An Evaluation of Behaviourism and Mentalism Theories of Linguistics: a Case Study of the University of Calabar Linguistics Students.

This study evaluates two prominent theories of language acquisition behaviorism and
mentalism to understand their contributions and limitations in explaining how language is
learned. Behaviorism, as introduced by B.F. Skinner, emphasizes environmental factors such
as imitation, reinforcement, and habit formation in language acquisition. This approach asserts
that language learning occurs through observable behaviors and interactions with the
environment. In contrast, mentalism, championed by Noam Chomsky, posits that language
acquisition is driven by innate cognitive mechanisms, including the innateness hypothesis and
universal grammar. Mentalism highlights the role of internal cognitive structures and the
distinction between linguistic competence and performance. This research employs a
qualitative approach, focusing on secondary data analysis from existing literature to evaluate
these theories. Behaviorism’s strengths include its empirical focus on observable behaviors,
while its limitations involve its inability to account for abstract language processes and creative
language use. Mentalism's strengths lie in its explanation of language creativity and complex
structures, though it is criticized for its insufficient attention to environmental factors and
challenges in empirical verification. This study reveals that while behaviorism and mentalism
offer valuable insights, neither theory alone fully accounts for the complexities of language
acquisition. The study suggests that integrating aspects of both theories could provide a more
comprehensive understanding of language learning. The findings contribute to the broader field
of linguistics by highlighting the need for continued research that bridges environmental and
cognitive perspectives in language acquisition.