Commentary on Pierce, Genesee, Delcenserie, and Morgan

Abstract

Early linguistic experiences are intimately tied to later language learning outcomes (e.g., Chilosi et al., 2013; Kaushanskaya & Marian, 2009b). The underlying neural and cognitive processes mediating this relationship remain unclear. Pierce, Genesee, Delcenserie, and Morgan (2017) propose that the phonological working memory (PWM) system is the critical component responsible for linking early linguistic experiences to later language development. Their argument arises from research demonstrating that exposure to linguistic input early in life shapes the kinds of phonological representations that are formed about the sounds within one's native language (Kuhl, 2004; Majerus et al., 2005; Mody, Schwartz, Gravel, & Ruben, 1999; Nittrouer & Burton, 2005). These phonological representations, which the authors believe to be created and stored using the PWM system (Gathercole & Baddeley, 1989), are highly predictive of later language outcomes (Bernhardt, Kemp, & Werker, 2007; Kuhl, 2010; Molfese & Molfese, 1985; Tsao, Liu, & Kuhl, 2004). Explaining language development via memory processes has many benefits. For instance, drawing on a large extant literature on memory-related processes allows researchers to make novel predictions about language learning, especially in regard to its connections to other kinds of learning (e.g., Gathercole, 2006). Identifying PWM as a key driver to language development is a useful insight likely to generate much further research, but it may not go far enough in tying language acquisition to more domain-general aspects of the human cognitive architecture. We believe that a complete account of language will require consideration of additional aspects of the human cognitive architecture working alongside the PWM system.