تعلم مفردا وكلمات اللغة الانجليزية التي تتعلق ب learning words تعلم المفردات والكلمات بسرعة مع النطق, سوف تجد في هذا الدرس جميع المفردات والفوكابولير بالانجليزية الذي يخص موضوع learning words تعلم المفردات والكلمات مع الصور, تعلم كيفية نطق كلمات الانجليزية ل learning words تعلم المفردات والكلمات بدون صعوبات, كيفية استعمال مفردات الانجليزية الخاصة ب learning words تعلم المفردات والكلمات في جمل صحيحة, تعلم قواعد استخدام المفردات والمصطلحات والتعابير الاصطلاحية الانجليزية المتعلقة بموضوع learning words تعلم المفردات والكلمات دون صعوبة. كما سوف تتعلم الأفعال والفريزل فوربس التي تخص موضوع learning words تعلم المفردات والكلمات باللغة الانجليزية الصحيحة.حورا الانجليزية, محادثات الانجليزية, استماع للانجليزية, تعلم و تعليم الانجليزية, أفضل أحسن طريقة, دروس و درس الانجليزية
Syntax and language acquisition
As syntax began to be studied more closely in the early 20th century, in relation to language learning, it became apparent to linguists, psychologists, and philosophers that knowing a language was not merely a matter of associating words with concepts, but that a critical aspect of language involves knowledge of how to put words together- sentences are usually needed in order to communicate successfully, not just isolated words.[6] When acquiring a language, it is often found that most verbs, such as those in the English language, are irregular verbs. These verbs do not follow specific rules to form the past-tense. Young children learn the past tense of verbs individually; however, when they are taught a "rule", such as adding -ed to form the past tense, they begin to exhibit overgeneralization errors (e.g. runned, hitted) as a result of learning these basic syntactical rules that do not apply to all verbs. The child then need to relearn how to apply these past tense rules to the irregular verbs they had previously done correctly.[11]
Generativism
Generative grammar, associated especially with the work of Noam Chomsky, is currently one of the principal approaches to children's acquisition of syntax.[12] The leading idea is that human biology imposes narrow constraints on the child's "hypothesis space" during language acquisition. In the Principles and Parameters Framework, which has dominated generative syntax since Chomsky's (1980) Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures, the acquisition of syntax resembles ordering from a menu: The human brain comes equipped with a limited set of choices, from which the child selects the correct options using her parents' speech, in combination with the context.[13][14]
An important argument, which favors the generative approach, is the Poverty of the stimulus argument. The child's input (a finite number of sentences encountered by the child, together with information about the context in which they were uttered) is, in principle, compatible with an infinite number of conceivable grammars. Moreover, few, if any, children can rely on corrective feedback from adults when they make a grammatical error.[15] Yet, barring situations of medical abnormality or extreme privation, all the children in a given speech-community converge on very much the same grammar by the age of about five years.[13] An especially dramatic example is provided by children who, for medical reasons, are unable to produce speech, and, therefore, can literally never be corrected for a grammatical error, yet, nonetheless, converge on the same grammar as their typically developing peers, according to comprehension-based tests of grammar.[16][17]
Considerations such as these have led Chomsky, Jerry Fodor, Eric Lenneberg and others to argue that the types of grammar the child needs to consider must be narrowly constrained by human biology (the nativist position).[18] These innate constraints are sometimes referred to as universal grammar, the human "language faculty," or the "language instinct." [19]
Empiricism
Although Chomsky's theory of a generative grammar has been popular with some linguists since the 1950s, many criticisms of the basic assumptions of generative theory have been put forth by cognitive-functional linguistics, who argue that language structure is created through language use.[20] These linguists argue that the concept of a Language Acquisition Device (LAD) is unsupported by evolutionary anthropology, which tends to show a gradual adaptation of the human brain and vocal cords to the use of language, rather than a sudden appearance of a complete set of binary parameters delineating the whole spectrum of possible grammars ever to have existed and ever to exist. On the other hand, cognitive-functional theorists use this anthropological data to show how human beings have evolved the capacity for grammar and syntax to meet our demand for linguistic symbols. (Binary parameters are common to digital computers, but may not be applicable to neurological systems such as the human brain.)
Further, the generative theory has several hypothetical constructs (such as movement, empty categories, complex underlying structures, and strict binary branching) that cannot possibly be acquired from any amount of linguistic input. It is unclear that human language is actually anything like the generative conception of it. Since language, as imagined by nativists, is unlearnably complex, subscribers to this theory argue that it must, therefore, be innate. A different theory of language, however, may yield different conclusions. While all theories of language acquisition posit some degree of innateness, a less convoluted theory might involve less innate structure and more learning. Under such a theory of grammar, the input, combined with both general and language-specific learning capacities, might be sufficient for acquisition.[citation needed]
Since 1980, linguists studying children, such as Melissa Bowerman, and psychologists following Jean Piaget, like Elizabeth Bates and Jean Mandler, came to suspect that there may indeed be many learning processes involved in the acquisition process, and that ignoring the role of learning may have been a mistake.[citation needed]
In recent years, the debate surrounding the nativist position has centered on whether the inborn capabilities are language-specific or domain-general, such as those that enable the infant to visually make sense of the world in terms of objects and actions. The anti-nativist view has many strands, but a frequent theme is that language emerges from usage in social contexts, using learning mechanisms that are a part of a general cognitive learning apparatus (which is what is innate). This position has been championed by Elizabeth Bates,[21] Catherine Snow, Brian MacWhinney, Michael Tomasello,[3] Michael Ramscar,[22] William O'Grady,[23] and others. Philosophers, such as Fiona Cowie[24] and Barbara Scholz with Geoffrey Pullum[25] have also argued against certain nativist claims in support of empiricism.
Statistical learning
Statistical learning suggests that, in learning language, a learner would use the natural statistical properties of language to deduce its structure, including sound patterns, words, and the beginnings of grammar. The statistical abilities are effective, but also limited by what qualifies as input, what is done with that input, and by the structure of the resulting output.[26]
Some language acquisition researchers, such as Elissa Newport, Richard Aslin, and Jenny Saffran, believe that language acquisition is based primarily on general learning mechanisms, namely statistical learning. The development of connectionist models that are able to successfully learn words and syntactical conventions[27] supports the predictions of statistical learning theories of language acquisition, as do empirical studies of children's learning of words and syntax.[28]
Chunking
Chunking theories of language acquisition constitute a group of theories related to statistical learning theories, in that they assume the input from the environment plays an essential role; however, they postulate different learning mechanisms. The central idea of these theories is that language development occurs through the incremental acquisition of meaningful chunks of elementary constituents, which can be words, phonemes, or syllables. Recently, this approach has been highly successful in simulating several phenomena in the acquisition of syntactic categories[29] and the acquisition of phonological knowledge.[30] The approach has several features that make it unique: the models are implemented as computer programs, which enables clear-cut and quantitative predictions to be made; they learn from naturalistic input, made of actual child-directed utterances; they produce actual utterances, which can be compared with children’s utterances; and they have simulated phenomena in several languages, including English, Spanish, and German.
Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology have developed a computer model analyzing early toddler conversations to predict the structure of later conversations. They showed that toddlers develop their own individual rules for speaking with slots, into which they could put certain kinds of words. A significant outcome of the research was that rules inferred from toddler speech were better predictors of subsequent speech than traditional grammars.[31]
0 Komentar untuk "مفردات وكلمات ومصطلحات الانجليزية عن learning words تعلم المفردات والكلمات"