【正文】 or children to acquire language (Nelson, 1973). Numerous such examples provide evidence that conscious learning is not a necessary element in language acquisition which may lead to the conclusion that something is genetically preprinted in human brain for the use of language.The fourth noteworthy fact about children’s language acquisition is that language develops long before children need to municate in order to survive. Without some type of inborn mechanism, children would not learn language before they are required to do so, just like learning puters. What’s more, children from different cultures might acquire language at different period of time with significantly different levels of language skills. Nevertheless, the reality is far different from this. As is mentioned above, almost all children from different countries and regions begin to acquire language as early as 6 months years old when they are still fed, tended and protected by their parents, long before language is necessary for them. This fact suggests that children’s language acquisition is somewhat innately guided. (Aitchison, 2000: 67)The last fact that more than one cases of children incapable of speaking because of impoverished linguistic environment may seem to be strong counterproof for the innateness of language. Several cases in which the children are socially isolated were repeatedly mentioned as the efficacious weapon to attack the view of innateness of language. These children were isolated from normal linguistic environments and thus couldn’t talk when first discovered, with some of them never being able to acquire language in their later life. Therefore, Lenneberg proposed the notion of critical period of language acquisition, suggesting there exists a critical point after which language acquisition bees rather difficult, if not impossible (Lenneberg, 1967). On the basis of these facts, the conclusion that language is due to learning rather than nature may be drawn with little doubt. However, some scholars also pointed out that in some cases the impoverished children tend to catch up quickly once their verbal environment is enriched, as is indicated in the case of Isabelle (Brown, 1958: 192), which implicates that it is too hush to make such an above mentioned conclusion as language is due to learning. Taking all the facts found in former studies and the two contradictory views into consideration, a more accurate conclusion may be reached that some type of natural or innate mechanism exists in human brain to make language acquisition possible while exposure to rich enough linguistic environment is necessary.3. ConclusionsThrough painstaking works, intense arguments and thorough speculations by philosophers, biologists, psychologists and linguists during the past thousands of years, the nature of language has been gradually revealed. Though it is still unclear what is exactly preprogrammed in human brain to facilitate them to acquire language, the results of numerous elaborate experiments on human physiological structure, persistent attempts to teach language to animals and close observations on children’s language acquisition, as displayed in the second part of this paper, have proved that a genetic basis must exist for humans to acquire, learn or use language, or in other words, language is innately preprogrammed. Meanwhile, careful nurture, or exposure to sufficient linguistic environment, is also a pulsory element to make language acquisition reach its full potential.Reference[1] Aitchisom, J. The Articulate Mammal: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. [2] Braine, . The Acquisition of Language in Infant and Child, in . Reed (ed.) The Learning of Language. New York: AppletonCenturyCrofts. 1971[3] Brown, R. Words