A SENSE OF ENGLISH

The Theory of Universal Grammar

Grammar has been described as the logic of language.

Last time we were considering the concept of a “Universal Grammar”. Linguistic philosopher and social thinker Noam Chomsky is a leading proponent of this notion.

The theory centres round the idea that as humans we have an innate capacity to organize language. We are born already equipped with the tools to assimilate our experience of language from the moment our life begins.

Think of it like this: In your brain there is a filing cabinet already neatly prepared with labelled suspension files. Automatically our brains know where to ‘file’ each piece of knowledge as our exposure to language develops.

Learning a language – including our mother tongue – involves relating knowledge (as it is acquired) back to a skeletal structure in our brains that we are born with.

If language acquisition required us to objectively learn sets of rules and the numerous variations in how words and structures can be used (without recourse to any help from within) then achieving effective communication would take too long.

Charles Darwin described language as being instinctive to humans; in the same way as, for example, it is natural for us to adopt an upright posture and not walk on all fours.

The idea gains credence if we consider grammatical errors that children make as they develop their mother tongue.

When a child makes a mistake with, for example, an irregular past tense (e.g. “My mum maked a cake”), it doesn’t come from hearing and repeating.

It is a type error and involves the natural application of a rule which has not been learnt, but which is already in place. Consistency of the rule is naturally assumed, which makes the mistake a logical one.

Therefore, in learning our first language, it is not the rules that have to be learnt, but the exceptions to the rules. The theory of Universal Grammar argues that the rules are already there.

These kinds of mistakes are made only at the beginning of the language assimilation process, and are quickly dispensed with as familiarity with irregular forms develops.

In contemporary Britain, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone under the age of 50 (and state-educated) who could tell you what a gerund or an infinitive are. Many would even struggle to define an adjective. Sadly, this is not an exaggeration.

Abandoning the teaching of English grammar in British state schools is increasingly considered as having been a significant mistake.

The Spanish school curriculum devotes three hours a week to “Lengua Española” (Spanish language) which is a formal subject for which there are exams and certificates.
It is treated as a subject within its own right.

There is the respect that an informed appreciation of our own language is intrinsically bound up with understanding collective identity.

The advantage of formal grammar study is that it gives labels to the innate structures that the universal grammar theory claims we have. It is like adding the tabs and the inserts to the suspension files that hang in our mental filing cabinet.

This then gives us a starting point to learn languages other than our native tongue.
British people are at a disadvantage when it comes to language learning precisely because of this lack of grammar appreciation.

Sometimes they are accused of being lazy to learn other languages, but I believe the root of the problem lies in this ignorance. That coupled with a perceived lack of need, due to the prominent nature of the English language in the international arena.