ABSTRACT
Eliciting infants’ verbal imitation in order to investigate its relation to language acquisition is not a new technique (Berko Gleason, 1993), but it has often been a controversial one. As an aspect of language development and, more broadly, of developmental psychology, the study of infants’ and children’s language-related imitation has frequently become the arena for enacting theoretical conflicts arising from these larger fields. Indeed, several disputes over philosophy and approach among imitation researchers can be regarded as reflections of distinct (but not entirely independent), well-known and enduring controversies within developmental psychology. The three discussed here include conflicts (a) between causal expla-nations that rely on nature versus nurture, (b) between investigations that focus on universal patterns versus individual differences in development, and (c) between emphases on aspects of behavioral functioning that are intrapersonal versus interpersonal. Although it is certainly the case that many investigators hold intermediate or interactionist positions on these points, regarding them as struggles between countervailing forces allows one to view the contrasting perspectives and issues most clearly.
