Re[2]: [tied] Glen, regarding...

At 3:25:45 PM on Friday, October 10, 2003, Patrick C. Ryan wrote:

> From: "ehlsmith" <ehlsmith@...>

>> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick C. Ryan" <proto-

>>> From: "ehlsmith" <ehlsmith@...>

>>>> Certainly there are differences between the two
>>>> populations in terms of both genetics and
>>>> pronunciation, but newborn infants from one population
>>>> brought up by adoptive parents of the other population
>>>> will speak like their adoptive parents, not their
>>>> genetic parents. You might as well propose that
>>>> phonological changes are caused by diet or religion, or
>>>> what sports one follows.

>>> <PCR> I acknowledge that, in general, those newborn
>>> infants from the imperfectly replicating population will
>>> speak like their adoptive parents. But why? Perhaps
>>> because they will be regularly and rigorously corrected,
>>> and even though great effort is necessary, eventually
>>> they will succeed.

>> The overwhelming consensus of researchers, as I
>> ubderstand it, is that no difference in effort is
>> required in language acquisition between natural children
>> or adoptive children, even adoptive children from other
>> ethnic groups.

> [PCR] The effort is expended by the correcters.

To very little effect; that simply isn't how children learn
language. This is both well-known and readily observable.

> In the imperfectly replicating population, obviously, by
> definition, newborn infants will not be regularly
> corrected, and no great effort will be necessary.

In fact young kids make all sorts of mistakes even if their
parents are fluent native speakers. They may say 'cimmanon'
for 'cinnamon', or 'pasketti' for 'spaghetti'; they may say
'singed' for 'sang'; they may substitute /t-/ for /f-/
(e.g., 'tunny' for 'funny'). I've personally encountered
all of these, and the first is actually fairly common. Very
often their parents and other adults waste a great deal of
time and energy trying to correct these mistakes. Why
'waste'? Because it's a futile exercise: the child will
correct the error in his own good time irrespective of the
effort expended.

Your explanation is a non-starter, as it presupposes a model
of language acquisition in young children that is known to
be false.

Brian