Language Learning in Infancy: Does the Empirical Evidence Support a Domain Specific Language Acquisition Device?

Current trends in outcome studies for children with hearing loss and the need to establish a comprehensive framework of measuring outcomes in children with hearing loss in China

Since the 1970s, outcome studies for children with hearing loss expanded from focusing on assessing auditory awareness and speech perception skills to evaluating language and speech development. Since the early 2000s, the multi-center large scale research systematically studied outcomes in the areas of auditory awareness, speech-perception, language development, speech development, educational achievements, cognitive development, and psychosocial development. These studies advocated the establishment of baseline and regular follow-up evaluations with a comprehensive framework centered on language development. Recent research interests also include understanding the vast differences in outcomes for children with hearing loss, understanding the relationships between neurocognitive development and language acquisition in children with hearing loss, and using outcome studies to guide evidence-based clinical practice. After the establishment of standardized Mandarin language assessments, outcomes research in Mainland China has the potential to expand beyond auditory awareness and speech perception studies.

Evolutionary psychology: Neglecting neurobiology in defining the mind

Evolutionary psychology defines the human mind as comprising innate and domain-specific information-processing mechanisms that were designed to solve specific evolutionary problems of our Pleistocene past. Yet it is argued here that evolutionary psychology’s assumptions regarding the mind are often inconsistent with the neurobiological evidence; biological constraints may place limits on the kinds of hypotheses that can be made within a theoretical framework that wants to remain true to the known properties and functions of the human nervous system. Evolutionary psychology’s assumptions regarding our innate biology also shape their treatment of culture and learning in ways that may inaccurately reflect true experience–neurodevelopmental interactions. It is suggested that the mind can be adequately understood and its activities properly explained without hypothetical appeal to countless genetically pre-specified psychological programs, and in a way that remains consistent with both our neurobiology and neo-Darwinian evolution.

Does kinship terminology provide evidence for or against universal grammar?

Jones introduces an intricate machinery of kin classification that overcomes limitations of previous accounts. I question whether such a machinery is plausible. Because individuals never need to learn the entire spectrum of kin terminology, they could rely on data-driven learning. The complexity of Jones's machinery for kin classification casts doubt on the existence of innate structures that cover the complete linguistic domain.