Text 1: Linguist Dr. Anna Wells argues for universal grammar. "Children acquire language too rapidly given limited input," Wells explains. "Innate linguistic structures must scaffold learning. The poverty of stimulus suggests biological language faculty."
Text 2: Linguist Dr. James Park emphasizes statistical learning. "Infants rapidly extract patterns from language input," Park reports. "Transitional probabilities, distributional regularities—sophisticated statistical mechanisms enable acquisition without innate grammar."
What does Park offer as an alternative to Wells's innate grammar explanation?
That children don't actually acquire language
That powerful learning mechanisms can explain acquisition without assuming innate linguistic structures
That adults are the primary language learners
That grammar has no structure
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Wells argues innate structures are necessary. Park argues "sophisticated statistical mechanisms" suffice—learning is powerful enough without innate grammar.
- Evidence: Park: statistical learning enables acquisition "without innate grammar."
- Reasoning: Powerful learning reduces need for innate content.
- Conclusion: Park offers learning mechanisms as alternative explanation.
Choice A is incorrect because Park studies acquisition. Choice C is incorrect because Park studies infant learning. Choice D is incorrect because Park explains grammar acquisition.