbings, or at least provide a normal rhythm dubbing.
6. Fluent language—the sentences should be concise and smooth, suitable for
primary school students to read, if necessary, can rewrite the original materials.
7. Note with hyperlink—for the new words, characters, and allusions in the original
materials, it is necessary to set “hot keys,” that is, to use hyperlinks to note—not
only to explain new words, but also add pronunciation, so that students can learn
independently.
8. Grasp the critical period—the selection of extended listening and reading mate-
rials should be carried out around each grade, each textbook, and each text, so
as to build a rich teaching resource database, to achieve the purpose of using
the resource database for simultaneous teaching and expanding listening and
reading. According to the requirements of “Semantic Perception Theory” (new
theory of children’s language development), we should pay close attention to
K. He
Institute of Modern Education and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
172 Appendix B: Guide to the Construction of Teaching Resource Database …
the critical period—before the age of 12. Therefore, during the process of the
construction of the resource database (both qualitative and quantitative), special
attention should be paid to strengthening the collection, collation, and processing
of relevant materials throughout the primary school stage (grades 1–6), and it is
necessary to develop a resources database of primary level with rich content as
soon as possible.
B.2 Content Classification Criteria for Extended Listening

Materials
In order to guide students to expand their listening and reading in a purposeful and
planned way in the future, it is suggested that the selected materials, which conform
to the above principles, be classified according to the following criteria (The relevant
materials of each textbook in each grade are classified according to this criterion
and the only difference lies in the difficulty, length and number of new words of the
content.)
1. Interesting knowledge
2. Wisdom enlightenment
3. Fable stories
4. Humorous anecdotes
5. Emotional expressions
6. Celebrity anecdotes
7. Folk customs.
It should be emphasized here that from the content’s point of view, the relevant
materials of each text should be divided into seven categories according to the cri-
teria above. The purpose of choosing these materials is to carry out synchronous
teaching and learning as well as extend listening and reading, so that every student
can increase the listening or reading quantity of related materials in the textbook
as much as possible with interest. In addition, with autonomous learning activities,
such as oral expression, neighborhood communication and group discussion, it is
possible to expand the amount of vocabulary and language knowledge that students
have mastered in each class, thus achieving the leap-forward development of English
learning. In order to enable pupils to truly consciously and voluntarily listen to these
materials and change “requiring students to listen” to “students want to listen and
love to read” (not the general “thinking,” but a kind of “demand,” a strong desire), it is
necessary to select materials from the resource bank, regardless of which aspects of
the content should be interesting, vivid, and small. Students have a strong attraction.
If this cannot be achieved, even if the content of the resource bank is richer, students
will not take the initiative to see it. The requirement of extensive listening and reading
will not be fulfilled, and the goal of leapfrog development will be difficult to achieve.
Thus, it can be seen that “interest, image, and vividness” (of course, interest, image,
and vividness under the premise of “correct content” and “emotional health”) are the
primary factors that need to be considered in the construction of Teaching Resource
Bank of “leapfrog development and innovation experiment of English education.”
Appendix B: Guide to the Construction of Teaching Resource Database … 173
The requirements of interest, image, and vividness usually include two aspects: one
is the interest, image, and vividness of the form of expression, the combination of
pictures and text, and the lively and beautiful form, which can be achieved by means
of multimedia technology such as pictures, animation, dubbing, and video activity
images; the other is the interest, image, and vividness of the content itself, which
is different from the mediocrity. Popular laughter is not a low-level amusement, but
through stories, humorous anecdotes, fables containing certain philosophical princi-
ples, aspiring folk customs and celebrity anecdotes that can inspire people to forge
ahead… And so on, there appears the thought connotation and the wisdom spark
content to attract the children. In a word, we should lay stress on both form and
content in choosing materials for expanding listening and reading in the lower
grades of primary schools. Every listening and reading material should be inter-
esting, vivid and vivid in its form of expression. We should strive to use multimedia
form to make it full of pictures, texts, and sounds, which can quickly attract children’s
attention and interest; the content itself is interesting, vivid and vivid, so that every
child can’t let go at a glance: he wants to look in the middle at the beginning, and he
wants to see in the middle. For the expansion of listening and reading materials in
the middle and senior grades of primary schools, more attention should be paid
to their content, not necessarily to their form (i.e., text-based, not necessarily
multimedia or animation). In a word, only if each expanded listening and reading
material can be selected according to the above requirements, can our experiment be
successful.
In order to facilitate the construction of the Teaching Resource Bank of “English
education leap-forward development and innovation experiment” in the future, the
experimental schools should follow the choice of expanding the content of listening
and reading materials. Following is an example of reading materials according to the
above content classification criteria, which can be used for reference by teachers in
various schools. (It should be noted that: 1) These materials are only text forms at
present, and have not yet been multimediatized, so they do not necessarily meet the
requirements of storage; 2) For which texts, in which books and in which grades are
these materials suitable remains to be examined and approved by English teachers.
Here, they are only listed as a reference for content selection and classification).
B.3 Examples of Various Extended Listening and Reading

Materials (Omitted)
1. Example of interesting knowledge (“Communication between Animals”)

2. Example of wisdom enlightenment (“The King and the Magician”)
3. Example of fable stories (“City Mouse and Country Mouse”)
4. Example of humorous anecdotes (“Mark Twain and Deaf Person”)
5. Example of emotional expressions (“Academy Awards Speech”)
6. Example of celebrity anecdotes (“The First Plane and the Wright Brothers”)
7. Example of folk customs (“The Story of Chopsticks”).
Appendix C
Exploration of Primary School English Teaching
Under the Guidance of Semantic Perception
Theory
Bingna Chen, Junfen Lin and Kekang He
Abstract This paper firstly reflects on the various misunderstandings in the current
English teaching in primary school. Then, under the guidance of Semantic Perception
Theory, we construct an English teaching model centered on verbal communication.
On the basis of this, taking “What’s your favorite fruit?” as an example, demonstrate
how to carry out teaching practice centered on verbal communication from the per-
spectives of teaching activity design, context creation, and multimedia resources’
utilization.
Keywords English teaching · Communication · Semantic Perception Theory ·

Teaching activity · Content creation · Resource utilization
English teaching is a language subject education. From the perspective of linguis-

tics, English teaching includes language and speech. The former refers to linguistic
knowledge such as phonetics, vocabulary, grammar, and sentence patterns, while the
latter refers to the language competence of listening, speaking, reading, and writing.
The essence of language is communication; communication is not only the purpose
of language learning but also the way of language acquisition. Communicative Lan-
guage Teaching has been paid more and more attention. The “New English Curricu-
lum Standards” pointed out that the English curriculum in the basic education stage
emphasizes the application of activities and advocates experience and participation.
This teaching requirement that emphasizes the acquisition of linguistic knowledge
and competence through the experience of linguistic situations is precisely the result
of the advantages of communicative English teaching. At present, English teaching
reform is being carried out vigorously throughout the country. However, from the
reality, there is still a long way to go between the achievements of reform and people’s
expectations.
B. Chen
Nanhai Experimental Primary School, Foshan City, Guangdong Province 528200, China
J. Lin · K. He
Institute of Modern Education and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
176 Appendix C: Exploration of Primary School English Teaching Under …
C.1 Rethink Current English Teaching in Primary School
The new English curriculum standard provides a new curriculum system for English
teaching in the basic education stage, including basic requirements for content,
goals, strategies, etc. But this is only a rough framework, and it is difficult to avoid
some deviations in understanding. For example, in the current theoretical research
and teaching practice in primary school English teaching, the following unilateral
understandings and even misunderstandings have emerged:
C.1.1 “Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing” Are

of Equal Importance
From the perspective of the training objectives, we ignore the critical period of growth
of semantic perception; just list the requirements of “listening, speaking, reading,
and writing” in primary school. No matter in the teaching methods or requirements
of assessment, we always emphasis the equal importance of “listening, speaking,
reading, and writing,” while ignore the training of “listening and speaking” in the
critical period (especially in the best age of critical period—before 9 years old) of
semantic perception. In addition, many tests and examinations organized by teaching
and research departments or schools are mainly based on word recognition, word
parsing, and sentence comprehension. The objective effect of such tests and examina-
tions is actually to emphasize reading and writing rather than listening and speaking,
which makes the above erroneous views produce more serious consequences.
C.1.2 Focus on the Teaching of Language Knowledge, While

Ignore the Cultivation of Students’ Comprehensive
Language Ability
In terms of teaching methods, with textbooks as the outline and around the text-
books, the basic teaching process in the classroom generally follows the following
procedures: reviewing old knowledge—teaching new knowledge—repeatedly prac-
ticing and consolidating (some may also be expanded). This practice is usually called
“completing the content of the curriculum standard,” but the requirement of “aim-
ing at cultivating students’ comprehensive language ability” stipulated in the actual
curriculum standard has not been implemented at all. What students learn is the lan-
guage knowledge stipulated in the textbook, not how to use English in real life. This
kind of teaching method is actually centered on the teaching of language knowledge:
teachers arrange each knowledge point into every day’s teaching according to the
linear order of textbooks; so-called experience is to repeatedly practice knowledge
points (words, sentence patterns, etc.) with various forms of games at the same level;
Appendix C: Exploration of Primary School English Teaching Under … 177
to teach words, sentence patterns, or dialogues in one class hour and to teach songs
in one class hour. Stories, one-hour review, and consolidation are typical practices in
primary school English classroom teaching. Although the current teaching method
centered on language knowledge teaching no longer emphasizes grammar analysis,
it still emphasizes language knowledge and ignores verbal communication. What is
slightly different is that these “knowledge” is more situational than the original one.
C.1.3 Overemphasizing “Activity Centered” in Classroom

Teaching Design Is Very Lively on the Surface,
but in Fact It Is not Helpful to Improve Students’
Listening and Speaking Ability
Through overemphasizing “activity centered,” some believe that activities are both
means and purposes. Usually, it is good to activate the classroom atmosphere and
arouse the enthusiasm of students through various activities. But if we regard “ac-
tivities” as the purpose of teaching and blindly engage in various activities, we will
not only fail to achieve the desired results, but also seriously interfere with the
accomplishment of classroom teaching objectives. In fact, this over-emphasis on
“activity-centered” bias has been quite common, which is mainly manifested in the
following aspects:
(1) Lack of communication
We often see situations like this: teachers use fruit to teach words; first, let students
play guessing games or learn new words in the form of “drive a train,” then, let
the students play the game “touch and say” to review these words, and finally use
the courseware (let the student manipulate the computer and drag the word to the
corresponding picture) to consolidate new words. These four activities make the
classroom very lively, and the students are also very excited (in some open classes,
the teacher uses some rewards such as candies, so the students are even more excited).
However, during this nearly 20-min period, the activities only stayed at the same
level (the understanding and memorization of the meaning of the word). There is no
training in speech communication and listening and speaking. Then, how can such
activities promote the development of students’ language skills?
(2) Lack of participation
Many teachers have the feeling that if they don’t teach the contents three or four
times and don’t ask questions one by one, they always feel unreliable after a class.
This kind of feeling is essentially the problem of teaching concept. Teachers are
still restricted by the teacher-centered teaching idea. The reflection of this concept
in the classroom is that teachers read and students follow together collectively. The
dialogue between teachers and individual students occupies most of the time in the
classroom. Even if there are two people communicating and group communicating,
it is often just a kind of embellishment, because more time should be spared for
students to perform (5 or 6 students performing or singing on the stage in a group).
Sometimes, the voice of “Let me try” or “I can try” of a few students even makes
teachers forget that more students are only in the audience at this time; that is to say,
the apparent liveliness actually conceals the real phenomenon that most students are
not able to participate in the teaching process.
(3) Focus on the form while ignore the content
As mentioned above, one of the characteristics of many primary school English

classes, especially open classes, is the excitement. In addition to singing and playing,
teachers also use a variety of games and rewards and punishments to keep students
in a state of excitement; moreover, some teachers will also use material rewards such
as candy and stationery as an aid to classroom evaluation. When we observe classes,
we often see students have high motivations; many students will even stand up. Once
the teacher does not call them, they will be very depressed, and some will sigh: “Oh,
not me!” The above activities will lead students to be more interested in the activities
than the content. Some students who are very shy will be ignored, and some students
who have not received the attention from teachers for a long time may even be tired
of learning.
C.1.4 Misuse of Multimedia in Situational Creation Lead

to the Waste of Classroom Teaching Time
With the introduction of multimedia into the classroom, more and more teachers
begin to use computers in English classes. At present, computers are mostly used
to create situations and play exercises, and some teachers also use multimedia net-
works to provide students with an environment for autonomous listening and reading.
While multimedia computers enrich English classroom teaching by means of pic-
tures, videos, and animations, the abuse of multimedia has gradually become a topic
of concern. Some classroom teaching activities always revolve around computers
and courseware, and even the proportion of human–computer interaction is much
higher than that of human–computer interaction. Students are constantly playing
and listening with computers, and students are enjoying listening and playing in
class. Teachers are very relaxed, but what do students learn after a class? Others sim-
ply use the computer as a means of creating situations (such as watching a video and
perceiving it as a whole, then importing new lessons, then extracting some words or
sentences from the video for new unit teaching), or simply use the computer as a tool
for game practice (such as the example of teaching fruit words mentioned earlier),
which is actually a waste of valuable teaching time.
C.2 Construct Primary School English Teaching Centered

on Verbal Communication by Using Semantic
Perception Theory
Semantic Perception Theory is put forward by Professor He Kekang on the basis

of inheriting and developing Chomsky’s theory of children’s language development.
He believes that human beings have a kind of “semantic perception” besides the five
perceptions of vision, hearing, taste, smell, and body. In the book Semantic Percep-
tion Theory, he cited a large number of brain neuroscience research achievements
and cases in the fields of linguistics, psychology, and pedagogy to demonstrate com-
prehensively and scientifically that “semantic perception” has not only innate genetic
characteristics, but also a “critical period”. On this basis, he put forward a new theory
of Language Awareness—Children’s Language Development. Semantic Perception
Theory is the inheritance and development of the previous theory of children’s lan-
guage development. It has important guiding significance for English teaching in
primary and secondary schools.
C.2.1 Grasp the Critical Period of Semantic Perception

Which Should Give Priority to Listening and Speaking
Skills in Primary School
The critical period of the growth and development of semantic perception is about
0–12 years old (before the first and second grades of junior high school), and the
best age range is from 0 to 9 years old. In other words, English teaching must firmly
grasp the critical period of primary school (especially the best age range from 1 to
4). Among the four abilities of “listening, speaking, reading and writing,” the ability
to “listen and speak” is mainly congenitally inherited according to the linguistic
view and the ability to “read and write” is mainly acquired later. Therefore, in the
critical period of the semantic perception (especially in the best age period), the
ability to “listen and speak” should be emphasized. In the primary school stage, the
requirements of “listening, speaking, reading, and writing” should not be treated as
equal important. The ability to “read and write” is mainly acquired later which is not
restricted by the critical period, so it is not too late to postpone the training to the
high grades of primary school or junior high school.
C.2.2 The English Teaching in Primary School Must be

Centered on Verbal Communication
The essence of language is communication. Speech communication includes two

processes: comprehension (listening) and expression (speaking). According to “Chil-
dren’s Language Acquisition Model Based on Semantic Perception”, especially the
rules revealed by the internal and external feedback mechanism of the model, “two-
way real-time verbal interaction”—especially “real-time two-way verbal interaction
with real communicators is the sufficient and necessary condition for language learn-
ers to form and master listening and speaking abilities”, it means that English class-
room teaching must emphasize “verbal communication as the center”, not “grammar
analysis, listening training, reading and writing training as the center”. Of course,
emphasizing “verbal communication as the center” does not mean weakening the
listening training; on the contrary, we should strengthen the listening training.
C.2.3 Create a Good Foreign Language Learning

Environment for Students During the Critical Period
of Semantic Perception
In order to effectively cultivate children’s foreign language listening and speaking

ability, while emphasizing the critical period of growth and development of the
semantic perception, it is necessary to create a good environment for children to
learn (lack of language environment is the root cause of the difficulty of second
language learning), and the language environment should be able to support both
“listening” and “speaking” training. In addition to the teacher–student interaction
and student–student interaction, the problem in environment of “listening” train-
ing can also be solved by introducing multimedia teaching courseware and rich
listening resources on the Internet into the classroom, and the environment for train-
ing the speaking ability depends on the English teacher’s construction of verbal
communication-centered teaching design which requires training of the teachers
related to teaching design skills; otherwise, it will be difficult to carry out.
C.3 The Practice of Primary School English Teaching

Under the Guidance of Semantic Perception Theory
In order to effectively cultivate children’s listening and speaking ability in foreign

languages, while emphasizing the critical period of the growth and development of
semantic perception, we should create a good language environment for children to
learn foreign languages (lack of language environment is the root cause of the spe-
cial difficulties in second language learning). Moreover, this language environment
should be able to support both “listening” and “speaking” training at the same time. In
addition to the interpersonal interaction between teachers and students, the environ-
ment of listening training can also be solved by introducing multimedia courseware
and rich listening resources on the Internet into the classroom, while the environ-
ment of training foreign language “speaking” ability can be constructed by English
teachers using “verbal communication-centered” classroom teaching design, which
requires relevant teaching for English teachers. Design skills training; otherwise, it
will not work:
• Design activities centered on verbal communication.
• Create good atmosphere for listening and speaking training.
• Provide abundant teaching resources by using the advantages of multimedia and
network.
C.3.1 Design Activities Centered on Verbal Communication
In order to implement the teaching method of “verbal communication-centered,”

the teacher should carefully design the questions, the desk mate communication,
the group communication, and the autonomous speaking according to the teaching
content of each class.
The teacher is the master of language. Their questions can give the student a
good example and can achieve good results for the implementation of “real-time
two-way speech interaction”. For example, when I was teaching Cambridge Chil-
dren’s English First Volume “Unit 9 What’s your favorite fruit?” I asked students in
English by using objects: “Do you like the pear? What color is the pear? What’s your
favorite fruit? By combining the previously learned knowledge, students not only
reflect the interaction between teachers and students, but also achieve the internal-
ization of language knowledge. However, time is limited, teachers cannot spend all
of the time on asking questions, and it is impossible to ask every student questions.
Therefore, in order to enable every student to have the opportunity to speak, teachers
should also design activities of desk mate commutation. This is an effective solution
to implement “real-time two-way speech interaction”. Although there is a flaw in this
kind of speech interaction—the two sides of the communication are not the masters
of the language, but it also has a great advantage—every student has the opportunity
to participate in two-way speech interaction, which can make the teaching method
and teaching mode which centered on verbal communication truly implemented, and
this is precisely what the teacher-led “teacher–student interaction” approach lacks of.
When teaching Cambridge Children’s English “Where is it?”, we collected a large
number of pictures related to orientation, and let students look at the pictures and use
the sentence “Where is the …?” to talk, encourage students to say as much as pos-
sible. Some students can combine sentence patterns they’ve learnt before like “How
many…” “What color…” “Do you like…” to ask their neighbors’ questions, which
indicates that good teaching effects have been achieved. It can be seen that the two
kinds of real-time two-way speech interaction methods of “teacher–student interac-
tion” and “desk mate communication” have their own advantages and disadvantages,
and they can complement each other. These two forms of verbal interaction should
be well combined as the main method of English teaching. Although students are
less involved in “group talks,” this model is also interactive and has certain benefits
on training speaking. For example, when teaching “What’s your favorite animal?”,
we collect songs related to animals and let students sing in a group of four. In this
process, students can learn from each other, advanced students can help poor stu-
dents, and learn in a more pleasant atmosphere. However, this kind of group activities
requires teachers to give timely guidance; otherwise, the classroom discipline may be
poor, inefficiency, or even fail to achieve the expected teaching results. “Autonomous
speaking”—let students use a foreign language to describe something or an event
(including time, place, person, passing, result, etc.) is also effective in training stu-
dents’ speaking ability. After the teaching of the story “What can a cat do?” in grade
two, I tried to let students describe what cats or other animals can do in English.
One student described: “Hello! I am Ally. I like cat very much. A cat can eat the
carrots. A cat can run. A cat can sleep. A cat can drink milk. A cat cannot play the
basketball.” Another student described as: “I like monkey. Monkey likes to eat the
bananas. Monkey can jump. Monkey can climb. Monkey cannot swim.” It can be
seen that through the autonomous speaking training, not only can students’ English
expression ability be trained, but also the ability of association and imagination can
be cultivated.
C.3.2 Create Good Atmosphere for Listening and Speaking

Training
The creation of language environment can organically combine the learning of lan-
guage knowledge with verbal communication. In English teaching, teachers influ-
ence and guide students’ learning through verbal communication. Teachers are not
only the counselors, but also the organizers and participants of the group learning
(collective or collaborative), the communicative objects of the learners. The best
environment to support students’ listening and speaking ability training undoubtedly
should have conversations and communication with real communicators. Students
can naturally immerse in such an environment—acquiring language knowledge—
and improve their verbal ability during the communication process unconsciously.
Therefore, designing a real or simulated language communication environment is
the focus of English instruction design. For this purpose, teachers can design activ-
ities such as look at the pictures and make a dialogue, situational dialogue, and
self-made stories in teaching. In the activity of look at the picture and make a dia-
logue, the teacher is the leader and demonstrator. For example, when teaching the
first-grade students: “How many…”, we collected a lot of pictures about food, fruits,
stationery and animals and used sentence patterns: “What can you see? How many…
are there? What color…?” to ask the students. In this way, students can use English
flexibly in situations the teachers create by using pictures. In the lesson of “What
do you like?”, we designed the activity: “simulate the plots and make dialogue”
in the teaching according to the students’ active and lively psychological charac-
teristics. We let students simulate the most common scenes in life (such as in fruit
shops, McDonald’s, KFC, Chinese/Western restaurants, supermarkets, flower shops)
to communicate with others happily in groups. Students can learn and consolidate
new words and sentence patterns and improve their verbal communication ability
unconsciously. In addition, we should also recognize that children not only like to
listen to stories, but also like to make their own stories, and have the ability to com-
pose stories by looking at the pictures. I have tried one experiment: provide students
some pictures of fable they familiar with (foxes and crows), and let students make
their own stories. As a result, second-grade students compose an excellent story:
After a few days, Miss Bird has another big cake.
Fox: Miss Bird, you are so pretty. Sing a song, please.
Bird: (Keep silent.)
Fox: Miss Bird, your feather is so beautiful, show it to me, OK?
Bird: (Keep silent.)
Fox: Miss Bird, there is a leaf on your tail. Please have a look.
Bird: Look at your head. (Miss Bird throw a stone to the fox.)
In order to make up for the lack of environment on training listening, we should
provide more story-rich multimedia listening materials for students to listen and
read. These pictures, texts, and sounds are very interesting and can make students
enhance their listening unconsciously. Good teachers also often use the non-verbal
ways (such as speech, gestures, posture, movements, teaching aids) to help students
understand the English they are listening.
In addition, it can also effectively broaden the channels for students to learn and
express language by means of English teaching, classroom situational arrangement,
and the combination of extracurricular and extracurricular activities (Fan et al.).
C.3.3 Provide Abundant Teaching Resources by Using

the Advantages of Multimedia and Network
A large amount of input and natural acquisition is an important experience in learning

a foreign language (Hu 2001). Much input means reading and listening a lot. Of
course, in the lower grades of primary school, a lot of listening is the main part.
Listening not only can effectively train students’ semantic perception, but also is
an important prerequisite for students to form rich and flexible language expression
ability.
Consider the characteristics of children of the lower grades of primary school

(little accumulation of language knowledge; lack of basic communicative compe-
tence; direct reading ability is not yet available). The abundant multimedia English
teaching materials on the Internet can not only provide students with the knowledge
required by the curriculum standards, but also provide students with a large number
of learning resources related to texts, so as to achieve the goal of expanding extracur-
ricular knowledge. Multimedia and network technology are used in many ways in
the classroom, but we believe that these technologies still play an important role in
English teaching in two ways:
(1) Provide listening materials
Multimedia and Web-based courseware provides text, sound, video, and animation
to students. Through vivid images and standardized pronunciations, it can stimulate
students’ vision and hearing, create good learning atmosphere, stimulate their learn-
ing motivation; thus, improve the learning results. It is important to point out that
the choice of such courseware must be closely related to the current teaching content
and the level of students’ cognition. The courseware for the lower grades of primary
school must be abundant in picture, text, and sound. Because the text can provide
language information, pictures can play the role of gesture, body language, teach-
ing aid, movements, etc., to help students understand language information; sound
can help training students’ listening. So for the lower grades’ students, we should
provide resources full of picture, text, and sounds. For example, when teaching the
word “hot,” teachers can collect animations or pictures of summer with reading: “I
feel very hot.” When teaching “Four seasons,” teachers can collect a large number
of flash animations about the four seasons from the Internet, and let students watch
the animation while listening to the recording: “Hello! My dear children! Welcome
to spring! In spring, everything is Green. The trees are green. I like spring. I can fly a
kite.” These illustrated textbooks provide students with realistic audiovisual scenes.
Students can learn independently through audio, pictures, animation, and audio dic-
tionary, which not only makes English learning more lively, fun, and enjoyable, but
also adapts to individual differences between students. When teaching “what’s your
favorite fruit?”, we provide students with four stories in the form of multimedia
(Monkey and the Fruits; The Fishing Cat; The Fox and the Bear; Making Friends);
when teaching “Animals,” several well-known ancient fables (The Frog in the Well;
Hare and Tortoise; The Rabbits and the Fox; The Wolf and the Sheep) were adapted
into multimedia English courseware. These stories not only provide students with
listening materials, but also create a language environment for imitation. For senior
students, after listening to and reading the article, they can ask many questions for
students to think and answer. For example, when teaching the unit “Weather” in the
fourth grade, the teacher collected some short articles about weather forecast and
asked the students to answer the following questions after listening: “What is the
weather like in…” “What is the highest temperature in…” “Do you need to bring
your umbrella tomorrow?” This teaching link not only detects the students’ under-
standing of the passage, but also lays a foundation for students to imitate the passage
for oral weather report.
(2) Provide speaking materials
Multimedia and online courseware not only can be used to support students’ listening
training, but also can provide students rich language materials for verbal communi-
cation and storytelling. For example, when teaching “Four seasons,” we give students
several pictures of the seasons, and let them tell which season it is, and describe the
features of the scenery and people’s activities in English; when we teach “People,”
we use courseware to create a “pantomime” situation for students; there are vari-
ous characters (tall, thin, different occupations) in it. Let students compile a story
for these characters. Or let the students describe the clown after reading the story
“A clown”. When teaching “Clothes,” we use the courseware to create a simulated
clothing store scene for students to choose the appropriate clothing for a certain event
(banquet, sports meeting, performance, etc.) and give reasons. When teaching the
“Four seasons” lesson, most of our students have never seen the winter in the north
Area, but with a picture or a video, students can feel the four seasons in the north
and anywhere in the world. In such a situation, they can say more things; otherwise,
students can only say “It’s cold. I can make snow man. I want to wear coat.”
Another example is that when teaching “Family,” we let students watch video
clips of some foreigners’ family life, which can not only enrich students’ language
information, but also allow them to understand the cultural differences. In short, the
use of multimedia scenarios and verbal materials provided by courseware can greatly
enrich the information students need for verbal communication, so that students have
a more realistic experience and can develop their ideas and visions.
C.4 A Case Study of English Classroom Teaching

in Primary Schools Under the Guidance of Semantic
Perception Theory
Case: What’s your favorite fruit?
【Content】】
Cambridge Children’s English Level 1: Unit 9 What’s your favorite fruit?
This is the second lesson, and students have learned common fruit words: apple,
banana, mango, pear, peach, strawberry, lemon, watermelon; and sentence patterns:
What’s your favorite…? My favorite … is…. The teaching content of this lesson is
based on the sentence “What’s your favorite…?” provided by the textbook. Through
the activities like, look at the pictures and make dialogue, autonomous learning,
collaborative performance and autonomous listening, reading, storytelling, etc. Stu-
dents can communicate in English about their favorite fruits, colors, animals, etc.,
and learn to sing their favorite songs and compose their favorite stories.
【Concept】】
Semantic Perception Theory holds that the fundamental purpose of language is com-
munication, and the best way to cultivate students’ language competence is also
communication. Under the guidance of the theory of linguistic perception, with the
help of multiresources provided by multimedia network, this course aims to culti-
vate students’ listening and speaking abilities and comprehensive language use abil-
ities in rich contexts and real communicative situations through the breakthrough
of pictorial dialogue, self-learning, cooperative performance of children’s songs and
self-listening, reading and story-acting.
【Purpose】
】
(1) Learn 4 songs with the help of multimedia resources according to the
requirements of teaching and communication.
(2) Use PPT to provide pictures and key words and sentences related to the content
to help students cultivate their verbal expressions with the help of key points.
(3) Help students cultivate their ability of verbal communication and the ability to
use English in daily life with the help of the verbal communication activities of
teacher–student Q & A, desk mate communication, role-play etc.
(4) Help students enhance their semantic perception, improve listening ability, and
cultivate and improve the consciousness and ability of using modern information
technologies by autonomous listening to songs and stories.
(5) Through learning stories, ideological and moral education is infiltrated subtly,
so that students realize that they can’t do things with half-heartedness and learn
to be ashamed of getting something for nothing; through performance activities,
children’s sense of mutual cooperation is gradually cultivated.
【Preparation of resources】
】
(1) Resources for autonomous listening: four songs (What’s your favorite fruit?
Mango chant, Apple chant, Turnip chant), four stories (The Monkey and the
Fruits,The Bear and the Fox, Making Friends, Fishing Cat), listening questions;
(2) Materials that aid in verbal communication: five pictures (colors, drinks, sports,
animals, fruits).
【Process】
】
Step I Warm up: Apple tree

Sing the song: Apple tree (a song which students are familiar with).
Let students sing familiar songs can stimulate interests in learning and create
leaning atmosphere.
Step II Revision
(1) T: shows the objects or toys and asks Ss questions (T refers to Teacher, and
Ss refers to students. The same as below)
Do you like the apple? What color is the apple? What’s your favorite fruit?
Do you like the dog? What’s your favorite animal?
In this step, teachers use visualized aids to arouse students’ desire to speak
English, and test what they have learned.
Do you like the cake? What’s your favorite food?

(2) Practice
In this session, students are required to answer questions raised by the computer.
This will not only provide students with a good listening environment, but also
motivate students to quickly answer questions after thinking in English.
Ss go to answer the questions in CAI,and see who can answer them quickly.
(3) Picture talking
T: There are some pictures here. Let’s see who can say more? (Provide five pictures
for discussion; students do autonomous speaking and desk mate communication
under the guidance of key points.).
Picture A: colors
Key points I like green. I like blue. My favorite color is purple.
Picture B: drink
Key points I like milk very much. My favorite drink is milk.
I drink milk everyday.
Picture C: sports
Key points I can see a football. It is black and white.
I like sports. My favorite sport is football.
Picture D: fruits
Key points Hello. I am Melody. I am a girl. There are many fruits.
I like apples and pears. My favorite fruit is watermelon.
Picture E: animals
Key points Look! There are many animals. I love all these animals.
I like sheep. I like goats. My favorite animal is monkey.
This session selects interesting topics based on the knowledge students have
acquired, and allows them to talk about according to the pictures displayed on
the screen. In this way, students can combine the learned knowledge with the
new words and sentences to achieve the cumulative development of language
and gradually master the ability to use language flexibly. The purpose of Key
Points is to inspire students to let them know what to say and how to say (after
all, these are only students in the lower grades of primary school, their language
ability is still very limited) in the classroom to guide students to say as much as
possible. In this activity, students are not only blindly imitate, but are inspired
by the key points by the five pictures, and they think by themselves. So they
can develop their thinking ability while developing their language skills.
(4) Talk about the things in the computer room or other places students know
For example: In the computer room, I can see many computers. I like computer
games. My favorite game is…
I like my school. I am in Class One, Grade One. My favorite teacher is…
In this session, the teacher guides the students to combine the different scenes
in daily life, using the main sentence patterns of the teaching unit: My favorite
… is… and the previously learned sentence patterns to describe the people
in the classroom, school, etc. This “autonomous speaking” activity, which is
closely integrated with life situations, can effectively train students’ language
transfer ability and lay a good foundation for students to use English in their
lives.
Step III Chants: mango/apple/turnip chant, favorite fruit
T: Here are four chants. First you can learn freely by yourselves. And then you can
chant the one you like.
According to the teaching content, the teacher selected 4 English songs that
meet the students’ cognitive level, let the students listen to it first, then perform
group singing and group performances, so that students can improve their
listening and enhance their semantic perception, enlarge scope of knowledge.
Step IV Stories
(1) The monkeys and the fruits
T: Guides Ss to learn the story
• T puts a toy monkey in the bag and asks Ss what is in the bag? Ss guess;
• “Do you know what’s monkey’s favorite fruit?” Ss think and answer;
Use the toys and the Guessing game to adjust the atmosphere and naturally
transit from the students’ answers to the learning of the story content.
• T tells Ss how to learn the story; Ss learn by themselves.

• T and S make a model of Scene I, Ss follow the model and act scene by scene in
groups
In this session, the oral language and body language of the teacher during the
performance of the story should be exaggerated in order to make the students
affected emotionally. In addition, divide the story into three scenes for lis-
tening, speaking and self-study can reduce the difficulty, help the students to
understand, and also lay the foundation for further activity of “make stories by
looking the pictures” (The teacher provides some pictures and asks the students
to compose English stories in order.).
(2) Other three stories(The fishing cat, The fox and the bear, Making friends)
T: Here are other three stories. You can listen, read, and chose the favorite one and
act it out next class.
These three stories are the content that students can listen to and read
autonomously. Students can choose the stories they like to listen to and read
according to their own interests. Teachers can guide learning and test in the
next lesson. The purpose of dividing the content into two parts is to ensure the
unified teaching objectives, and take care of the differences of students.
【Comment】】
This lesson is a case study of primary school English leaping experiment under
the guidance of Semantic Perception Theory. Its greatest feature is to embody the
teaching thought which centered on verbal communication, while paying attention
to the overall development of students and implementing the concept of the new
curriculum:
1. Utilize a large number of extended listening and reading materials and a

variety of verbal communication activities to achieve leaping development
of language ability
In this class, textbooks are only part of students’ learning contents. On the basis of
textbooks, teachers use themes determined by textbooks to provide students with a
large number of related expanded listening and reading materials. This not only about
enriching the language application environment of subject sentence patterns in texts,
but also can enable learners to contact more synonymous expressions. Moreover,
through various verbal communication activities, students are trained to use lan-
guage flexibly. Students’ language knowledge and language ability are far beyond
the requirements of the text, so that their comprehensive language ability can be
developed by leaps and bounds.
2. Emphasize the leading role of the teachers and the students’ subjective status
In order to enable students not only to imitate but also to generate correct sentences
that are grammatical, semantic, and meet the needs of communication, teachers have
carefully designed teacher–student dialogue to arouse old knowledge and serve as a
model of verbal communication. In this regard, teachers play a vital role in leading
role. On this basis, students are allowed to speak and look at pictures independently
through courseware. They said, talked about the things around them, and wrote stories
to develop students’ listening and speaking ability step by step. This series of self-
regulated learning activities completed by individual or group students is one of the
main contents of classroom teaching in this section. It can be seen that this course
not only gives full play to the leading role of teachers, but also highlights the main
position of students.
3. Emphasize the overall perception of language and focus on developing

listening and speaking skills
The object of this course is the pupils in the lower grades of primary schools. Teachers
carefully consider the age characteristics and cognitive characteristics of pupils in
resource provision and activity design. In the process of teaching, teachers provide
rhythmic songs and stories with strong plot as expansive teaching resources; in the
design of listening and speaking activities, there is no entanglement in words and
sentences, but directly let students communicate in the context, emphasizing listening
and speaking training and language perception as a whole. In addition, this lesson
also firmly grasps the critical period of semantic perception growth and development
(especially the optimal age of the critical period), and focuses on the training of
listening and speaking ability in the design of classroom teaching activities.
4. Focus on the requirements of the new curriculum standards
“The Monkeys and the Fruits” is chosen as the key learning materials to expand
listening and reading in the course of teaching, because the story is divided into three
interesting and ideological scenes, easy to understand and perform, and permeate
ideological and moral education. It also enables students to develop their English
language ability and develop correct emotional attitudes and opinions on value. In
this way, the requirements of the new curriculum standards can be better implemented
in this lesson.
References
English Curriculum Standards (Experimental Draft). (2001). Beijing Normal University Press, 7.
Fan, Q. L., Lin, J. F., He, K. K. (2004). Grasp the critical period of semantic perception and create
a communicative context for english teaching
People’s Education Press, 11.
Hu, C. D. (2001). English learning theory (pp. 61, 86). Guangxi Education Press.
Appendix D
Grasp the Critical Period of Semantic
Perception and Create a Communicative
Context for English Teaching
Qiaoling Fan, Junfen Lin and Kekang He
Abstract According to the Semantic Perception Theory, there is a critical period

of growth and development for children’s semantic perception. During this critical
period, we must create a good environment for children to learn foreign languages, so
as to effectively cultivate children’s foreign language listening and speaking ability.
This paper proposes that context creation should follow the principles of authenticity,
development, relevance, immersion, etc., and elaborate the context design methods
and problems of English teaching centered on verbal communication in primary
school from the aspects of classroom atmosphere, natural environment of foreign
language teaching, authentic communicative context, non-verbal communication
context and resource environment.
Keywords English teaching · Semantic Perception Theory · Context, communication

· The critical period
Both language knowledge and verbal ability are learned in the process of verbal
communication, while communication is always carried out in a specific context.
The so-called context refers to the specific environment in which the language is
used. The context usually has a broad context and a narrow context. The broad
context refers to the social environment and the natural environment in which the
language is used, and the narrow context refers to the context of the language.
Professor He Kekang pointed out in Semantic Perception Theory (He 2004) that
the key period of growth and development for children’s semantic perception is about
0–12 years old (before the first and second grades of junior high school), and the
best age range is 0–9 years old. In other words, we must grasp the “critical period”
of semantic perception (for primary school English teaching, we should especially
Q. Fan
J. Lin · K. He
Institute of Modern Education and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

194 Appendix D: Grasp the Critical Period of Semantic Perception and Create …
grasp the best age range of grades 1–4). Students can achieve more effective results
if the listening and speaking environment of foreign language is provided. In order to
effectively develop children’s foreign language listening and speaking ability during
the critical period (especially during the best age period of the critical period), it
is necessary to create a good language environment for them, since the lack of
language environment is the root cause of the difficulty of second language learning.
This language environment should support both listening and speaking training. If
the required environment and experience are not provided during the critical period
of the semantic perception, though the brain’s nerve center does have the potential
function of natural semantic perception, such functions cannot actually occur.
So, what kind of context is a good foreign language teaching context? How should
we create such a good foreign language teaching context for the development of
children’s foreign language ability?
D.1 The Principle of Creating Communicative Foreign

Language Teaching Context
The essence of language is communication. Verbal communication includes both

speaking and listening: “speaking” is the process of expression, also known as the
process of speech generation; “listening” is the process of accepting, also known as
the process of speech comprehension. Speaking must be based on understanding (oth-
erwise, the expression cannot take the role of communication), while understanding
must depend on certain context, because no matter what kind of language knowledge
(speech, words, sentences, etc.) it is; without the specific context, it will only be a
symbol with logic which is impossible to achieve the purpose of communication. In
addition, in order to achieve expression (speaking), apart from understanding, there
is also a need for expression, which may be related to the social environment, the
natural environment, and the self-confidence of learners. Therefore, it is unrealistic
to talk about communication without context. The creation of a foreign language
teaching context centered on verbal communication must be able to support training
of both the listening and speaking skills. So how can teachers create a foreign lan-
guage teaching context that meets this requirement, and what principles should be
followed in creating a context?
D.1.1 Authenticity
Authentic activities are important ways for learners to engage in meaningful and
purposeful learning and are important for the acquisition of knowledge and abilities.
The creation of context should be derived from real life (which should be something
Appendix D: Grasp the Critical Period of Semantic Perception and Create … 195
that students often touch in present or future verbal communication), so that students
can be transferred to life. This context has two advantages:
• Shorten the distance between language learning and students’ real life, and make
the “dead” language, which seems to be composed of symbols and rules, become
vivid and real, and open up a realistic way for students to actively participate and
actively learn.
• Produce a sense of value in English learning. The authentic communicative context
allows students to feel that they can learn and use English everywhere, everyone
can learn English, and everyone can use English. This sense of value will motivate
students to learn English, so that students like to learn English and are willing to
learn English from the heart.
As long as we pay attention to observation, diligent accumulate it and skillful
design it, it is not difficult to create an authentic communicative context. For example,
when teaching the “Shopping” unit, we arranged the classroom as a store that sells a
variety of items. When teaching “At the Zoo,” the classroom was arranged as a zoo.
In order to strive for reality, we also divide the different corners of the classroom
into different Areas of the zoo, such as the beast Area, the bird Area, and the water
animal Area. When teaching “What’s the weather like today?”, the teacher made all
kinds of “Weather Report” collected into extended listening and reading materials.
Students not only learned the words and sentences that represent the weather, but
also mastered how to broadcast “Weather Report”. When teaching “After School,”
we used a video camera to take a shot of students’ extracurricular activities (removing
the sound) for the students to dub in English. These teaching arrangements enable
students to stay in a real context and use the learned language to conduct practical
communication activities, so that they cannot feel the distance between learning and
life, and can experience the joy of learning to use.
D.1.2 Developmental
The creation of a language situation must aim at developing students’ communicative

competence and provide students with a space for creatively use of language, rather
than allowing students to imitate simply and mechanically. In some English classes,
we often see situations where teachers use cards and objects to teach words, then use
2–3 kinds of game activities to consolidate these individual words, after that they
let students learn about 1–3 times of extended words, and finally consolidate these
words by playing various games. Some teachers may think that such word teaching
can not only enable students to learn in playing, but also expand their vocabulary.
In fact, this is only the contextualization of the form of activity, and there is no
peculiar environment for verbal communication. The words here are still isolated
words that are separated from the specific language environment; although this kind
of vocabulary teaching that is out of specific language use situation makes students
enjoyable, in fact, it not only can’t help students improve their language competence,
but also increase the burden of memorizing vocabulary. Therefore, when creating the
context, we must avoid the emphasis on the words, but focus on how to provide more
opportunities for speech interaction between students, and guide students to develop
verbal communication skills in the process of autonomous learning. For example,
after learning the unit of “Four seasons,” teachers can provide students with a context
of different seasons, encouraging students to talk about their favorite seasons and
characteristics, the weather, the types of fruit eaten of the season. In the process of
verbal communication, students should be inspired to boldly associate and imagine
and flexibly use the learned words and sentence patterns to achieve the purpose of
expanding the language knowledge and language transfer ability in the process of
communication.
D.1.3 Relativity
The principle of relativity requires that the context must be related to the student’s
age characteristics and cognitive development level (Cai) and must be related to the
current teaching theme and student’s development goals.
Curiousness and interest are the best teachers for students. They are derived from
the yearning for the future world and come from the love of a certain kind of activity. A
successful English class should be full of passion and fun, but psychology tells us that
students of different ages have different characteristics and cognitive characteristics.
For example, students in the lower grades of primary school only have 10–15 min of
concentration, and students in the upper grades of primary school have 15–20 min of
concentration. While our classroom lasts 40 min, how can we guarantee the learning
effect in this valuable 40 min? From the perspective of teaching context design, we
believe that we should start from two aspects:
• According to the age characteristics and cognitive characteristics of students,
teacher should set up some suspense and create context that leaves room for
imagination for students, to stimulate their curiosity. For example, when teaching
‘What’s the weather like today’, we asked students if they want to be a small
weather forecaster to report weather conditions around the world. The enthusiasm
of the students was immediately mobilized. They listened to the weather fore-
casts from all over the world, looked at the weather reports (teachers prepared in
advance), and used the paper to roll up the horns as “forecasters”. When teach-
ing “School,” the teacher asked students to be small tour guides to introduce the
school to foreign guests. Students first listened carefully and read the introduction
materials of the school (pre-prepared), and then, they communicated with their
desk mates (one for guest, one for guide, and change roles in communication).
• Use games to make it edutainment. For example, when teaching the “color” unit,
we first guided children play the game of guessing; let them start the lesson in
the context of suspense. While teaching the two different concepts of “This and
that,” we did not put the items in two different places as usual (because things
and orientations are constant, it is difficult to inspire children’s interests). Instead,

we let a few children come out and stand in different positions and then put some
cute toys on their head and let them constantly change their orientation. This kind
of game can effectively stimulate their interests and arouse their enthusiasm for
learning, so that they are willing and loving to learn.
In addition, no matter the activity design or context creation, its fundamental pur-
pose is to cultivate students’ comprehensive language application ability. The design
of the activity and context creation cannot deviate from this fundamental purpose
and should closely focus on the teaching theme and development of students’ abil-
ity. Never design contexts and activities that seem interesting and have no practical
content.
D.1.4 Immersion
People who can swim have the feeling that they must be soaked in water instead of
occasionally touching water to learn to swim. Learning a foreign language is like
learning to swim, and students must be immersed in the atmosphere of listening and
speaking English. In particular, it is necessary to create a natural and relaxed learning
environment for communicative English teaching, so that students can “immerse”
in the authentic language environment and naturally enter the communicative role,
no longer shy, not afraid of making mistakes. In this way, listening to and speaking
English can gradually become the conscious behavior of students, so that language
knowledge and verbal ability can be acquired efficiently.
D.2 The Design of Communicative English Teaching

Context
D.2.1 Create a Communicative Context Based

on the “Children’s Language Acquisition Model”
of Semantic Perception Theory
The role of language is communication. From the “child language acquisition model
base on Semantic Perception Theory” (He 2004), there are two feedback lines at the
speech input port: one from the semantic recognition module (called the “internal
feedback line”) and the other from the output of the utterance generation system,
which is the output of the entire speech signal system (called the “external feedback
line”). These two kinds of feedback are very important for children’s language acqui-
sition. To establish these two feedback mechanisms, the prerequisite is to have a true
communicator, and the communicator is preferably a master of the language. This is
because when the primary school students who are beginners of foreign languages are
not rich in vocabulary and the grammar knowledge, it is difficult for them to carry
out verbal interaction smoothly, while the communicator can help them complete
semantic identification with their tone, gesture, or posture. After students master the
initial verbal ability, the communicator can not only communicate with the students
directly, but also judge whether the students’ words conform to the “context” of the
current dialogue, and give feedback to students’ expression on this basis. In addition,
internal and external feedback mechanisms are also crucial for the realization of the
speaker’s self-monitoring function. Since internal feedback involves the process of
speech understanding (listening), external feedback involves the process of speech
understanding and utterance generation (listening and speaking). It can be seen that
“real-time two-way speech interaction” (i.e., dialogue with real communicators) is
a necessary and sufficient condition for mastering the ability of listen and speak.
Therefore, in English teaching practice, if we can use the authentic communicative
context, it will be possible to achieve the best teaching results. In the English teach-
ing in primary schools, the main communicative contexts have the following three
categories:
(1) Teacher–student dialogue context
The communicative context of teacher–student dialogue is the most basic and most
commonly used context for cultivating listening and speaking skills in English teach-
ing, and it is also the best context. This is because in the English class, the teacher
is a master of the language, and he/she can help students form effective internal and
external feedback mechanisms. However, due to the limited time of teaching, it is
difficult for them to communicate with each student in the class within 40 min. For
the current class of more than 40 students in primary and secondary schools in China,
even if the teacher can talk to each student, each student can only get an average of
less than 1 min in class, while listen to others in the rest 39 min. Therefore, although
the communicative context is ideal to be used as the basic form of English class,
due to the low participation of students, the efficiency is relatively low, so it is usu-
ally used for inspiration and demonstration teaching. Generally speaking, every time
before the activity of “desk mate communication” or “group talking,” teachers can
conduct a teacher–student dialogue in order to play a demonstration role.
(2) Desk mate dialogue context
The communicative context of the desk mate dialogue is also a basic and common
context for the learner’s listening and speaking ability training. This context is just
like the teacher–student dialogue context, which have a real communicator, so learn-
ers’ internal and external feedback mechanisms for language learning can also be
formed. However, since both students in the context are beginners of language, their
linguistic knowledge and verbal ability are in the process of formation, so the results
of their verbal communication are certainly not as good as the teacher–student dia-
logue. But this context has a big advantage—every student has the opportunity to
participate in two-way speech interaction (lead to the highest level of participation),
which can make the communication-centered teaching ideas and teaching design
truly implemented, and this is exactly what teacher–student dialogue lacks. There-
fore, this context is an effective context that can be adopted in English teaching
when there is no guarantee that everyone can communicate with a language pro-
ficient. Usually, this context should be combined with teacher–student dialogue to
complement each other. For example, demonstrate by asking questions, and then
give more time for the students to communicate (to help students understand the
context of the conversation; teachers can use PowerPoint to provide some keywords
and key drills). Practice has proved that combining these two contexts often leads to
satisfactory results.
(3) Group dialogue context
The group dialogue context is also a common communication context in English
teaching class; it usually refers to group discussion and role-playing of three or more
people. This kind of communicative context is just like the first two contexts. It has
real communicators, and the effect of training learners’ listening and speaking ability
is similar to that two contexts. However, since learner’s participation is not as high
as in other two contexts, this method can only be used in appropriate situations (e.g.,
where the text is suitable for group activities or role-playing), and not recommend
for a basic context.
All the above three contexts can support both listening and speaking training
because they have real communicators. The teacher–student dialogue has the best
training results, and the desk mate dialogue ranks second, but it has the highest partic-
ipation level, so we can use these two contexts as the usual English teaching context.
While the third one (group dialogue), we can use it as an auxiliary option. However,
no matter what kind of context, we must start with students’ actual life experience.
The following is the teaching example based on units of “What’s the weather like
today” “What’s your favorite animal” “What’s your favorite sport,” and demonstrate
how to design such a communicative context specifically. For example, when taught
“What’s the weather like today,” I first demonstrated through the teacher–student
dialogue (the content of the dialogue involves weather, lesson schedule, How will
you go home? What is the weather like next week? etc.), and then let students carry
out desk mate dialogue. In this way, students can review the content they have learned
before and could naturally be introduced into teaching content of this lesson. When
taught “What’s your favorite animal?”, I used a picture of the zoo to demonstrate
(question and answer content related to position, color, what can be done, like or
dislike, and why). After that, let students talk freely about this picture. In this way,
new knowledge and learned knowledge can be naturally combined to achieve the
cumulative development of students’ language ability. Another example was when
taught “What’s your favorite sport,” I first chose a student to conduct a demonstration
(discuss their favorite sport and why they like it, how is the weather today, make an
appointment to go to the stadium, etc.) and then provided several extend listening
and speaking materials (watch TV, buy tickets for the Olympic Games, which com-
petitions to participate in, etc.) for them to talk about and compose a dialogue of
their favorite sports, athletes, and the reasons. Finally, let them conduct show and tell
in their group (introducing each other’s favorite sports and athletes). Through these
activities, not only the students’ listening and speaking skills are trained, but also the
ability to transfer their language can be cultivated (by conducting contextual dialogue
and introducing in English), so that students’ comprehensive use of language skills
can be effectively improved.
D.2.2 Create Autonomous Listening and Speaking Context

by Using Multimedia Courseware and Web-Based
Teaching Resources
The linguistic phenomena and linguistic materials provided by English textbooks

are often difficult to meet the needs of teaching, while the multimedia courseware
and online teaching resources can provide a large number of English materials with
pictures, texts and sounds, which will make up for the shortcoming of textbooks,
thus creating more favorable conditions for listening and speaking training.
(1) Create autonomous listening context by using discourses full of pictures,
texts, and sounds
According to the perspective of Semantic Perception Theory (He 2004), in the
autonomous listening context, the lack of real communicators may result in the
interruption of internal and external feedback of the entire speech signal system.
However, the psychological processing such as “speech perception (sound spec-
trum analysis),” “speech analysis,” “word meaning recognition,” “phrase (chunk)
generation,” and “semantic identification” involving in speech understanding is still
in progress. Therefore, such autonomous listening context is still beneficial to the
learner’s speech understanding (listening) training. But many teachers are not clear
what should be focusing on. We believe that to listen to contextual discourse, which
means the discourse with context, content, logic, and strong plots (Hu 2001). Empha-
sizing the discourse with strong plots is because the plot not only facilitates the learner
to understand the meaning of the words, but also helps them understand the “context”
and the cultural background of different languages, which cannot be achieved by sin-
gle word or sentence—because the words without specific context are only symbols
in a logical sense. For example, when teaching the lesson “What’s the weather like
today?”, we first use pictures and animations to give students an intuitive and per-
ceptual understanding of all types of weather; these images and animations do not
exist in isolation, but also the overall presentation of weather forecast for the coming
week. In this context, students quickly enter and understand the topics learned in this
lesson. Many of the reading materials in the “reading” and “rhythms” columns of
our leaping English learning Web site are composed of such texts.
(2) Create autonomous speaking or desk mate dialogue context by using
multimedia materials
Multimedia courseware and online teaching resources (pictures, videos, animations,
texts, etc.) can not only provide autonomous listening context, but also provide
autonomous speaking and desk mate dialogue context. In fact, some resources full
of pictures, texts, and sounds can be used for both of autonomous listening and
autonomous speaking, desk mate dialogue. For example, when teaching “What’s the
weather like today”, the online weather forecast can be used as a language material
for students’ “weather forecasters” activities, and the different weather animations
can be used as materials for students to conduct their own stories. When teaching
“Animals,” we used the photographs of the zoo we took as the material for the students
to introduce animals. When teaching “After school,” we used our own videos as the
materials to let students dub in English.
D.2.3 Create English Teaching Context by Using Non-verbal

Ways
In the process of communication, people also have non-verbal communication in

addition to verbal communication. Of course, non-verbal communication and verbal
communication are not irrelevant, but complement each other. Non-verbal informa-
tion not only helps to understand the meaning of the language, but also enriches the
language information, which is the so-called sometimes the silence is more powerful
than words. Therefore, when creating the context of English teaching, we should
not ignore the contextual knowledge implied by these non-verbal methods. In teach-
ing practice, there are two types of non-verbal contexts that are effective and used
frequently:
(1) Tone, body language, etc.

Since students in the lower grades of primary school are beginners of English, they
don’t have much knowledge of the language, which makes it difficult for them to
communicate smoothly (because they can’t make correct judgments based on the
empirical information and language knowledge stored in the brain). No matter the
understanding of the sentences of the communicator or the correct judgment of
their current discourse, students largely rely on the communicator’s tone, gesture, or
posture. Therefore, the contextual knowledge implied by tone, body language, etc.,
is of great significance for the listening and speaking training of students (especially
beginners). For example, when teaching “expression,” the body language (hold the
belly means “hungry,” use the hand as a fan means “hot”) and the expression (laugh
means happy, weep means cry, twitch mouth means sad, etc.) can make students
quickly understand the meaning of these words and sentences.
(2) Teaching aid
Teaching aid, such as objects, wall charts, models, is another important non-verbal
context. At present, most English classes use English only (we have always insisted
on doing this), but for first- and second-grade children who don’t have much English
knowledge, even teachers teach for ten times, students do not necessarily understand,
what’s more, some words and sentences are difficult to express in body language or
tone. Then, some teachers may choose to explain in Chinese, but practices show
that if you use teaching aids and supplemented with body language, we can often
get excellent results. Combine body posture, expression to understand words, and
sentences (visual representations, auditory representations, and kinesthetic repre-
sentations, which can make students’ senses be stimulated comprehensively, leaving
deep impressions) is better than explain in Chinese for students. When teaching
“What’s your favorite fruit?”, teacher brought all kinds of fruit into classroom and
then introduced: “Look, I have many fruit. Apples, pears, strawberries…. But my
favorite fruit is pear. I like it very much.” Meanwhile, he held the pear in his hand,
and putting other fruit aside. In this way, children can easily and clearly understand
what “My favorite fruit is pear” means.
D.2.4 Expand the Context of English Teaching in Various

Ways
(1) Expand communicative context by using English immersion education
English is both a teaching object and a teaching method. English learning is a process
of repeated accumulation. The best way for students to learn is to be immersed in
an English environment. We have all seen or heard many examples: many foreign
children whose native language is not English are not able to understand when they
first arrived in the USA or European countries. They cannot speak, just like a dumb,
but it won’t be long before they can understand and speak naturally. Therefore,
whether for first-year or upper-grade students, teachers should try to use full English
teaching in the classroom (no Chinese in the classroom). The purpose is to immerse
students in an English environment, to enable students to acquire language knowledge
and verbal ability naturally in an authentic context. It also gives students a kind of
edification, so that they gradually adapt to listening to and speaking English under
the teacher deeds, instead of relying on Chinese interpretation. Maybe someone will
say: how can we learn if we can’t understand? This argument is reasonable, because
sometimes students do not understand. However, we must know that primary school
students’ language imitative ability is very strong, as long as they listen enough, and
teachers can give appropriate encouragement and allow students to make mistakes,
students can adapt to full English teaching quickly. For example, in the first class
of the first grade (The main teaching content is to learn simple self-introduction and
greetings), as soon as I walked into the classroom, I said to the children: “Hello,
children”, and they answered naturally: “Hello”. After that, I wrote my name on the
blackboard and introduced myself to them: “I am ….”, and then guided the students
to introduce themselves in English (of course, at the beginning, they may experience
a silent phase or speak very little, but the teacher should not be too anxious and could
guide slowly).
(2) Use classrooms to expand English listening and reading context

The classroom is the main activity space for students to learn English. Teachers can
use classroom to arrange an English environment. For example, play English songs or
tell English jokes frequently in the classroom; some English hand-paintings, English
extracurricular knowledge, English quotes, and English short story can also be posted
on the wall. This kind of English learning environment which enables students to see
and hear English everyday can make students experience English unconsciously, so
that they can improve their listening and reading skills in the context naturally.
(3) Expand the listening and speaking context of English by using various
activities inside and outside the class
After all, the class has only 40 min, and the English class in a week is usually 3–4
class hours. Due to the lack of English environment, students will inevitably learn
quickly and forget quickly. To this end, we use such methods in class and outside
the classroom to try to create and expand English listening and speaking context for
students:
• Establish the English Corner: Use the advantage of accommodation to open an
English Corner and encourage students to listen to English and speak English
there.
• Combination of extracurricular painting homework and classroom practice activ-
ity: In general, we ask students to draw a hand-painted picture in the teaching
process of each unit with brief English descriptions on it. At the end of the unit,
students should post their own paintings, and then, we select the best 3–4 frames.
After that, students are expected to communicate based on the pictures. Students
who draw the best paintings are not only being praised, but also conduct show and
tell in front of the whole class.
• Create autonomous listening and speaking context with the help of parents: The
reality is that students usually do not have an English learning environment after
class. Since it is impossible to ask parents to communicate with students in English
frequently, we ask parents to help to create an environment for students to listen and
speak autonomously. Although the effect of autonomous listening and speaking is
not as good as authentic communication, it is also beneficial on training students’
ability to listen and speak. The specific approach is to buy some English stories
and CDs for students, allow them to read stories, recite some famous sayings, and
often sing excellent English songs.
D.3 Several Issues that Should Be Paid Attention

to in Context Creation
From the above discussion, we can see that the creation of a good context is extremely
important for the language learners’ listening and speaking ability training. In order
to create a good context, the following issues should be noted in practice.
D.3.1 The Creation of Context Must Be Based

on the Development of Comprehensive Language
Application Ability
In practice, many teachers focus on the games and other highly interesting activities.
Most of the time in the classroom is used for singing and jumping or action activi-
ties. Especially after the multimedia computer enters classroom, there are more and
more game-based courseware and situation information, while students have fewer
opportunities to speak since the time of human–computer interaction occupies most
of the teaching hours. We believe that the fundamental purpose of language teaching
is to cultivate learners’ comprehensive language skills for communication. While to
develop students’ language skills, the most important thing is to create a dialogue
context with authentic communicators to support listening and speaking skills. We
must not blindly pursue the excitement and fun and should not engage in activities
for activities. This is the core issue to be aware of in context creation.
D.3.2 Contexts’ Creation Should Have Different

Requirements for Different Grades
Children of different ages have different psychological characteristics and cogni-

tive characteristics. In English teaching, in order to achieve expect results, we must
consider the differences between students of different grades and create different
contexts that suit their needs. For example, in the lower grades, students’ language
knowledge is still very little, so more non-verbal contexts are required, and multi-
media and games are also needed. While for higher grades’ students, we don’t need
so much multimedia or games in context creation. Moreover, after completing the
extended listening and reading, teacher can use simple questions, topic discussions,
or short conversations, etc., to help students in the lower grades of primary school
to consolidate and migrate knowledge. While in the higher grades, since students’
language expression ability has been greatly improved, other methods such as look
at the picture and describe, story adaptation, or story retelling can be adopted. When
taught “What’s the weather like today?”, after students read extended materials of
“Changeable weather” and “Snowman,” we asked them to retell or adapt the story in
their own words. As a result, they produced stories that were quite exciting by full
use of their imagination and creativity.
D.3.3 Pay Attention to Both the Creation of Context

and the Stimulation of Learning Motivation
Context plays an important role in English teaching, but it is an external cause after
all. It cannot replace learner’s independent learning inquiry. Students are still the
main body of the English class, so we should not only pay attention to the creation
of context, but also the stimulation of students’ interest and learning motivation. It
is necessary to recognize that students’ sense of accomplishment and value iden-
tification is the real source of learning motivation. Therefore, we must combine
the creation of context and the stimulation of learners’ learning motivation. In fact,
every excellent contextual creation is the combination of these two aspects; they not
only provide a good language environment for verbal communication, listening and
speaking training, but also attract the learners, thus inducing stronger learning desire
and motivation.
D.4 Conclusion
Because the context is visual, vivid, and authentic, it can not only stimulate students’
interests, arouse their enthusiasm, but also allow them to experience it personally.
Therefore, English teaching (especially English teaching in primary schools) must
create a humanized language learning environment for students, making language
learning a pleasant experience in life. A good language environment can maximize
the enthusiasm of students, so that they can successfully acquire language knowledge
and verbal ability in the simulated communication context during the critical period
of growth and development of the semantic perception. In this way, learning English
will be an interesting experience for primary and secondary school students, and no
longer a chore that is overwhelming. Is this a dream? Is this the Arabian Nights? No!
This is the reality we are creating.
References
Cai, P. (2010). Language context and the english teaching. http://219.239.238.40/theoresearch/.

Hu, C. D. (2001). English learning theory (pp. 61, 86). Guangxi Education Press.
Appendix E
Primary School English Teaching Method
Centered on Verbal Communication
Guishuang Qin, Junfen Lin and Kekang He
Abstract Under the guidance of Semantic Perception Theory, this paper has
explored a set of communicative teaching methods for primary school English learn-
ing that have been proved to be effective and operable. This method can be summed
up in a central (“centered on verbal communication”) and four principles (thematic,
contextual, developmental, and integrality).
Keywords English teaching method · Communication · Thematic · Contextual ·
Developmental · Integrality
The new English Curriculum Standards point out that (English Curriculum Standards
(Experimental Draft) 2001) English education in basic education stage is based on the
development of students’ language skills, language knowledge, emotional attitudes,
learning strategies, and cultural awareness and develops students’ comprehensive
language application ability. The English course in the basic education stage advo-
cates a task-based teaching mode, emphasizing the adoption of activity channels and
experience participation. This not only reflects the changes in teaching methods, but
also reflects the transformation of teaching concepts, highlighting the foreign lan-
guage teaching ideas that students should acquire language knowledge and verbal
ability in language contexts. However, this has produced some different interpreta-
tions in the process of research and practice, and even some bias, a typical example
is the “activity center theory”. Some scholars believe that activities are not only the
means of English teaching, but also its purpose (Qu); others equate the “student-
centered” English class with the “activity-centered” class (Bao). These views gener-
ally emphasize on “activity” as the center, often leading to the ignorance of the ability
to use language comprehensively, especially the ability of English communication.
Moreover, taking activity as the center of English teaching is easy to cause some
misunderstandings in practice:
G. Qin
Xiangnan Primary School, Shenzhen 518052, China
J. Lin · K. He
Institute of Modern Educational and Technology, Beijing Normal University, 100875 Beijing, China
208 Appendix E: Primary School English Teaching Method Centered on Verbal …
• Consider the form of activity more important than its content. Many activities
that seem to be lively but have no substantive help to the development of speech
ability (especially listening and speaking ability). Teachers often prepare activities
for activities, and lack of purposes, regardless of whether there is real verbal
communication in such activities.
• Design many activities but in a mess and lack of integrality.
• Lack of hierarchy in the training of language skills, all activities are simply
mechanical repetitions.
• Abuse of games and multimedia contexts, the classroom seems to be fresh
and interesting, but in fact is still the traditional educational ideology rules the
classroom, just like “wearing new shoes and walking on the old road.”
We believe that the essence of language is communication, and to develop com-
prehensive language ability through verbal communication is the goal of English
teaching. Therefore, how to design English teaching activities around “verbal com-
munication” is an extremely important research topic. In the course of teaching
practice, especially since I started to participate in the Basic Education Leaping
Development Experiment in 2003, I have gradually explored a set of communicative
English teaching methods of primary school that have been proven to be effective and
operable. This method can be summed up in a central (“centered on verbal commu-
nication”) and four principles (thematic, contextual, developmental, and integrality).
In this case, I hope to attract more attention and discussion.
E.1 Centered on the Verbal Communication
Regarding the generation of language, Engels pointed out in the Dialectics of Nature:
“the development of labor necessarily helped to bring the members of society closer
together by increasing cases of mutual support and joint activity, and by making clear
the advantage of this joint activity to each individual. In short, men in the making
arrived at the point where they had something to say to each other.” From the judg-
ment of Engels, we can see that language is social and is produced to communicate
thoughts and exchange emotions. On the one hand, it is a tool of human thinking and
communication; on the other hand, language carries a certain kind of thought and
culture, having the characteristic of cultural. However, communication makes them
integrated together (In order to communicate, we must have certain verbal ability, but
also have relevant language and cultural knowledge). Therefore, it is not necessary to
worry about the acquisition of language knowledge or the cultural nature of language
will be lacking because of the emphasis of communicability of language. Commu-
nication is the purpose of children’s language learning, and learning language is for
communication—communicate thoughts and exchange emotions; communication is
also the fundamental way and method for children to learn language—children can
Appendix E: Primary School English Teaching Method Centered on Verbal … 209
master the language quickly only when they communication with people. As a lan-
guage subject, English emphasizes that communication should be centered on the
rules of children’s language development.
Verbal communication includes both speaking and listening: speaking is the pro-
cess of expressing discourse, also known as the process of speech generation; lis-
tening is the process of accepting discourse, also known as the process of speech
comprehension. According to the Semantic Perception Theory, “real-time two-way
speech interaction” (dialogue with each other) is a necessary and sufficient condition
for mastering the ability to listen and speak. Because, for beginners of a language
(especially for elementary and junior students who have not yet developed English
language proficiency), the communicator’s tone, gesture, or posture is an essen-
tial condition for completing the process of semantic identification (achieve speech
understanding). When the learners form basic verbal ability, the verbal expression of
communicators becomes an indispensable condition for learners to master the lan-
guage, because they can communicate with each other directly (not necessarily rely-
ing on gestures, posture, etc.). Human speech signal system, along with the speech
input in the process of verbal communication, also has self-monitoring function
through feedback—not only make judgments of the correctness of the speech, gram-
mar, and semantics of the learner’s speech (whether it compliant with the standards),
but also can judge the correctness of its “context”—if the grammatical sentences
are not suitable for the current language environment (does not match the context),
it is also inconsistent with the requirements of verbal communication. It can be
seen that through verbal communication, not only learners can learn the pronuncia-
tion, grammar, and semantic knowledge, but also enable them to master contextual
knowledge. Therefore, “communication” is a necessary and sufficient condition for
language learners to truly acquire verbal comprehension and speech generation abil-
ity. Therefore, primary school English teaching must emphasize “centered on verbal
communication” rather than “centered on grammar analysis,” nor “centered on lis-
tening training,” or “centered on reading and writing training.” As mentioned before,
verbal communication includes both listening and speaking. Listening and speaking
are two inseparable speech activities. It can be seen that the primary school English
teaching activities centered on verbal communication must be organized around the
listening and speaking of certain contexts.
E.1.1 Teacher–Student Dialogue
In order to achieve effective “real-time two-way speech interaction,” an authentic

“communicator” is needed, and the communicator should be the master of the current
language. In the English class, such “communicators” are usually teachers. Thus,
the “teacher–student dialogue” is the most effective way to achieve “real-time two-
way speech interaction” in the English class. However, in practice, it is difficult for
teachers to ask questions for each student (most regions in China are still large class
of 40 or more students) in a limited period of time (the average primary school
teaching time is 40 min), not to mention there is still a lot of teaching content to be
completed. In this way, it is impossible to teach with total “teacher–student dialogue”.
Usually, the “teacher–student dialogue” is an inspiration and demonstration of the
“desk mate dialogue”. For example, when teaching “Which season do you like,” I
first showed four pictures of the season and asked the question to several students for
demonstration, and then let the students asked their neighbors to do Q&A by looking
at the picture. Practice has proved that such an arrangement not only greatly reduces
the threshold for students to participate in verbal communication, but also provides
students with a large number of opportunities to practice listening and speaking, so
it can effectively promote the development of students’ listening and speaking skills.
E.1.2 Desk Mate Dialogue
As mentioned before, the form of teacher–student dialogue is the most effective

way to achieve “real-time two-way speech interaction,” but there is a flaw. In the
limited teaching time, the participation of students is not high, and the desk mate
dialogues can make up for this shortcoming. In the two conversations, learning peers
are authentic “communicators,” so this way can also achieve “real-time two-way
speech interaction,” and it can make every student have a lot of opportunities to
participate. This is very simple. For example, in the first 5 min of the teaching,
I usually arrange conversations (sometimes around a picture, sometimes around a
topic). If it is a teacher–student question, I can only ask about 6–7 students, and
others can only “listen”. And if I only spend 1 min ask one student (for demonstration
purposes), then take 3 min to ask the students to do desk mate dialogue, so that each
student has an opportunity, and students can do extended dialogues by choosing
other pictures or topics. In the end, they can also report for about 1 min. Thus,
the desk mate dialogue should be one of the most important forms of activity in
primary school English teaching. Of course, because the “communicators” of the
desk mate dialogue are not the masters of the language, the effect is not as good
as the teacher–student dialogue, so there must be a teacher-directed teacher–student
dialogue as demonstration (the desk mate dialogue should be complemented with the
teacher–student dialogue), and the teacher should pay attention to the individualized
counseling at any time.
E.1.3 Group Activity
There are group activities with more than 3 students in English teaching, such as
singing songs and group role-playing. These activities’ effects are similar to the
desk mate dialogue in terms of the “real-time two-way speech interaction,” but the
participation level is not as high as desk mate dialogue. Therefore, group activities
should be properly selected and cannot be used as the main mode of activity in
English teaching.
E.1.4 Autonomous Speaking
Another form of activity that improves speaking ability is autonomous speaking,

such as describing by looking at pictures, describing scenes, singing songs, reading
classics, and so on. Due to the lack of authentic verbal communication, it is difficult
to acquire and master contextual knowledge, and it is impossible to immediately
correct the speech, grammar, or semantic errors that occur in the process of discourse
generation and expression through the immediate feedback of two-way interaction.
Therefore, autonomous speaking is only a necessary condition for mastering speech
ability rather than a sufficient condition. However, this method is still effective for
training students’ language expression ability and can usually be used as an alternative
to make up for the lack of speaking training environment.
E.1.5 Autonomous Listening
Autonomous listening is also unable to achieve effective “real-time two-way speech

interaction” due to the lack of authentic communicators. Therefore, there are defects
similar to autonomous speaking, and the effect is certainly not as good as teacher–stu-
dent dialogue and student–student dialogue. However, it is quite effective in improv-
ing learners’ ability to understand the current input speech (listening), and a large
number of listening is the basis of speaking. The practice of foreign language teach-
ing shows that to learn any foreign language, we must pay attention to a large amount
of input of language information, that is, a large number of listening and reading.
In the process of inputting (listening, reading) language information, learners natu-
rally absorb much useful linguistic knowledge. For children in the lower grades of
primary school who are beginners, there is a large amount of listening is the main
part. In the teaching practice, we found that compared to the non-experimental class
students (they are taught by the same teacher with similar teaching methods; while
non-experimental class students are lack of the environment of autonomous listen-
ing, they can only listen by recorder and screen), the experimental class students
perform better in the richness and flexibility of verbal expression. This shows that
autonomous listening is not only good for cultivating students’ listening, but also is
good for strengthening students’ ability to speak. Therefore, it is an indispensable
part to allow students to listen to the content-rich extended listening and reading
materials related to the text.
E.2 Thematic Principle
At present, a variety of activities have become fashionable in the primary school

English class, especially in some evaluation classes, observation classes, those activ-
ities in a large amount. As the saying goes, “dilettante watches the scene of bustle,
expert look at the way”. When we analyze these classes carefully and calmly, we
will find two thought-provoking questions behind these dazzling activities: First, the
form is more important than the content. Many activities are only around a few words
or a few sentence patterns in the textbook. They are constantly doing consolidation
and strengthening exercises, but lack of development of language skills (especially
listening and speaking). Second, the purpose of the activity is not clear, and the
integrity is not strong. The activity seems to be lively, but lack of the soul, and some
activities that seem to be related but actually not piled up together. Thus, what kind
of principles should be used to design classroom teaching activities? We believe that
we should first insist on the principle of thematic. It refers to determine the develop-
mental goal of students’ comprehensive use of language skills by using the teaching
theme base on teaching materials and then to design listening and speaking activities
as well as materials based on this goal.
E.2.1 Determining Students’ Ability Development Goals

Based on Teaching Themes
Most of the current English textbooks are presented in the form of units with a theme,
such as family and animal, which have different requirements in different stages of
learning. Because some textbooks are arranged in terms of words, sentences, and
articles (songs, stories), some teachers who based on textbooks take the arrangement
of one class for word, one class for sentence patterns, one class for song, one class
for story. Some teachers, although not arranged the class in this way, are also influ-
enced by the grammatical analysis-centered teaching thoughts. They also believe
that students must master words to speak sentences and learn words and sentences to
learn discourse. Although this kind of instructional design also gives students a lot
of opportunities to speak (mostly mechanically repeating words or sentences), the
ability of students to use language comprehensively cannot be improved. Teachers
often feel that students seem to know many words but don’t know how to use it,
and forget the simplest expression in daily life. We believe that instructional design
should determine the goals of students’ development based on the teaching themes
provided by the materials. For example, when teaching “Which season do you like,”
the words required in the textbook are “spring, autumn, summer, winter, hot, warm,
cold, cool”; the sentence pattern is “It’s… in …”. According to this theme, I set the
student’s ability development goal in the first class to be able to tell the characteris-
tics of each season (Give a few pictures, students can guess what season is, and can
describe the picture in English orally.). The goal of the second lesson is to describe
the season they like—ask the students to explain why they like this season from the
perspective of people’s clothing/food/sports. When teaching “A birthday party,” I set
the goal of the second class is to be able to hold a birthday party for a classmate in
English. It is not difficult to see from the above examples that in designing activities,
we must first determine the student’s ability development goals in this lesson. This
is the core of teaching design. All teaching activities should be echoed in both form
and content and service for this goal. The content of each part of the textbook is then
naturally integrated into these activities.
E.2.2 Design Listening and Speaking Activities Based

on the Student’s Ability Development Goals
Once the student’s ability development goals are determined, the classroom activities
and the supporting materials needed can be determined. For example, when I decided
the goal of the second lesson is to hold a birthday party in English, the analysis made
me realize that in order to achieve this goal, students must know how to invite friends,
give\receive gifts, arrange venues, and say phatic sentences in English. So, I designed
following activities:
• Free talking to review the old knowledge: teacher provides questions related to the
text (Who is your friend?/What do you like to eat?/Festival greeting: Happy New
Year/What do you like to play?/What can you do?/When is your birthday?), and
let students do desk mate conversation.
• Task-driven situational dialogue: The teacher provides 3 situational dialogues
related to the birthdays (Dialogue 1 is used to invite friends by phone, Dialogue 2
is related to give\receive gifts, and Dialogue 3 contains some keywords for hold-
ing parties). On the basis of autonomous speaking, let the students do desk mate
conversation based on the actual situation.
• Read stories and percept integrally: Students’ perception of English birthday party
after the learning of situation dialogue is still partial and incomplete. It is necessary
to further expand the story related to the birthday party (especially the story of Ben’s
birthday) to have an all-around experience of the birthday party and experience
the cultural background of different languages;
• Divide into groups and utilize transitionally: After the students have a complete
and clear understanding of the English birthday party through dialogue and story
learning, let them organize an English birthday party for a classmate. That is a
natural thing.
What needs to be pointed out here is that the development and improvement of
students’ English listening and speaking ability are the core goal of primary school
English teaching. All teaching activities must firmly hold this core goal.
E.3 Contextual Principle
What is context? Context is the specific environment in which language is used. The
context can be generally divided into a narrow context and a broader context. The
former refers to the context, and the latter refers to the social environment and natural
environment in which the language is used. Both language knowledge and verbal
ability are learned in the process of verbal communication, and communication must
be carried out in a specific context. As Professor Wang Dechun, Neurolinguist in
China, pointed out (Wang 1997): “Direct language communication is also a nec-
essary part of children’s mastery of language…. A child can only hear the spoken
language, but he cannot master it; he also needs a benign stimulus in a certain speech
environment, that is, the child learn to speak must by talking with others in an envi-
ronment where they can communicate”. It can be seen that in order to effectively
develop children’s English listening and speaking ability during the critical period
of semantic perception, it is necessary to create a good language environment for
children to learn foreign languages. This language environment should support both
training of “listening” and “speaking”.
E.3.1 Design Listening and Speaking Activities Bases

on Authentic Communicative Context
The role of language is communication, and the way to learn and master language is
also communication. In the practice of English teaching, no matter what the choice
of teaching methods or the design of teaching activities are, we must consider the
authentic communicative context to achieve the best results. For example, when
teaching “A birthday party,” we let students organize a birthday party in English
(including inviting friends, giving/receiving gifts, setting up evening parties, etc.).
When teaching “Fantasy World,” ask students where they want to go in Children’s
Day, and let them imagine and describe the place they want to go. In such an authen-
tic communication context, students are not only feeling interesting, but also highly
motivated. Through a lot of listening and speaking training, they can naturally “ab-
sorb” the language information into their brains. More importantly, students can truly
experience the value of learning English—they can use English everywhere, and they
can develop their ability to migrate and use language.
E.3.2 Create Autonomous Listening Activities by Using

Discourses with Strong Plots
Autonomous listening is not only an important way to cultivate students’ listening

ability but also a way to increase the input of language information. So, what should
be listened to? We believe that it is necessary to listen to the discourse with context,
logic, and plot, especially discourse with interestingness and strong plots. The reason
why we emphasize this kind of material is because the context of the materials can
be not only good for learns to understand the meanings of words and sentences, but
also helpful for them to understand the different cultural background. This cannot be
replaced by single word and sentence because they are just some signals with logic if
short of the concrete language application context. For example, “I am sorry” usually
means “sorry,” but sometimes it means “I am very sad.” If we don’t combine it with
language situations, we can only rely on rote memorization. When teaching “Which
season do you like,” “It rains cats and dogs” appeared in the extended listening
material. When students hear this sentence, they can understand what it means by
combining pictures and contexts. But if there is no context, it is inevitable to explain
why “cats and dogs” are used to describe downpours. “He is a yellow dog” is the same.
When teaching “What can I do,” the original intention of the textbook is not to say
who can do something, but not be able to do something in a specific occasion, so if the
teacher simply explains “I can’t drink in computer room. I can’t sing in the library.” It
is inevitable to analyze grammar, but if we combine the language situation in which
everyone in the library is quietly reading. Students can immediately understand it.
Another example, “She is hot,” literally seems to be “she is very hot,” but if we really
understand in this way, we will make a joke. In English, this sentence generally means
“she is passionate, fiery, and very attractive,” and this is easier to understand with
contextual knowledge. Of course, for the lower grades’ primary school students, such
a text should be full of pictures, texts, and sounds, in order to stimulate students’
interest in learning and also facilitate students to better understand the contextual
knowledge.
E.3.3 Create Speaking Activity by Using Media Context
Create speaking activity by using media context refers to teachers use a variety of
media, including pictures, physical objects, multimedia computers, etc., to provide
students with speaking materials such as describe by looking at the picture and
discuss by looking at the objects. However, what should be pointed out is there
are two problems should be noticed in creating this kind of context: first, students
should not be able to imitate mechanically, but to give students room for migration and
expansion; teachers should use the teacher–student dialogue to demonstrate first, and
then let students engage in free dialogue; the second is to give clear guidance, such as
what to ask and how to ask (using a blackboard or PowerPoint to give some keywords
and sentences). For example, when teaching “Which season do you like,” the free
dialogue session is to first display four pictures to the students. The first picture is
used for teacher–student dialogue, and teacher gives some keywords and sentences as
hints by using PowerPoint. When the students know what to ask, I will let the students
freely choose pictures to do Q&A. Since the content of information in the picture far
exceeds the keywords’ sentence, I encourage the students to continue to ask questions
based on the keywords and sentence, or to select another picture for dialogue. When
teaching “Fantasy world,” after students have read the extended materials such as “A
hot balloon,” in order to inspire students’ thinking and imagination, we ask students
to have a free dialogue around the following questions: “If you had a hot balloon,
where do you want to go? Why? Can you tell something about the place you would
go? What can you see, do, hear and touch there?”
E.4 Developmental Principle
Confucius said that “the person who knows is not as good as the one who is willing
to know, and the one who is willing to know is not as good as the one who is happy
to know”; interest is the best teacher, so the interest in cultivating students to learn
English is undoubtedly one aspect that English teaching should pay close attention
to. However, there have been some practices of putting the cart before the horse:
Teachers use fun and excitement as a magic weapon to stimulate students’ interest.
The form of the activity is the focus of the design, and the form is far more important
than the content. The other type is that there are a large amount of activities, one
after one, and these activities are actually having the same content but only change in
the form. In order to better achieve the goal of cultivating students’ English listening
and speaking ability, we believe that in addition to adhering to the principle of
theme, the design of English teaching activities must also implement the principle
of developmental, which is, based on the students’ current ability level, close to
the goal set by the principle of thematic step by step (i.e., the student’s language
ability development goal determined according to the theme of the lesson). We can
understand this principle in two ways.
E.4.1 Development of Students’ Language Ability
To develop students’ language ability, the first requirement is that the design of
English teaching activities should not aim at knowledge, but should aim at “lan-
guage ability development”. When we first came into contact with this view, we also
had doubts: they are only the primary school students in the first and second grades.
Is it possible to set the target as develop students’ language application ability when
the students don’t have so much knowledge background? For example, when teach-
ing “A birthday party,” students know a few words such as invite guests, give/receive
gifts, and set up a party, but they have not systematically studied it. So at the begin-
ning, we were worried about whether students could accompany these requirements.
However, due to the creation of relevant contexts, most students understand and use
the dialogue flexibly. This kind of teaching method not only organically integrates
the text content and the extended content (such as “A birthday party” provides three
sets of extended situational dialogue and four stories), and it also has an advantage—
the learned language knowledge and the new language knowledge can be combined
together effectively through the need of language expression, so that the cultivation of
the students’ comprehensive language application ability can be truly implemented.
When implementing this principle, the following issues should be pay attention to:
(1) The development of students’ language ability needs demonstration and review.
As mentioned above, learners can only develop language skills through com-
munication. However, when implementing communicative teaching in order to
achieve better results, teachers should first demonstrate in the form of ques-
tions and answers. At the same time, teachers must pay attention to language
cumulative development, that is, review and consolidate in a similar language
communication situation to promote students’ application and migration of lan-
guage. Normally, students should have the opportunity to practice again in a
short period (depending on the need of the teaching, this review can be pro-
ceeded in the next lesson or in the next unit). For example, when teaching “My
pet,” we designed a pet-buying activity. When we taught the next unit “Toys,”
we designed a similar toy purchase activity.
(2) Design “progressive” listening and speaking activities to promote the develop-
ment of students’ language skills. The leaping development of English profi-
ciency should not be a simple increase in the amount of linguistic knowledge
and memory (we should pay special attention to the development of students’
comprehensive language application ability, rather than simply teach 5 or 6 new
words to a dozen in a lesson), nor the accumulation of various flashy activities
that are unrelated. Activities should be hierarchical and progressively—the for-
mer activity is the foundation of the latter, the latter activity is the improvement
of the previous activity, and ultimately, the “goal of ability development” of this
lesson can be achieved, thereby achieving the leaping development of language
ability (significant increase in language proficiency). As we taught “Which sea-
son do you like,” we designed five progressive activities: look at the picture and
say the season (mainly reviewing and consolidating the content of the previous
lesson), listening to the situational dialogue that describes the season (perceive
the weather conditions in different seasons, what people wear, what they like to
do, what they eat), desk mate communication (consolidate and transfer language
communication skills), read the story about the season independently (perceive
the characteristics of the four seasons more comprehensively and deeply), and
express it flexibly (talk about the season the students like and improve their
comprehensive language application ability). Teaching practice has proved that
such “progressive” listening and speaking activities can indeed achieve better
results.
(3) The activities of each lesson should be designed according to the teaching theme
of each lesson and the relationship between the themes. One of the character-
istics of today’s English textbooks is that they are presented in a single theme,
and each teaching theme is related to each other and cooperates with each other
to accomplish the goal of cultivating students’ comprehensive language appli-

cation ability. Therefore, in addition to focusing on each lesson, the design of
activities should also consider the development of students’ language ability
from the perspective of a unit, a semester, or even a phrase. Otherwise, it may
happen that each teaching unit is not related to each other, but some content is
repeated, or the following teaching unit stays at the level of the previous teaching
unit, which makes the whole teaching lack of systematic and integrality.
E.4.2 The Development of Students’ Thinking Ability
Language is the material shell of thinking. Language is the tool of thinking, and
the development of language ability and thinking ability complements each other.
The development of language ability without the development of thinking ability is
undoubtedly fruitless. Speak but not think or speak more think less cannot achieve
great improvement. Therefore, it is necessary to organically combine the cultivation
of thinking ability and language ability. The specific implementation methods are as
follows:
(1) Focus on from acceptance to expression
As mentioned above, the primary English teaching should be centered on verbal
communication. Of course, speaking is based on listening in the process of speech
communication. The learner should try to express after accepting the teacher’s verbal
information or expanding the language information on the listening material. If the
students only accept but never express for a long time, it will affect the effect of
acceptance and thus directly affect the ability of verbal communication. Therefore,
we believe that it is debatable that some teachers do not direct students to practice
speaking after organizing students to read the extended materials. Of course, in
practice, we can use a variety of flexible ways to conduct speaking exercises. For
example, after listening to a song, students can sing or adapt songs themselves; after
listening to the story, students can be grouped and role-play according to the storyline;
or plan a topic that students are interested into allow the students to do desk mate
communication or group communication (as the free conversation example in the
previous section “A hot balloon”).
(2) Focus on from imitation to creation
The importance of imitation for language learning is unquestionable. Imitation can
not only initially understand the knowledge and methods needed for language use
by repeating the “communicators’” language, but also enable learners to capture
the sense of using English from native English speakers. But if we just stay at the
level of imitation, it can only be a “parrot,” which can’t achieve the purpose of
communication. Communicative-centered language teaching should focus on the
development of students’ ability to use language and to focus on the creative use
of language, but not limited to imitation. However, the migration and creation of
language are gradually formed. First, it can be imitated in a similar context (e.g.,
after the teacher demonstrates a season that he likes, the students can describe the
season they like by imitation). Then, students can communicate according to the
context need—migration and creation (such as a second-grade primary school student
answers the teacher “What’s your favorite color?”, if he can say “My favorite color
is orange. My T-shirt is orange.” then, it shows that the student has a certain ability
to migrate and create language in a similar context”). One thing to be reminded is
that students should be encouraged to use the language creatively. At the same time,
students should be allowed to make mistakes, so that students can dare to learn and
speak. Only in this way can they be able to create.
E.5 Integrality Principle
The so-called integrality principle means that the development of students’ com-
prehensive language ability should start from the integral perception and should be
based on the comprehensive development of students’ language knowledge, language
skills, emotional attitudes, learning strategies, and cultural awareness.
E.5.1 Adhere to the Overall Development of Language

Knowledge and Speech Ability
The mastery of a language includes the mastery of language knowledge and speech
ability. Language knowledge (including phonetics, vocabulary, syntax, semantics,
context, etc.) and speech ability (including listening, speaking, reading, writing,
etc.) are an inseparable whole, so learning language must emphasize integrality, and
should be implemented in the following tips:
With regard to the way of learning language, it is necessary to emphasize the
interrelation and interaction between the learning of language knowledge and the
development of speech ability, that is, to develop and improve students’ compre-
hensive language application ability (especially listening and speaking) according
to the integrality principle and the need of authentic communicative context. The
listening and speaking materials provided to students should not stay on words and
sentences, but should emphasize more on the materials with complete structure and
plot. In other words, with regard to the study of language materials, it is necessary
to emphasize the integral perception of discourse; focus on paragraphs in teaching
words, sentences, and articles.
The development of speech ability should emphasize the combination of listening
and speaking. The perception, understanding, and expression of language are closely
combined. Speaking is based on listening; on the contrary, a large number of listening
must be combined with speaking to have a comprehensive and accurate perception

and understanding of the discourse. The lower grades of primary schools mainly
emphasize listening and speaking. When they reach the upper grades of primary
school and the junior high school, they should realize the overall development of
listening, speaking, reading, and writing under the premise of listening and speaking
as the key point.
E.5.2 Adhere to the Harmonious Development of Students’

Knowledge, Affection, and Volition
Language includes knowledge and ability, as well as culture. Learning English is

not only the cultivation of verbal communication ability in order to open the door to
the world; it can also broaden the horizons and appreciate the differences between
the world’s multiculturalism and Chinese and Western cultures. Language learning
is not only intellectual activity, but also includes emotions, attitudes, and values.
English learning is not only the process of acquiring language knowledge and verbal
ability, but also the process of develop thinking, experience value and identification,
and strengthen will. Therefore, in the English teaching activities, the cultivation of
students should adhere to the harmonious development of cognition, emotion, and
volition; in the process of promoting students’ speech ability and language knowl-
edge acquisition, we must not neglect the cultivation of correct emotional attitudes,
cognitive learning strategies, and cultural literacy.
References
Bao, T. R. (2004). The teaching model of english class using “Four in One” Teaching Method.
http://school.ecp.com.cn/school0/netschool.
English Curriculum Standards (Experimental Draft). (2001). Beijing Normal University Press, 7.
Qu, T. L. (2002). The research and exploration of the teaching mode of English teaching activity in
primary schools. http://www.pep.com.cn/200212/ca14442.htm.
Wang, D.C. (1997, February). Neurolinguistics (pp. 17–22, 102, 97–123). Shanghai: Shanghai
Foreign Language Education Press.
Appendix F
The Construction and Application of Primary
School English Teaching Resources
Mei Cao, Junfen Lin and Kekang He
Abstract In primary school English teaching, online teaching resources are increas-
ingly valued by teachers, since they can provide students with a good listening and
speaking environment and conversation materials. However, in practice, there are
various misunderstandings in the use of multimedia network teaching resources. On
the basis of rethinking these misunderstandings, combined with the exploration of
experiment of English education leaping development based on Semantic Percep-
tion Theory, this study demonstrates several problems in designing and developing
high-quality teaching resources from two aspects of content and method. Finally,
this paper also clarifies how to improve teaching results by effective use of teaching
resources.
Keywords Teaching resources · English education · Leaping development
It is unquestionable that high-quality multimedia network teaching resources pro-

vide a good listening and reading environment and a rich conversational context
for primary school English teaching. However, technology and resources will not
naturally lead to the improvement of teaching quality and teaching efficiency. Some-
times, it may even be counterproductive, making the teaching process more difficult
to organize and manage, leading to more students distracted, which is common. So,
what kind of resources can be regarded as high-quality teaching resources? How
should high-quality teaching resources be applied to teaching to improve teaching
effectiveness? The problem is how to effectively integrate information technology
with English teaching. Judging from the current situation, it should be said that the
problems are still far from being solved. Even in the construction and application of
Web-based teaching resources, there are still some misunderstandings. Let us first
analyze these misunderstandings.
M. Cao
J. Lin · K. He
Institute of Modern Educational Technology, Beijing Normal University, 100875 Beijing, China
222 Appendix F: The Construction and Application of Primary School English …
F.1 Misunderstandings in the Construction

and Application of Web-Based Teaching Resources
As we all know, online resources are in a large amount, and there are many English
learning resources for children, such as the Cambridge Children’s English Learn-
ing Center (http://www.xingzhingtang.com.cn), which is widely known by English
teachers and English fans, and the famous Korean Children’s English Web site: http://
www.littlefoxkids.com/, Hong En English: http://www.hongen.com/, etc. However,
the recourses that match the text, content, speed, and the characteristics of children
in lower grades are few. Teachers also need to choose according to their own teach-
ing needs and even develop their own teaching resources. Because the majority of
teachers can’t grasp the goal and connotation of information technology and curricu-
lum integration accurately, resulting in a lot of deviations in the development and
application of online teaching resources, and even put the cart before the horse.
F.1.1 The Understanding of the Interest of Teaching

Resources Only Emphasizes the Form but Ignores
the Content, and Excessively Pursues the Animation
Effect
In order to enable primary school students to voluntarily listen and read the extended
materials related to the text, it is necessary to change the focus from “requiring
students to listen and read” to “making students want to listen and read, and love
to listen and read”. Then, the listening and reading materials must be interesting,
visual, and vivid. It usually includes requirements on two aspects: form and content.
As to the form, it needs to be lively and abundant in visual, text, and sound. Such
materials not only can arouse children’s interest, but also can help them understand
the meaning of listening and reading materials and play the role of body language and
sign language. For example, in the “ugly duckling,” if there are several pictures in the
materials which can allow students to watch while listening, they can understand the
main idea of the story quickly. Teachers have no need to explain the content of the
story, which equals to the role of a recorder. Pictures, animations, videos, and other
media, as well as songs and jingles, can fulfill this requirement. As to the content,
the requirements are to be intriguing. Humorous anecdotes (such as the origin of
April Fool’s Day, Mark Twain and his nephew, female crabs and crabs), fairy tales
with philosophy and intellectual enlightenment and fables (such as turtle and rabbit
race, Little Red Riding Hood, Emperor’s new clothes), and celebrities’ anecdotes
(such as the first aircraft and the Wright brothers), etc., are excellent listening and
reading materials abundant in interestingness, visual, and vivid feelings. For the
lower grades’ primary school students, we must emphasize both the form and the
content; for the middle and upper primary school students, the content should be
emphasized, while the form is not so important. However, in practice, in order to
Appendix F: The Construction and Application of Primary School English … 223
stimulate students’ interest, many teachers often neglect the fundamental goal of
language ability training, over-emphasizing the fun of form, blindly pursuing the
effects of animation and video, and even teach upper grades’ students in this way as
well. There are only 2 or 3 English sentences in 4–5 min of animation. Students like
to watch but forget whether this is English class or animation class.
F.1.2 The Design and Application of Teaching Resources Are

Mainly Oriented to Teaching While Ignoring Learning,
Which Do not Embody the Teaching Design Idea
of “Paying Equal Attention to Learning and Teaching”
The goal of information technology and curriculum integration is to change the tradi-
tional teacher-centered teaching structure and form a new type of teaching structure
of “leader subject”. The construction of this new teaching structure is inseparable
from the teaching design idea of “learning and teaching”. That is to say, it is necessary
to fully reflect the subjective status of students while paying attention to the leading
role of teachers. This guiding ideology is extremely important for the design of teach-
ing activities and the application of teaching resources. However, it is regrettable that
many teachers still only consider how to use the resources for the design and appli-
cation, but rarely think about how to use resources to promote students’ independent
learning. There are two manifestations in practice: one is teacher always think about
how to better teach the content of resources to students, even if the resources can
support the students’ independent learning, the teachers are not at ease and want to
control the process of collective listening and collective learning. The second is that
teachers consider how to provide extended reading resources from a teaching aspect
only—always let students to listen to words and sentences repeatedly, but rarely
consider how to help students use the language materials in verbal communication.
In essence, this is still dominated by teacher-centered teaching thoughts and never
jumps out of the traditional teaching mode that emphasizes words interpretation but
ignores verbal communication.
F.1.3 Lack of Originality in the Construction of Teaching

Resources and Blindly Adopt “Takenism”
Due to the heavy workload of daily teaching, teachers often adopt “takenism” in
resource construction. There are indeed a lot of excellent resources on the Internet,
but most of them are probably not suitable for the lower grades’ students who use
English as a second language. Some Flash animations are quite good, but the speed of
speech and the clarity of the voice can’t meet the requirements of these beginners—
most of them can only mumble, and they can’t understand even the content. Due to
the short of time, some teachers often choose resources of this kind that are related
to the teaching theme and teaching content but are not suitable for the students’
age characteristics and cognitive characteristics, so that students don’t know how to
use it. This way of selecting and building resources can’t improve students’ interest
in learning and teaching, but seriously dampen students’ enthusiasm in learning
English.
F.1.4 Pursuit of Activities Is Quantity and Form, Failing

to Highlight the Focus of “Verbal Communication”
“Speak,” “listen,” “memorize,” “sing,” and “play” are the main forms of activity in the
of primary schools leaping English class, especially the teacher–student dialogues led
by teachers and the desk mate dialogues. In order to facilitate the development of these
forms of activities, the online teaching courseware for English leaping experiment
provides columns such as words, sentences, rhythms, stories, games, and Web sites.
Because of the lack of grasp of the leaping teaching concept, I and many teachers
who have just participated in the leaping experiment have also provide numerous
extended materials to the students in order to make the classroom atmosphere more
active, more vivid and colorful—design teaching centered on resources, provide all
these resources for students to listen, read, play: ask them to listen to a few songs,
follow a few stories, and allocate a certain time to do the game, and also strive to let
students use Internet. In this way, the whole class seems to be “fascinating.” In fact,
it is difficult for students to do what the teacher wants. Every link is incomplete to
understand and skim the surface of the content. Under such circumstances, how can
the cultivation of listening and speaking ability be put in place? I remember once I
finished the class, a student who liked me very much, a “seeded player” of first-year
report to me:
“Miss Cao, I didn’t listen to the story just now.”
“Oh, the computer is broken?”
“No, I like songs. After I have finished listening to the songs, other students have
already started playing games.”
Excellent student does so; it is more difficult for other students to fulfill the above
requirements.
F.1.5 Most of the Current English Teaching Resources Are

Used to Support Autonomous Listening and Reading,
Rather Than Supporting Verbal Communication
After the extension of listening and reading, most teachers will test the effect of stu-
dents’ autonomous learning and cooperative learning. The usual practice is to give
an exemplary scenario dialogue to let the students imitate (basically memorize), or
let the students sing songs (group singing or whole class singing), for the story-like
extended materials, teachers usually let the students do the role-play according to
the plots (If the story is not suitable for performance, then let the students repeat it
or read it collectively). Most of the above methods are retelling and imitating, and
there are not many opportunities for students to migrate, expand, and creatively use
language. The existence of such defects is directly related to the following condi-
tions—the current English teaching resources are generally used as listening and
reading materials, and there are few situational materials that can be used to create
a verbal communication environment.
Since I started participating in the leaping experiment in September 2003, I have
experienced confusion and walked through detours in practice. However, with the
progress of the experiment, our understanding of the leaping teaching concept has
gradually deepened. At the same time, we have gradually accumulated experience
in how to construct and use English teaching resources.
F.2 Design and Development of Resources for Listening

and Speaking Ability Training
This paper believes that in the primary school English teaching, the advantages of
multimedia teaching resources are mainly reflected in the provision of listening train-
ing environment and the creation of conversation scenarios. So how can we design
listening materials and conversation materials? Then, we will focus on the issues that
should be paid attention to in the construction of English teaching resources from
two aspects of content and method.
F.2.1 Content Requirements for Teaching Resources

Required for Listening and Speaking Skills Training
According to the theory of semantic and perception, primary school English teaching
should implement a communicative teaching model focusing on the development
of listening and speaking skills. The environment for training “listening” can be
constructed by introducing multimedia courseware and rich listening resources on
the Internet into the classroom; the environment for training “speaking” is built by
the English teacher using the teaching design centered on verbal communication.
(1) Content requirements of extended listening materials
The multimedia teaching resources supporting students’ listening training should

be suitable for the age characteristics and cognitive development level of primary
school students. The content should meet the requirements of funny, imaginary, and
vividness. Specifically, the extended listening materials should meet the following
nine items (He).
➀ The content must be correct—no political or ideological mistakes.
➁ Emotionally healthy—conducive to the cultivation of adolescents’ sentiments,
not the opposite.
➂ Funny and interesting—can stimulate students’ interest in learning, so that stu-
dents can learn and love learning. The fun and interestingness here are require-
ments both in form and content. The form requires both of pictures and sounds,
and the content makes the students love it. We should avoid that the form is
more important than content. Don’t let unproductive animations and videos take
over the class (the lower-grade students’ listening and reading materials require
both form and content. For the middle and upper grades, we should focus on the
content without paying too much attention to the form).
➃ Language must be standardized—no errors in vocabulary, syntax, and semantics.
➄ Standard dubbings—each piece of information must have a standard English
dubbing. If conditions allowed, provide both fast and normal reading rhythms of
the dubbings, or at least provide a normal rhythm dubbing.
➅ Fluent language—the sentence should be concise and smooth, suitable for
primary school students to read, if necessary, can rewrite the original materials.
➆ Note with hyperlink—for the new words, characters, and allusions in the original
materials, it is necessary to set “hot keys,” that is, to use hyperlinks to note; not
only to explain new words, but also add pronunciation, so that students can learn
independently.
➇ Suitable for different grades—the selection of extended listening and reading
materials should be carried out closely around each grade, each textbook, and
each text, so as to build a rich teaching resource database, to achieve the pur-
pose of using the resource database for simultaneous teaching and expanding
listening and reading. According to the requirements of “Semantic Perception
Theory” (new theory of children’s language development), we should pay close
attention to the critical period of before the age of 12 (the critical period of
semantic perception). Therefore, in the construction of the resource database
(both qualitative and quantitative), special attention should be paid to strength-
ening the collection, collation, and processing of relevant materials throughout
the primary school stage (grades 1 to 6), and it is necessary to develop a resources
database of primary level with rich content as soon as possible. Among them,
the lower-grade resources can focus on the scene dialogue, songs, and short sto-
ries (less than 100 to 200 words); middle- and upper-grade resources should
be story-based, the length should be slightly longer (700 to 1000 words), and
it may involve some local customs, celebrity anecdotes, etc. In addition, it can
also include some monographic listening resources, such as animals, families,
friends, festivals, and so on.
➈ Focus on chapter—both words and sentences need to be in a certain context
to display their rich connotations, and there must have contexts in which there
can be plots and logical connections to stimulate the interest of learners and to
facilitate learners to associate memories and thus reduce the memory burden.
Therefore, in the construction of extended listening resources, special emphasis
should be placed on texts with certain plots and contextual associations (includ-
ing situational dialogues, songs, stories, customs, legends, celebrity anecdotes,
humorous jokes, etc.), while multimedia courseware or materials involved only
words, phrases, or isolated sentences should be avoid.
For example, when teaching “My family,” we prepared a small story “The
Barnyand Chorus” (Fig. F.1) for the students. The content of this story is very child-
ish (the main idea of the story is: Maria likes to sing very much, but no one wants
to listen to her singing at first, and finally she finds a partner who likes to listen to
her singing) which attract students’ curiosity (because they really want to know if
Maria finally found someone who would like to listen to her singing). In the form,
not only the use of Flash animation and comic strips is lively and interesting, but also
the pictures, animations, voices of different moods (especially Maria’s emotional
changes) can help students understand the story. Although for the first-year students,
the story is not short, there are a lot of words and sentences, but the students still
learn in passion, and in the end, they can perform this story.
When we taught “What’s your favorite food,” we have adapted the familiar story
“Crows and Foxes” into English stories; when we taught “Clothes,” we carefully
selected part of the fable story “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” When we edit, we
deleted some difficult words and sentences and perform them in the form of Flash
animation. Although this kind of story has more details, because many students have
already read the Chinese version of the story book before learning, they know the
meaning of the story, and with the help of animation, the students can understand it
without much effort and can understand many things unconsciously.
(2) Content requirements of extended speaking materials
To implement “real-time two-way speech interaction,” it is necessary to carry out

verbal communication between people. This requires a real communicator and espe-
cially a master of the language (in the English class, it is generally a teacher). Because
the “teacher–student dialogue” and the “desk mate dialogue” can complement each
other in efficiency and effect, the leaping experiment emphasizes the need to use
these two forms of verbal communication as the basic form of teaching activities in
the English teaching. Although the effect of the “group dialogue” is similar to the
“desk mate dialogue,” its efficiency is lower than it. “Autonomous speaking” is not
as effective as “teachers–students’ dialogue,” “desk mate dialogue,” so “group dia-
logue” should not be used as a basic form of teaching activities in English classes, but
Fig. F.1
can be used as a supplement to the above two basic forms and should be selected in
appropriate occasions. Following points regarding the design of speaking materials
should be paid attention:
➀ Type of speaking material: The speaking material can be different types such
as pictures, texts, animations, and videos. The picture can support look at the
picture and describe, compose stories (autonomous speaking), and look at the
pictures and communicate (teacher–student dialogue, desk mate dialogue); ani-
mation can be used to compose stories (autonomous speaking) and dubbing
(autonomous speaking and desk mate dialogue); video can support dialogue
exercises (teacher–student dialogue, desk mate dialogue, group dialogue); the
text can be used for topic description and storytelling (autonomous speaking).
The choice of the type of material to be spoken should be based on the ability to
support the teacher–student dialogue and the desk mate dialogue.
➁ Give students room to think and expand: In order to make the teacher–student
dialogue and the desk mate dialogues more effective, not only should we pay
Fig. F.2 Model picture
attention to demonstration and migration when designing the content of the mate-
rials, but also leave space for students to think and expand, and avoid mechanical
imitation. For example, when designing the picture for dialogue, the first picture
can be used as a model picture. The teacher displays the picture and related key
points by using PowerPoint (see Fig. 2) and then gives the student several optional
pictures of the same subject with related key points (see Fig. 3) for reference. It
should be noted that the optional pictures provided to the student should have the
same theme. The description and sentence pattern should be similar, but there
may be some changes; and the key points for the students should inspire students
to think and promote themselves.
➂ Different grades should have different focuses: The activities in lower grades can
be looked at the picture and described, or read the texts; the middle and upper
grades can focus on looking at the picture (or consecutive pictures) and making
story, or dubbing animations (make up conversations).
➃ Focus on the development of students’ thinking skills: The content of the speaking
material should be conducive to the development of students’ thinking ability.
For example, give students a few weather forecasts (see Fig. 4), and ask them
to make a weather report. While asking students to make a weather forecast,
teachers also ask students to think about where they want to go in the past few
days. How does the current weather affect the plan, and how to adjust your
plan (similar to oral composition), and so on. This not only enriches the content
of language expression, but also gives students a certain amount of training in
thinking, imagination, planning, judgment, and other thinking skills.
Fig. F.3 Optional picture
Cities Temperature Weather
lowest highest daytime at night
Guangzhou 26 34 sunny to cloudy sunny to cloudy
Shenzhen 26 33 sunny to cloudy sunny to cloudy
Hongkong 26 34 sunny to cloudy sunny to cloudy
Macao 25 32 sunny sunny
Foshan 26 31 sunny sunny
Fig. F.4 One of the weather reports
F.2.2 Construction Methods of Resources for Listening

and Speaking Training
Resource construction is a long-term systematic project. It is impossible to build a

resource base in a short time. It is not only related to computer technology, but more
importantly, it must have correct educational ideas and teaching theory. After all,
teaching is the most important. The following four aspects should be paid attention
to:
➀ Importance of accumulation: As an English teacher, we should create a series

of theme folders based on the syllabus on our own computer, and download
the relevant content at any time while browsing the information on the network
or other CDs, and put the corresponding categories according to their subject
categories. At the same time, it is necessary to pay attention to the collection of
the URLs of some good English resource Web sites.
➁ Realize resource sharing as soon as possible: Each teacher has different resources.
If there is a space for resource sharing that will bring together scattered and
fragmented resources, it will be a huge asset. To this end, we suggest that the
research group establishes a unified resource sharing platform for all teachers
participating in the leaping experiment as soon as possible.
➂ “Takenism” and independent development should be paid equal attention to:
Many of the resources obtained on the Internet generally have a relatively fast
speech rate, or the expressions and vocabulary used are relatively complicated.
They are often not suitable for primary school students to listen to and read
in the lower grades. Therefore, the resources that are “taken” on the Internet
cannot fully satisfy the primary school students’ requirements. In addition, the
resources required for the innovative teaching design of the leaping experiment
are sometimes difficult to find directly on the Internet. At this time, our teachers
are required to develop resources independently. The method of development can
be to re-record the existing content of the online resource, reproduce the content,
or simply edit it. Of course, the workload for own editing is too much, so we
need to use some resources that are “taken” from Internet or other channels (such
as purchased CDs).
➃ Use Flash integration whenever possible: Because the extended listening and
reading materials require pictures, texts, and sounds, if the sound is directly
inserted into the webpage, the data size of the courseware will be too large. On
the other hand, it may be caused by poor playback performance of the student
machine’s playback plug-in or poor machine performance, and even the sound
cannot be heard. If the English extended listening and speaking material can try
to use Flash integration, the above drawbacks can be avoided.
F.3 Improve the Effect of Teaching Through the Effective

Use of Online Teaching Resources
In order to effectively improve the teaching effect through the effective use of online
teaching resources, the following three issues must be paid attention to the application
of online teaching resources:
F.3.1 Make Clearly the Purpose of Using Resources
This paper believes that in the primary school English teaching, the purpose of using
online multimedia teaching resources is purely to create an environment for students
to listen and speak. If it is not related to the students’ listening and speaking skills
training, but to help students understand the semantics, they can use other methods
such as physical objects, gestures, or body language.
F.3.2 Handle the Proportion of Human–Computer

Interaction and Interpersonal Interaction,
and Correctly Provide the Quantity of Resources
for Listening and Reading
As mentioned above, the “autonomous listening” of human–computer interaction is

not as effective as the interpersonal interaction in the listening and speaking ability
training. Therefore, in the teaching design, the proportion of interpersonal interaction
and human–computer interaction should be correctly handled according to the needs
of listening and speaking activities, and select the relevant content in the resource
database in an appropriate time. Usually, 2–3 listening activities (usually 12–15 min)
can be designed according to the needs of teaching, and the rest of the time is used
for interpersonal interaction activities (such as teacher–student dialogue, desk mate
dialogue); interpersonal interactive activities can sometimes provide communication
material through multimedia courseware. For example, in the teaching of “What’s the
weather like today?”, we designed three independent listening sessions: the first is to
listen to the weather forecast, in order to provide a demonstration for the students to do
the autonomous weather forecast; the second is listening to a story about the weather;
after listening to the story, the teacher not only consolidates and deepens the students’
understanding of the theme of “weather” and related words and sentences, but also
strengthens the students’ language ability training; the third is to listen to a few other
stories, which can lay the foundation for later storytelling and adaptation of the story.
In the teaching of the animals, we designed two independent listening sessions: the
first is to listen to riddles, to provide demonstrations for students to compile animal
riddles, and the second is to listen to stories, to provide rich language materials for
students to describe animals’ characteristics.
F.3.3 Effectively Use Online Teaching Resources Through

the Organic Combination of “Listening and Speaking”
Ability Training
Speech comprehension (“listening”) and discourse expression (“speaking”) are two

closely related speech activities. “Speaking” should have “listening” as the basis, and
a large number of “listening” can help training listening and provide accumulation of
language knowledge for speaking. However, in order to truly master verbal ability, it
is necessary to communicate through verbal communication (two-way speech inter-
action), so listening training is not enough, it must also be combined with speaking
training—and it cannot be achieved by autonomous speaking, but desk mate dia-
logue, group dialogue, and role-playing. Therefore, the extended listening session
must be organically combined with the “speaking”. For example, in the teaching of
the “A happy birthday,” after listening to some stories and descriptions of the birth-
day party, the teacher did not directly repeat the story, but let the students organize
a birthday party themselves. In this way, the learning activities are directly linked to
the students’ daily life, so that the students’ enthusiasm is quickly mobilized, and
the words and sentences learned in the extended listening materials are naturally
applied to the verbal communication in the current birthday party. In the teaching
of the “A fantasy world,” after the students listened to several stories such as “A hot
balloon” and “Clown,” the teacher gave the students several topics to describe: “If
you had a hot balloon, where would you want to go? Why?”, “Do you want to be
a clown? How to make up yourself?” Then let the students use their imagination to
describe to their desk mates where they want to go or how to dress like a clown.
In the teaching of the “What can I do,” after the students listened to the descriptive
material “What can a cat do,” the teacher did not let the students repeat the material,
but let the students do desk mate dialogue around the topics: “What can a tiger do?”,
“What can a monkey/rabbit/… do?”. The English words and phrases such as animals,
movements, food, and likes/dislikes that the students have previously learned have
been well reviewed, consolidated, and migrated through this comprehensive verbal
communication activity. At the same time, the students’ listening and speaking skills
have also been trained.
The above cases have inspired me in the following points:
➀ It is necessary to design a variety of verbal communication activities according
to the needs of different resource contents and teaching themes, and a good
communicative design can achieve unexpected results.
➁ The design of verbal communication activities must be combined with daily life
to effectively develop students’ comprehensive language application ability and
transfer ability.
➂ The training of listening and speaking ability can not only stay in the imitation
and retelling, but we should also encourage students to migrate and create in
the use of language and promote the simultaneous development of students’
language and thinking.
All in all, the construction and application of Web-based teaching resources should
proceed from reality, and it is necessary to serve the teaching as the fundamental
principle, and achieve the unity of form and content, knowledge and interest. As
long as we work hard to explore and continue to summarize, multimedia resources
will certainly play its positive role in teaching. English teaching based on Web-based
environment will also show its unique charm.
References
He, K. K. Guide to the construction of resource database of “Innovative study of primary

english education leaping development”, Internal reference materials for the study of Leaping
Development.
References
Bekov, K. (1952). The theory of a second signal system [Medical worker] (B. R. Zhao, Trans.) (Vol.
29).
Best, J. B. (1999). Cognitive psychology. Heinle Publishers (5th ed.).
Blumstein, S. E. (1995). The neurobiology of the sound structure of language. In M. S. Gazzaniga
(Ed.), The cognitive neuro-science, VII LANGUAGE. London: The MIT Press.
Chambers, J. K. (1992). Dialect acquisition. Language (4).
Chen, Y. H. (1996, December). Cognitive development psychology (p. 128). Zhejiang: Zhejiang
People’s Press.
Chomsky, N. (1998). Language and problems of knowledge. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press.
De Boysson-Bardies, et al. (1989). A crosslinguistic investigation of vowel formants in babbling.
Journal of Child Language, 16, 1–17.
De Casper, A. (1986). Spence, prenatal maternal speech influences newborns’ perception of speech
sounds. Infant Behavior and Development, 9, 133–150.
De Yoe, E. A., & Van Essen, D. C. (1998). TINS, 11, 219.
Dong, Q. (1992). Development of life—psycho-development. Jinan: Shandong Education Press.
Eimas, P., et al. (1971). Speech perception in infants. Science, 171, 303–306.
Encyclopedia of China (Philosophy II). (1987, October). Encyclopedia of China Publishing House.
Gazzaniga, M. S., Lury, R. B., & Mangun, G. R. (1998). Cognitive neuroscience. New York: W.W.
Norton & Company, Inc.
Goldin-Meadow, S., & Feldman, H. (1977). The development of language-like communication
without a language model. Science, 197, 401–403.
Gui, S. (2001, February). (Ed.). A new psycholinguistics (pp. 50–52, 74–75, 131–143, 549–552).
Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
He, K. K. (2000). On creative thinking—DC model of construction and confirmation. Beijing:
Beijing Normal University.
He, K. K. (2002, October). On native language education. In Proceedings of Mandarin Chinese
education and information technology forum.
Hu, M. Y. (1985). Language and linguistics (p. 21). Hubei: Hubei Education Press.
Hu, Y. S. (1995). Modern mandarin Chinese. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Press.
Huang, B. R., & Liao, X. D. (Eds.). (1999). Modern mandarin Chinese. Beijing: Higher Education
Press.
Hubel, D. H., & Wiesel, T. N. (1963). Journal Neurophysiology, 26, 994.
Johnson, J., & Newport, E. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence
of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology,
21.
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundation of language. New York: Wiley.
Li, D. X., et al. (1996). Concise neurology. Beijing: People’s Medical Press.

236 References
Li, Y. M., & Chen, Q. R. (1998, May). Language comprehension and production (pp. 107–108,
175–176). Central China Normal University Press.
Livingstone, M. S., & Hubel, D. H. (1987). Journal of Neuroscience, 7, 3416.
Mehler, J., & Christophe, A. (1995). Maturation and learning of language in the first year of life. In
M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.) The cognitive neurosciences, VII LANGUAGE. London: The MIT Press.
Morse, P. (1972). The discrimination of speech and nonspeech stimuli in early infancy. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 14, 477–492.
Suga, N. (1995). Processing of auditory information carried by species-specific complex sounds.
In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences, III SENSORY SYSTEMS. London: The
MIT Press.
Pavlov, I. (1952, August 13). Human first and second signal systems [Soviet Teacher] (B. R. Zhao
Trans.).
Pavlov, I. (1954). Lecture on the function of both hemispheres of the brain (B). Shanghai: Shanghai
Medical Press.
Pavlov, I. (1955). Objective study of animal higher neural activity (behavior) for twenty years. In
Selected Works of Pavlov (pp. 151–162). Beijing: Social Science Press.
Pavlov, I. (1956, October). Pavlov wednesday, 3, p. 320 (Russian version). Cited in Pipneirov
Pavlov’s Theory of two signal systems and Marxist-Leninist epistemology (p. 29). Beijing: Science
Press.
Pavlov, I. (1956, October). Twenty year experiment (p. 668) (Russian version). Cited in Pipneirov
(S. C. Zhang & M. X. Zhang Trans.). Pavlov’s theory of two signal systems and Marxist-Leninist
epistemology (pp. 5–21). Science Press.
Pavlov. (1986). Pavlov complete works, 3, 2. Cited in Petrovsky (Ed.), (Z. S. Yu, Trans.), Selected
works from psychology (pp. 181–182). People’s Education Press.
Peng, D. L. (Ed.). (2001, May). General psychology (pp. 8, 74, 124–125, 156). Beijing Normal
University Press.
Piaget, J. (1972). The principles of genetic epistemology. Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
Pipneirov (S. C Zhang, M. X., & Zhang, Trans.), (1956, October). Pavlov’s theory of two signal
systems and Marxist-Leninist epistemology. Beijing: Science Press.
Ruan, D. Y., & Shou, T. D. (1996, January). Neurophysiology (pp. 204–211, 302–306, 320–321).
Beijing: Chinese Science and Technology University Press.
Shechenov, A. A. (1984). The development and present situation of Soviet psychological science.
People’s Education Press.
Shen, Z., & Lin, Z. Z. (2001, July). Physiologic psychology (pp. 11, 33–35, 69, 81–97). Beijing:
Peking University Press.
Shou, T. D. (1997, December). Brain mechanism of visual information processing (pp. 173–179).
Shanghai: Shanghai science and technology education press.
Stromswold, K. (1995). The cognitive and neural bases of language acquisition. In M. S. Gazzaniga
(Ed.), The cognitive neuro-science, VII LANGUAGE. London: The MIT Press.
Summary Report on the Strided Testing Stage of Chinese and English in Primary School, December,
2003, from www.etc.edu.cn/学者专访/何克抗.html.
Sun, J.R., Introduction of Brain Science, p 138-151, p168-169, p218, Beijing: Peking University
Press, December, 2001.
Wada, J. A., Clarks, R., & Hamm, A. (1975). Cerebral hemispheric asymmetry in humans. Archives
of Neurology, 32.
Wang, D. C. (1997, February). Neurolinguistics (pp. 17–22, 102, 97–123). Shanghai: Shanghai
Foreign Language Education Press.
Wang, S., & Wang. A. S. (1996, February). Cognitive psychology (pp. 30–31). Beijing: Peking
University Press.
Wu, F. G. (1990). In Z. X. Zhu (Ed.), China adolescent psycho-development and education. China
Zhuoyue Publishing Company.
Wu, T. L., Li, B. S., & Wu, F. Y. (1990, February). Psychology (pp. 12–13, 27–29). Beijing: People’s
Education Press.
References 237
Ye, H. S. (Ed.). (2000). The essence of psychological theory. Fuzhou: Fujian Education Press.
Ye, Y. Q., & Zhu, P. L. (Ed.). (1992, August). Psychology (pp. 12–14, 82–84, 101–102). East China
Normal University Press.
Li, Y. (1995, June). Child language development (pp. 29–37, 83). Central China Normal University
Press.
Zhang, H. C. (Ed.). (2002, March). University psychology (pp. 81–82). Beijing: Beijing Normal
University Press.
Zhang, P. L. (Ed.). (1998). Neuro-anatomy. Beijing: People’s Medical Press.
Zhu, Z. X. (1998, February). Child psychology, (revised 1993) (pp. 125–129). Beijing: People’s
Education Press.

Semantic Perception Theory - A New Theory On Children's Language Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Semantic Perception Theory - A New Theory On Children's Language Development

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Semantic Perception Theory - A New Theory On Children's Language Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/14177

ISSN 2366-1658 ISSN 2366-1666 (electronic)

Nearly two decades ago, in November 2000, Professor He Kekang wrote a

recognize grammar is acquired through learning. It is amazing that Professor He,

series of educational theories, such as creative thinking theory, Semantic Perception

June 2004 Chongde Lin

1 Child Language Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.4 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis of the Semantic

4.5 Child’s Language Development and Native Language

6.3 Importance of ‘Two Signal Systems’ and Interrelation

Appendix A: An Innovative Study of English Education Leaping

1.1 Acquired Environment Theory1

many other behaviors, language is learned through a series of stimulus–response.

1.2 Innateness Hypothesis

1.2.1 Language Acquisition Device

mechanism. Moreover, it seems that as long as children exposed to some lan-

1.2.2 The Critical Period Hypothesis

Another innateness hypothesis currently influential is Lenneberg’s ‘critical period

32: 239–246, 1975.

1.3 Interaction Between Nature and Nurture

This theory is represented by Canadian psychologist Donald Hebb. He believes8 that

1.4 Assessment of the Two Theories of Child Language

1.5 Semantic Perception and Species Evolution

2.1 Current Understanding of the Sensory Perception

3 China encyclopedia (philosophy), China encyclopedia press. 1987.

2.2 Analysis of Neurophysiological Mechanism of Sensory

2.2.1 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis

Visual–perceptual system is generally referred to visual system for short.

15 Sun, J. R. Introduction of Brain Science. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.

2.2.2 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis

Listening perception system is generally referred to as the auditory system. The

19 Peng, D. L. (ed.). General psychology. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.

2.2.3 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis

20 Sun, J. R. Introduction of Brain Science. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.

2.2.4 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis

2.2.5 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis

As pointed out by Professor Shen Zheng,24 somatosensory mode can be divided

2.3 Objective Criteria for the Proper Classification

25 Livingstone. M. S. & Hubel, D. H. Neuroscience. 7: p. 3416. 1987.

Here, we use this objective classification system to do a serious investigation on

2.4 Neurophysiological Mechanism and Analysis

As we already know, ‘semantic perception’ refers to the sense of perception that

2.4.1 Neurophysiological Mechanism of Speech–Hearing

founder of ‘cognitive science.’ In his book entitled Cognitive Neuroscience,27 pub-

& Company, Inc. 1998.

28 Suga, N. processing of auditory information carried by species-specific complex sounds. In The

auditory cortex. However, gradual differentiation phenomenon in this process (each

29 Zhang, P. L. Neuro-anatomy. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House. 1998.

The other neurophysiologist is Professor Sun Jiurong from Peking University.

2.4.2 Components of Speech–Hearing System (Elements

30 Sun, J. R. Introduction of Brain Science. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.

2.5 Semantic Perception: Criteria of Perception

As mentioned, in order to ensure scientific classification, the classification of percep-

33 Cited in Chen, Y. H. Cognitive development psychology. Zhejiang: Zhejiang People’s Publishing

34 Peng, D. L. (ed.). General psychology. Beijing: Peking University Press. 2001.

3.1 Function of Semantic Perception