what is the difference between behaviorist theory and cognative theory of language learning?

Answer 1

The Behaviorist's theory is an attempt to explain human personality. It is in conflict with the Psychoanalytic and the Humanistic theory ... in several important ways. Most important ... are the ways in which each claims how human personality is formed. The Behaviorist ... believes that cultural and sub-cultural conditioning molds and shapes behavior and subsequently the personality. The unconscious is of little concern to the behaviorist. A human being, according to the behaviorist, has his life determined for him since he is a product of the culture that causes him to be as he is. The theory, therefore, is very deterministic.
Therapy in the Behaviorist model is based on the principles of learning, with all of learning's processes or methods: conditioning, reinforcing (rewards, denials, punishment), desensitization, aversion therapy, modeling, imitation, etc. [1]

Social cognitive theory provides a framework for understanding, predicting, and changing human behavior. The theory identifies human behavior as an interaction of personal factors, behavior, and the environment (Bandura 1977; Bandura 1986).
In the model, the interaction between the person and behavior involves the influences of a person’s thoughts and actions. The interaction between the person and the environment involves human beliefs and cognitive competencies that are developed and modified by social influences and structures within the environment. The third interaction, between the environment and behavior, involves a person’s behavior determining the aspects of their environment and in turn their behavior is modified by that environment. [2]

Answer 2

Chomsky denied the verbal behaviour of B. F. Skinner and replaced it by utilising acquisition. in accordance to verbal behaviour may well be speech subconscious in addition like all different behaviour (to illustrate locking the doors that's in specific circumstances forgotten and we are uncertain if our flat is locked). this suggests that we can communicate in specific circumstances a element without concerning to to the meaning of it - it incredibly is definitely known slipping of tongue. in accordance to Chomsky is grammar obtained as an entire and there's a deep shape in language that may carry ambiguity. to illustrate: travelling relatives may well be uninteresting. in this sentence is meaning divided into 2 areas: the two relatives who're travelling may well be uninteresting or travelling of them may well be uninteresting. This deep blunders in grammar are reminiscent of subconscious blunders in speech as suggested above.