Why do you think that young deaf children who become fluent in sign language would be cited in support of the innateness hypothesis?

Answer 1

Language must be genetically innate since children can learn language at the same time. Deaf children did not learn speech hence showing that their language capacity did not depend on the teeth and vocal cords there human offsprings are born with special capacity of language.

Answer 2

If these deaf children do not develop speech first, then their language ability would not seem to depend on those physical adaptations of the teeth, larynx, etc. That are involved in speaking. If all children (including those born deaf) can acquire language at about the same time, they must be born with a special capacity to do so. The conclusion is that it must be innate and hence genetically.

Answer 3

WHY DO YOU THINK THAT YOUNG DEAF CHILDREN WHO BECOME FLUENT IN SIGN LANGUAGE WOULD BE CITED IN SUPPORT OF THE INNATENESS HYPOTHESIS?
If these deaf children do not develop speech first, then their language ability

would not seem to depend on those physical adaptations of the teeth, larynx, etc.

that are involved in speaking. If all children (including those born deaf) can

acquire language at about the same time, they must be born with a special

capacity to do so. The conclusion is that it must be innate and hence genetically

determined.

Answer 4

Young deaf children who become fluent in sign language are often cited in support of the innateness hypothesis because it demonstrates that language acquisition is not dependent on auditory input. This challenges the idea that exposure to spoken language is necessary for linguistic development, suggesting instead that humans have an innate capacity for language acquisition that can manifest through different modalities, such as sign language.