This chapter overviews broad issues related to language acquisition research and answers fundamental questions related to first language acquisition, such as What is language? and How do children learn their first language? It begins by introducing some components of language, such as grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, pragmatics, and discourse. It also discusses language varieties (e.g., American English vs. Indian English) and explains their legitimacy. Then, the chapter addresses language learning during the first years of a child’s life. It also discusses bilingualism, especially of those who start learning multiple languages in their early years (simultaneous bilingualism). In order to understand second language acquisition for the rest of the textbook, the chapter focuses on a question: How are children able to learn a language without formal instruction? In order to answer this question, multiple language acquisition theories will be discussed.

The chapter locates the Minimalist Program (MP) in the wider context of the Generative Program (GP). It argues that MP is the next logical step for GP to take given the relative success of two prior projects: (i) explaining how linguistic creativity (the capacity to use and understand an unbounded number of different hierarchically organized linguistic objects) is possible and (ii) explaining how linguistic flexibility (the human meta-capacity to acquire the grammatical recursive procedures that undergird linguistic creativity) is possible. The argument is that given that we (roughly) understand what kinds of recursive procedures natural language grammars (Gs) contain, and given that we (roughly) understand key aspects of the fine structure of the faculty of language (FL), MP asks the obvious next question of why FL has the particular structure it has.

The chapter provides an overview of work that crosses the linguistics-psychology boundaries.

It presents early influential contributions/developments: Piaget and Vygotsky, Skinner’s behaviorist treatment of language acquisition (and Chomsky’s criticism), computer programming formalism, and the Chomskyan and cognitive revolutions.

It then analyzes research developments from the 1950s, reviews the tenets of generative grammar (especially Universal Grammar) and their role in sentence processing theories (garden-path theory, connectionist models) and describes models of discourse processing, e.g., mental/situation models, Construction-Integration model.

Other topics discussed are:

• - Child language acquisition: its empirical foundations and Chomskyan views about language learnability (poverty of stimulus, critical period of development).

• - Formalization of language processing with computing tools: simulation of language processes, description of representations underlying language processing (e.g., semantic networks, scripts, ACT CCREADER); computational linguistics (e.g., speech recognition, automated translation); corpus linguistics.

• - Social dimensions of language use: pragmatics (Grice’s conversational maxims, Relevance Theory); social psychology (Communication Accommodation Theory).

• - Neurolinguistics: disorders resulting from brain damage; technical advances in brain imaging methods and new insights about language processing networks.

• - Gesture and sign language: gesture-thought relationship; study of sign languages.

• - Cognitive linguistics and the claim that cognitive structures and representational schemes contribute to shaping language structure (e.g., Cognitive Grammar).

This chapter reviews the existing Role and Reference Grammar (RRG) work on diachronic syntax and morphosyntax and shows how the tools of language description developed by RRG can also be used to account for several aspects of language change. Drawing evidence from developments which have occurred in a wide range of languages, it is argued that RRG allows for a more fine-grained analysis of diachronic processes than theoretically neutral approaches, that it answers fundamental questions about the nature and causes of syntactic change, and that it is not a mere tool of linguistic description, but a theory that makes falsifiable empirical predictions.

Chapter 4 discusses foundational studies linking theoretical findings in second language acquisition and classroom research. The first part of the chapter presents the linguistic background for adverb placement in English and in French within the Principles and Parameters framework of Universal Grammar and then focuses on intervention studies on the acquisition of verb movement and adverb placement in English as a second language by Francophone children in Montreal. The second part of the chapter focuses on question formation in English, the developmental sequences learners of English go through in the acquisition of questions in English, and Pienemann’s Processability Theory, which has been the impetus for important studies on the acquisition of question formation in English as a second language.

Chapter 1 provides an overview of the major topics in linguistics and second language acquisition (SLA) that are particularly relevant for research with second language learners. The first half of Chapter 1 sets out the foundational concepts, and defines such major terms as linguistics, second language acquisition, and heritage speakers. The chapter addresses such influences on language acquisition as age of acquisition and input quantity and quality, comparing and contrasting different types of learner population (monolingual vs. bilingual, first language vs. second language learners vs. heritage speakers). The chapter provides a brief introduction to generative linguistics and generative SLA, discussing evidence for the biological foundations of language and for Universal Grammar. In the second half of Chapter 1, the discussion moves on to the implicit vs. explicit distinction, which is manifested in second language learning, knowledge, and instruction, and which is relevant both to the nature of teaching interventions and to the measurement of learners’ resulting knowledge.

Chapter 10 concludes the book by summarizing the major findings from the intervention studies in the preceding chapters and putting forth suggestions for future research. Returning to the themes introduced at the beginning of the book, Chapter 10 addresses the relationship between intervention research and linguistic representations, as well as the role of crosslinguistic influence or transfer from the learners’ native languages. Suggestions for future research address issues of scope, generalizability, and study length in intervention research, as well as the incorporation of new technologies in intervention studies.

This paper is another argument in favor of a uniformitarian approach to Creole languages, analyzed on a par with non-Creole languages. We take a critical look at competing hypotheses about the formation of Creole languages and any resulting typology. We document and analyze the shortcomings of these hypotheses in terms of methodical and theoretical flaws, lack of empirical coverage, and socio-historical implausibility. Then, we present our own proposal for a “Null Theory of Creole Formation” whereby the term “Creole” can only have socio-historical, and definitely not linguistic-structural, significance. In this “Null Theory,” the individual-level cognitive processes that underlie the formation of grammatical structures in Creole languages (via the acquisition of both native and non-native languages, by children and adults, respectively) are exactly on a par with their counterparts in the formation of non-Creole languages. So there isn’t, and couldn’t be, any sui generis “Creole typology.” We conclude with some guidelines toward a fully uniformitarian and theoretically constructive framework for the study of Creole languages and their formation – a framework that can also help us understand the formation of new language varieties that do not go by the label “Creole.”

This chapter builds the general theory of the UG–iconicity interface, which consists of two general principles, with the Functional Iconicity Complementation Hypothesis (FICH) defining when the interaction is activated, and the Uniform Structure Mapping Principle (USM), how this interaction is carried out. In general, if a functional void of UG prevents a semantic/conceptual relation from mapping to a structural relation properly and thus halts an otherwise well-formed process of clause-generation, iconicity is called in to help finish the task. Intricate interactions between UG and iconicity may happen under the regulation of the USM so that the solution remains UG-compliant (and therefore has a proper interpretation). The scarce literature on the UG–iconicity relation is reviewed to provide the context in which the interface theory in this book is positioned and evaluated. The specific theory of the UG–iconicity interface is also compared with familiar examples in biology for further validation.

Chapter 4 outlines key properties of language development and explores the question whether the acquisition of an additional or foreign language is fundamentally different compared to the acquisition of a primary language in infancy. Drawing on key findings from studies of second language acquisition involving a range of language pairs, it is shown that some properties of an additional language are acquired naturally despite apparent difficulties caused by input and transfer from previous language knowledge. However, some properties of grammar and language use remain persistently difficult, even despite input and teaching of the properties. We conclude with the claim that the knowledge of Virtual Grammar and its grammatical concepts provides a way for teachers to understand the learnability issues faced by their language learners so that they can then make use of appropriate approaches to address these issues.

In this chapter we review the competing perspectives on the starting point for second language acquisition. Do learners begin with the L1 and transfer all properties and processes into second language acquisition? Or is transfer partial and selective at the outset? Or do second language learners not transfer any aspects of the L1 and begin with universal properties of language and universal processes for acquiring language? We review such key hypotheses as Full Access and Full Transfer/Full Access, as well as important constructs such as minimal trees, input processing, and processability.