Commentary on Rispoli's review

Abstract

The debate between nativism and empiricism has been the central issue in developmental psychology for well over three centuries. Nowhere has the opposition between nature and nurture been felt more keenly than in the study of child language development. At times the debate has proven useful, or at least entertaining. But there are those, like Matthew Rispoli, who worry that a fixation on this issue may reinforce a polarization that will eventually ‘run developmental psycholinguistics into the ground’.