Talk:Language deprivation experiments

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics Unassessed

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.

A fact from Language deprivation experiments appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 February 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Emperor Frederick II ran an experiment that involved raising infants in isolation to discover what language God spoke?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/February.

Wikipedia

According to the link, it was James V of Scotland, not James IV who held experiments in language; also, he ruled BEFORE Akbar =). Elefuntboy 16:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Historical examples"

The term "historical" is a pretty loose description of these stories, which might better be termed semi-legendary. Furthermore, the category "Historical Linguistics" is pretty much of a stretch; "Psycholinguistics" might be closer. --Ziusudra 04:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taking this a little bit further:

As to the literal truth of Herodotus, critics ancient and modern accuse him of fabricating many outlandish stories (see Scrutiny of Herodotus' works).
As to Salimbene di Adam's acccount of such an experiment, which even the present article calls "alleged", it is to be found in his Chronicle among other "curiosities" or "excesses" of Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor, such as the amphibious "Nicholas the Fish", whom the emperor compelled to retrieve his golden cup from the bottom of Charybdis. Frederick had many enemies who were fond of villifying him, cruel though he might have been, so any such tales are to be take with several grains of salt. (BTW, the WikiSource for Salimbene's Chronicle to which the article links is missing. A paraphrase and translation from Latin is to be found at [1].)
As to the reference for James V of Scotland, the cited source states, "...the children were reported to have spoken good Hebrew." The witness impeacheth itself.
Finally, in the same reference (online class notes for an undergraduate linguistics course), no verifiable source for the alleged deeds of James or Akbar is given.

It seems to me that what these citations provide would be, not a verifiable history of experiments, but perhaps an indication that the idea has long been current, that only a cruel autocrat could order such an inhuman experiment. --Ziusudra 03:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. btw I've found another source for the Akbar anecdote.--K.C. Tang 06:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The entry for King James IV claims he was responsible for the experiment not James V. Which entry is correct? Mathew Rammer (talk) 08:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC) They are the same person. King James the V of Scotland, later becoming James VI of England in 1603 (1566-1625)[reply]

As to the reference for James V of Scotland, the cited source states, "...the children were reported to have spoken good Hebrew." This is not a good source and should not be referenced as a fact —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.128.239.66 (talk) 17:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

shouldn't this reference more modern examples, like the children kept under the stairs who created their own pidgin languages? AaronSw (talk) 21:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While not strictly "experiments", they sound like they would be related enough for at least a paragraph dealing on their development. But I'm not sure I've seen a news story on a case where a child was raised without language, and developed one of their own -- do you have a link or something? Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 21:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reality of natural experiments

I seriously doubt that any of the experiments listed really happened. However, there are a number of tragic cases of children growing up with very little human contact. These children don't speak any foreign or ancient language. In fact, some of them don't speak at all. Those which eventually learn to speak understandably speak a limited and strange-sounding version of the surrounding culture's language. What I mean is that they don't follow the grammar or usage of the language in question. These are the real consequences of not having the chance to learn a language in time.

2009-12-08 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.