A feral child is a child that is brought up without much, if any human contact and is kept in isolation from a very early age. Though there aren’t many reported cases, there are few that gained national attention, and will forever be referred to scientifically. One of the most famous cases of a feral child, is that of Genie. She was discovered at the age of 13, and was labeled as an “unsocialized, primitive human being, emotionally disturbed, unlearned, and without language,” (Fromkin, et al., 1974). The story of Genie’s childhood was heartbreaking, since the age of 20 months, she was restricted to one room where she was tied to a “potty chair”, and here she stayed for most of the day and sometimes throughout the night. Due to her lack of human interaction, Genie never learned to speak or do many other things that were considered normal tasks for a girl of her age. This sort of cognitive clean slate intrigued scientists and became crucial in trying to understand how and when language acquisition appears. The first hypothesis proposed was that there is no such thing as a feral child, but these children never made progress because they were considered autistic (McNeil, Polloway, & Smith, 1984). Another argument, is the Critical Period Hypothesis, which states there is a period for learning language early in life and if the child does not learn the language in this time, he/she never will (McNeil, Polloway, & Smith, 1984). In Genie’s case, she was given comprehension tests regularly, these consisted of her pointing at objects to show she understood, due to the fact that she did not have much vocabulary. Genie’s first word however, was like many other typically developing children’s which was a consonant-vowel monosyllabic word. She later gained other simple words that were slightly more complex in terms of number of syllables. At the end of her language training, all consonants in the English language were in her lexicon, though she often would delete the final consonants of words (Fromkin, et al., 1974). Later on, her phonological system changed as well, meaning she was able to pronounce different consonants and vowels and imitate any English sound and sound sequences. Though many of these aspects of her learning seem groundbreaking, her spoken language skills were comparable to that of a two-year-old (Fromkin, et al., 1974). It was found that Genie had a much easier time storing lists of words and small phrases than learning the rules of grammar. As written in the study, “This illustrates very sharply that language acquisition is not simply the ability to store a large number of items in memory,” (Fromkin, et al., 1974). Unfortunately, language is more than simply relaying words and phrases back to people, and communication can only travel so far without the very imperative grammar that holds language together. This further supports the hypothesis that there is a certain time frame ideal for children to learn language and it occurs early in life, prior to puberty.
It has been hypothesized that, “if areas of the brain are unstimulated they may remain unspecialized to specific functions,” (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). This statement suggests that in extreme cases of isolation or social deprivation, like that of Genie’s, the capability to regain what has already been damaged is difficult, and could be impossible (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). However, it also could imply that within the right parameters, if those areas of the brain associated with language development are stimulated, acquisition capabilities may surface (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). In order to test this however, someone deprived of human interaction from a young age must be studied, and a language development training program implemented.
Though not many cases of isolated children are studied, Rose, another child severely neglected child experienced similar trauma. Rose, a child who suffered with seizures at nine months old was the oldest of five children (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). At the age of six, her mother left her in the care of her grandmother. Here, she was confined to a small room with only a bed and had very limited contact with her grandmother. Her diet consisted of coffee, candy, instant milk, and cookies (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). The only other contact she received was when she was inconsistently taken to the doctors for checkups. At the hospital, doctors would visually observe her behaviors, and write prescriptions for medications accordingly and they would leave. (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). When Rose was 36, her grandmother passed away, and her mother returned to Puerto Rico where she was living to reclaim her, however, she was in a state of isolation for about 30 years at that time (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). Once this was discovered, she was taken to South Carolina Department of Disabilities and Special Needs. “Rose’s initial psychological evaluation revealed that she did not engage in even the simplest of interactional play with others,” (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). It was then decided she would obtain therapy regarding social interaction as she “had not received any formal speech and language intervention,” (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998).
First, baseline observations were made regarding her knowledge and comprehension of language. She demonstrated understanding of, “yes/no”, “bye-bye”, her name, and simple directions (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). However, her responses remained nonverbal and inconsistent. She was able to gesture and use facial expressions to convey her replies, but it was determined that, “Rose was functioning at the gestural and object symbol level,” (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). Rose underwent both a Pre-Training, which included her caregiver’s interactions, and also a Training Program. The first objective of these was for Rose to begin associating meaning with black and white picture symbol cards (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). The second objective of the program was “designed to increase Rose’s comprehension and execution of one-step directives,” (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). These were short phrases like “stand-up” or “time to wash your hands”, and were accompanied by both speech and gesture. A third objective consisted of implementing gestures such as, “come here, yes, and, no,” into her lexicon (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). Her therapy focused on establishing a communication system, utilizing receptive language tools, and training her caretakers in order to provide a conducive environment for language development (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). The training programs lasted 12 weeks and a pattern of progress was observed. It was evident she began to pick up on communicative interaction and intent. She also was able to move from iconic to more abstract gestures more easily. Lastly, Rose was able to start to understand her own communicative influence on others around her (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). In terms of the objectives laid out in the research, the first was not met. She was not able to use the black and white picture symbol cards in an accurate way. However, the second objective was met, and Rose was able to comprehend statements referred to as one-step directives. For example, she would sit when cued “it’s time to sit” (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). Lastly, the third and final objective was not reached, as she still gestured spontaneously and with a great deal of variability (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). Do these findings provide hope that language acquisition is possible after the critical period?
Throughout Rose’s case, language and communication were used interchangeably, however, they are not equivalent. Communication passes and receives information. Language though, is a form of communication that is considered much more complex and contains rules like grammar that help the information get across more clearly. Communication though crucial to human contact seemed to be attained for Rose, however the end goal of language was not. This case resonates incredibly close to that of Genie’s as well.
Genie was subject to extreme emotional and sometimes physical abuse, which hindered her from learning any spoken language. Similarly to Rose, Genie grew up with a, “lack of cognitive stimulation in her environment [which] may have produced permanent cognitive or even neurological damage,” (Grimshaw, Adelstein, Bryden, & MacKinnon, 1998). This alone could delay their acquisition of language, and was a reason why Rose’s Pre-Training consisted of her caretaker’s participation as well, as to make a conducive language development environment (Kenneally, Bruck, Frank, & Nalty, 1998). Although Rose and Genie were both able to hear, an attempt to teach either of them sign language was not made. Nevertheless, it is apparent that there may be a critical time period to learn and develop the skills to acquire spoken language, the same may not pertain to signed language (Grimshaw, Adelstein, Bryden, & MacKinnon, 1998). If this is the case, Genie would have had possibly greater success with a non-spoken language. Likewise, “homesigns bear some similarity to sign languages such as ASL [American Sign Language],” these are used as a communication system between a deaf and hearing person, when the deaf individual lacks input from a language; it usually combines gesture, signed, and some spoken language (Grimshaw, Adelstein, Bryden, & MacKinnon, 1998). Attempting to teach a signed language though it does come with its own rules, may resonate with an individual who is past the point of being able to fully grasp and develop the skill for a spoken language.
Incorporating homesign into Genie and Rose’s development of language would have been beneficial considering their background. Typically used for individuals, “unable to hear the spoken language around them, and are not exposed to conventional sign language… their only input is what they can visually perceive,” (Carrigan & Coppola, 2017). Though Genie and Rose can hear, they cannot necessarily make the connections between the auditory words and cognitive meaning. Communication with either of them may have been more complex in this mode because they are not constantly trying to verbalize or complete tasks but rather sign using something that they themselves also fully understand. Interestingly enough, in many studies of homesigning, it is evident that the comprehension by communication partners is poor, and that the, “structure in homesign does not develop so that homesigners can be understood by their communication partners,” (Carrigan & Coppola, 2017). These findings suggest that there is less linguistic structure in this type of signing and therefore may be more likely to be picked up by an individual that has not been exposed to a language with rules and a fixed structure. Neither Rose nor Genie were able to fully grasp a language, but were able to learn functional communication skills in the process. They are evidence that there is a critical acquisition period for using and processing auditory language. However, evidence for learning a signed language without a definable organization may be crucial in eventually developing accurate linguistic skills.

References
Carrigan, E. M., & Coppola, M. (2017). Successful communication does not drive language development: Evidence from adult homesign doi:https://doi org.libproxy.unh.edu/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.09.012

Fromkin, V., Krashen, S., Curtiss, S., Rigler, D., & Rigler, M. (1974). The development of language in genie: A case of language acquisition beyond the “critical period” doi:https://doi-org.libproxy.unh.edu/10.1016/0093-934X(74)90027-3

Grimshaw, G. M., Adelstein, A., Bryden, M. P., & MacKinnon, G. E. (1998). First-language acquisition in adolescence: Evidence for a critical period for verbal language development doi:https://doi-org.libproxy.unh.edu/10.1006/brln.1997.1943

Kenneally, S., Bruck, G., Frank, E., & Nalty, L. (1998). Language Intervention After Thirty Years Of Isolation:A Case Study Of A Feral Child. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 33(1), 13-23.

McNeil, M., Polloway, E., & Smith, J. (1984). Feral and Isolated Children: Historical Review and Analysis. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 19(1), 70-79.